Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : America On-Line: will it survive ...? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (10785)	7/27/1998 10:01:00 PM
From: gmccon	Respond to of 13594

From: cbs.marketwatch.com "... Now, at the end of July, Schoenleber says he and his firm are still positive on the market and that money flow looks strong in a wide range of companies, the strongest of which are, in alphabetical order: America Online (AOL), Amgen, AT&T, Chrysler (C), Citicorp (CCI), Ford (F), IBM, McDonalds and US West Communications (USW)..."

To: LindyBill who wrote (10785)	7/28/1998 12:08:00 AM
From: Michael Anthony	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13594

You may be right about someone being able to knock them off, but I will say this. IMO, the way our society is, we WANT a one-stop-shop. Looking at it's structure, the fact that anyone else could do it is true. In the long run though, it's the kind of thing that we only need one of. Why do we need another all-in-one service unless it is cheaper? IMO, AOL already has a tradition and a following. Whatever anyone else tries to offer in competition, AOL can duplicate just as well. There is no need for another AOL type service ever IMO. AOL will grow and change with the internet easier than anyone else trying to compete. Even the other telco's can only offer the same thing cheaper maybe. Then it's a price thing. But, even they can't do anything AOL does any better than AOL already does it, and AOL can still compete on pricing. Maybe not everyone needs AOL, but those who like that kind of thing will not ever need look further THAN AOL. I just can't imagine that aesthetics could sway everyone from AOL to someone else. Price is the only reason I could imagine anyone considering going with someone else. As easy as it might be for someone to duplicate AOL's structure, it is just as easy for AOL to say "hey, people like that, we can do it too". So, IMO, I think only one service like AOL will ever be neccessary. Therefore, I think the fact that AOL is already there makes them a lock for the future. There just isn't a need for another service. IMO, we are looking at the AT&T of the internet age. (I acknowledge the fact that not every computer user will want a service like AOL. Some will just need access. This isn't Microsoft, but like Windows, AOL is the only service of it's kind we will ever need and will become better as time goes on. How that affects the bottom line I don't know, but I'm sure I'll still be seing AOL commercials in the middle of the next century. JMO)