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 : Voice-on-the-net (VON), VoIP, Internet (IP) Telephony -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (1266)	9/8/1998 1:28:00 PM
From: Freeflight	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3178

Micromuse VoIP deal with Netcom is hot today. Help me figure out is Micromuse is a buy? NASDAQ; MUSE

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (1266)	9/8/1998 2:16:00 PM
From: Stephen B. Temple	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3178

Frank: I like the 'vapor'action just as long as its not above the MOGAS ignition. ggg Your assessment of <They may, for example, accelerate the Internet community's resolve to create a bypass of the status quo system by various means, many of which have been talked about here> is not to be taken lightly. How many times have we seen entrepreneurs throw a monkey-wrench into the norm, forcing a redirection. As entreprenuers decide which fence to straddle, I like the chances of VoIP from a hind-site. The Bells are always looking as you say for escape-hatches to sound-off while permeating mega-deals silently within. If the Bells can't get access to the LD market, then why not use every conceivable angle and then some. We talked about DSL and its acceptance awhile back on the FTel Thread. At that time, I didn't understand how that technology would entice (indirectly) the Bells into a complimentary cooperation with the likes of Microsoft, Intel, and Compaq and the likes of> Covad Communications> covad.com It Bells in their BS, kinda reminds me of the Pop-Up Targets I once used back a few light years. They sneak, they are up (say a few words), snear at you, down again, and you never know when you'll see them again and are more apt to take you off guard again and again. To the point, the Bells look at AT&T's buyout of TCI. They sneer at the thought of Cable_Telephony, so they counter-act (indirectly with DSL companies like Covad to hammer out interconnection and collocation agreements. So if the Bells cry "wolf" like they are now, but yet ride the boundaries of the law in regards to the Tele-Act of 96, then as you say it could possibly back-fire. Market strategy tells the Bells to find avenue's to crush the competition. The ILEC's will do anything to maintain their customer base, and selling DSL help, and they know it. If the lack of high-speed access weakens their ability to compete in other markets, then DSL will take off. I like the chances of DSL with their huge backing and it will only add to the numbers for each Bell company folding to the pressures. I see more action coming from "Vicks Vapor Rub" than the action taken by the BellSouth company today. I think its a flair-up, in their true motives in buy more time to save customer base and the value of the T1 lines those customers buy! But, I've gotta hand it to BELLSOUTH, they seems to the the most arrogant astars of them all? hmmmmm sTempy ps...Covad raised 150 million in bonds and hired a US West executive Bob Knowling to lead the way. DSL is here to stay......!

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (1266)	9/9/1998 9:09:00 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 3178

Court Reverses Telecom Act Ruling [Another Holiday Weekend Ruling on LD. What's with the holidays? And what does this do for IP Telephony, if anything?] September 9, 1998 SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS, U.S.A., Newsbytes via NewsEdge Corporation : Long-distance carriers are celebrating and regional Bell operating companies (RBOCs) are glum after an appeal court late on the eve of the long weekend overturned a lower court ruling in favor of SBC Communications Inc.'s [NYSE:SBC] challenge to parts of the Telecom Act of 1996. The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit overturned a ruling by Judge Joe Kendall of the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas, who last New Year's Eve agreed with SBC's claim that parts of the act unfairly discriminated against SBC and the other RBOCs. SBC had argued that provisions specifically restricting the RBOCs from competing in certain areas such as long- distance service amounted to a bill of attainder, or trial by legislature, prohibited by the US constitution. However, a three-judge panel at the appeal court has overturned Kendall's ruling by a two-to-one margin, ruling the provisions constitutional. Had the appeals court upheld Kendall's position, the way would have been cleared for RBOCs to begin providing long- distance service in short order. Instead, their entry into the long- distance market will continue to hang on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) deciding the RBOCs have done enough to open up the local service markets in their territories to competition. SBC said it is disappointed by the ruling, and argued that the losers will be consumers "who deserve full-fledged competition in all sectors of the telecommunications industry." SBC pointed out that counting the appeals court's three-judge panel along with Judge Kendall, two of four judges who have heard its case so far have sided with SBC. Major long-distance carriers are happier with the ruling. AT&T issued a statement saying it is pleased though not surprised by the appeals court ruling, and expressing the hope that "today's ruling puts to rest this line of attack against the Telecom Act by the Bell companies." Meanwhile at MCI Communications Corp., spokesman Dan Greenfield told Newsbytes that the decision is "a clear victory for consumers and fair competition, " and said the RBOCs should now focus more on opening their markets to competition and complying with the law. SBC still has the option of appealing the decision to the Supreme Court. Spokesman Larry Solomon at SBC told Newsbytes the company has not yet determined whether to pursue such an appeal. Reported By Newsbytes News Network: newsbytes.com (19980908/Press Contact: Larry Solomon, SBC Communications, 210-351-3990, e- mail solomonl@corp.sbc.com; Jim McGann, AT&T, 888-602-5490; Dan Greenfield, MCI, 202-887-2750 /WIRES TELECOM, BUSINESS, LEGAL/) <<Newsbytes -- 09-08-98>> [Copyright 1998, NewsBytes]