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 : AUTOHOME, Inc -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ERM who wrote (2921)	10/23/1998 1:40:00 PM
From: ahhaha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

My response had little to do with content differentiation. I haven't missed any point. If you want to know all the points, go back in the thread and check my extensive commentary on this subject before the T offer. You say AOL "would like to be able to access cable plant WITHOUT partnering with @Home or anyone else." Who said anything about partnership? I'm sure they would like to have all market share. I'm sure AOL would like a lot of things which aren't going to happen. This issue is not a consequence of the merger. As I stated last February if TCI had spent billions on upgrading to HFC instead of on 200 more channels, you'd still have the same complaint from AOL whether or not ATT was involved. The issue is whether cable is a substantially different distribution costing substantially more in comparison with telephone line distribution. The issue is whether substantially different means non-competing. Does DELL compete with Sun or are they substantially different, one representing the low end, and the other, the high end? They overlap. Therefore the DOJ had better start legal proceedings or we have another unequal application of the law. To level the playing field to enable access usurps MSO autonomy and attempts to apply the equal access provision of the Telcom Act in a way violating constitutional guarantees under the Bill of Attainder. Equal access only implies that AOL should be free to set up a deal with ATHM's actual competitor, TWX's Road Runner, so that you would have Road Runner@AOL or set up the same with ATHM. Then you have competition on the same playing field. Jermoluk wanted to merge with Road Runner. I thought that was antitrust and stated that I was quite happy to see that attempt fail. The government can't demand that AOL set up a deal with Road Runner in order to create competition. If no one wants to compete with MSFT, does that mean government should prevent the company from operating? That's the essence of the government's argument and it will go down in flames. Antitrust has little to do with any of this. ATHM has a very significant competitor in UMG. It may be argued that T-TCI represents aggregation, but the argument would be that TCI must allow other RBOCs access or that other MSOs can do the same. If the T-TCI merger goes through, nothing would prevent RBOCs from buying MSOs. As I've argued earlier, that is exactly what will happen. It isn't happening now because the "risk takers" are waiting to see if government meddling interferes with the merger. If government doesn't interfere, the natural response will be the advent of competition among RBOC level players as they buy MSOs and develop their own distribution systems. I can assure you that the FCC socialists will interfere and make a mess of the situation, but ATHM will skate right through all of it.