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: Stephen B. Temple who wrote (1562)	10/16/1998 8:31:00 AM
From: Stephen B. Temple	Respond to of 3178

Does this stand a chance still? Ug >SBC-Ameritech Merger Opposed October 16, 1998 WASHINGTON - The Associated Press via NewsEdge Corporation : Long-distance companies and consumer groups asked federal regulators Thursday to block SBC Communications' planned takeover of Ameritech. The $60 billion merger, announced in May, would combine two Baby Bells into a local telephone colossus that would cover 13 states and control almost a third of the nation's phone lines. Opponents asked the Federal Communications Commission to block the merger on the ground that it would blunt competition, and thus the prospect of lower phone prices. SBC and Ameritech said the merger will be good for consumers and for competition and said getting bigger is the key to boosting competition and expanding jobs and innovation. The FCC and the Department of Justice are reviewing the deal to determine whether it would expand or contract local phone competition. By fusing the companies' adjoining local phone territories, the merged company would control a swath of the Midwest from Wisconsin to Texas. Sprint, AT&T, MCI WorldCom, the Consumers Union, the Consumer Federation of America and other opponents of the merger argue that SBC Communications and Ameritech, whose local phone territories abut each other on the Missouri-Illinois border, would have been each other's biggest competitor. Specifically, Sprint, in its filing with the FCC, said Ameritech obtained permission to provide local phone service in Missouri, Texas and California, all parts of SBC's local phone region. Ameritech isn't providing local phone service in those markets. Ameritech has said it never intended to make a full-scale assault on SBC's local phone market in those states. An Ameritech-SBC merger, AT&T said, ''eliminates the prospect that the two companies would compete against each other _ something they had announced plans to do.'' It's rare for the government, however, to try to block a merger solely because a potential competitor would be eliminated by merging. That is difficult to prove in court. Sprint and AT&T also said the merger would create such a formidable force that it would become more difficult for other companies to compete in the combined companies' local phone territory, which now spans 12 states and will include Connecticut when SBC's acquisition of Southern New England Telephone is completed. Sprint next year plans to start its ION service, which would let users log onto the Internet, send a fax, play a video game and conduct a telephone conversation simultaneously. But to work, Sprint needs approval from local phone companies to hook its new network to theirs. Sprint contends that a merged SBC-Ameritech would have more of an incentive to discriminate against Sprint in those negotiations. But SBC and Ameritech deny that would happen.

To: Stephen B. Temple who wrote (1562)	10/16/1998 8:37:00 AM
From: Stephen B. Temple	Respond to of 3178

OT> MILLENNIUM BUG RAISES INTERNATIONAL CONCERN FOR GLOBAL NETWORKS October 16, 1998 MOBILE SATELLITE NEWS via NewsEdge Corporation -- As the year 2000 approaches, concerns have been raised by the FCC that the millennium computer glitch may wipe out public networks in some developing countries, leaving global satellite networks on the blink. "As long as satellite systems are on a global network, they should be okay-but if their terrestrial connections are not fixed for the Y2K problem, then [customers] won't be able to complete calls if the public switch telephone network (PSTN) is down," said Tom Tycz, FCC satellite radio-communications division chief. "For example, with all the problems Russia has been having with the ruble, they may not have time to fix their PSTN by 2000. If their terrestrial network is down at that point, you won't be able to complete calls to Russia (using a satellite cellular phone)." The FCC, the Satellite Industry Association (SIA), the Satellite Broadcasting and Communications Association (SBCA) and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) have been informing foreign governments and foreign telecommunications companies about the Y2K problem in order to pinpoint possible solutions. But many satellite companies still may not know what effects the computer glitch will have on their ground stations and connectibility until after Jan. 1, 2000, said satellite industry consultant Mark Chartrand. "Satellites are only as good as the ground stations that connect them, " Chartrand said. "Systems that are dependent on stations are going to be in more trouble than those that aren't-and financial risks could be enormous if [satellite systems] are shut down for a long period of time. Overall, it's a hold-on-to-your-hats situation, because we just don't know what's going to happen." Globalstar L.P. [GSTRF], scheduled to launch service in 1999 following a Zenit rocket failure, has planned to create 50 to 60 gateways worldwide that will plug satellite calls into terrestrial phone lines-making Globalstar a direct target of the glitch. Though the company is taking measures to assess its systems, Jeanette Clonan, vice president of communications for Globalstar declined comment on year 2000 issues. International satellite carrier Comsat is working on identifying potential computer complications, but has not identified any problems with the 2000 switch-over. However, Comsat has set up a task force to address concerns made by the company's operators, distributors and affiliates, said Tom Surface, manager of public relations. "We are focusing on our identifying critical problems with both Intelsat and Inmarsat-to make sure they are compliant," he said, "but we have no reason to believe that Y2K will affect our ability to perform basic business functions." Clayton Mowry, director of the SIA, said that the inoperability of ground satellite systems poses the greatest threat if calls cannot be completed to countries that still make use of old wireline infrastructures. "The problem seems to be on the ground, not in space," Mowry said. "It seems that little is being done on the global scale in developing countries whose PSTN systems won't be able to receive messages." Mowry said the SIA and the FCC are working to get the message out to these areas to guard against the risk of connection failure. Since April, the FCC has held meetings and completed assessment reports on the status of satellite companies regarding Y2K awareness and risk management. Most large companies completed vulnerability assessments and are in the process of modifying systems to be year 2000-compliant by the beginning of 1999, according to the FCC. Since then, the scorecard from satellite manufacturers and distributors came back relatively confident in domestic telecommunications. Concern is now being placed on international satellite companies that may not be able to connect to the ground stations if those systems are not Y2K- ready. "Telecommunications relies on interconnected, international networks-and there's a legitimate concern between the ground stations and the PSTN," said an aide to FCC Commissioner Michael Powell. "For example if someone in Africa wants to talk to a neighboring country, they can only do that if [the satellite systems] are Y2K-ready. It must be a collectively engaged activity to raise the level of awareness to this issue." The FCC has had no indication from the major satellite companies to indicate problems with the satellite networks as testing will be performed on the birds prior to 2000 to ensure Y2K capability. "Satellites connect with almost every aspect of the global economy, and the FCC and the ITU are actively engaged to move the industry to ensure that users of telecommunications enjoy continuity of satellite services in 2000 as they do today-it's our number one goal," Commissioner Powell's aide said. Most analysts researching the year 2000 bug say it is too early to predict the impact the supposed systems crash will have on the financial markets, but think investors may halt transactions temporarily until systems are restored. "The worst case scenario would be that investors may stop trading until satellite companies can address [the glitch,]" said Ron Stearns, a market analyst for Frost & Sullivan. "The market is so important to the financial system that companies will most likely do whatever it takes to make sure transactions are recorded correctly."