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 : Advanced Fibre (AFCI) ** IPO -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill McCullen who wrote (1315)	12/9/1998 9:52:00 AM
From: Ausdauer	Respond to of 3299

Bill, Thanks for helping to separate the chaff from the wheat. Ausdauer

To: Bill McCullen who wrote (1315)	12/9/1998 4:19:00 PM
From: CChalmers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3299

I am responding to the call for some fact based discussion. First, two posters roundly declare that the Tellabs/Sprint contract is not beneficial for AFCI, without any support except that one of them notes that no post or press release spells out the benefit. That's a pretty weak factual basis for the conclusion, since it is not practice for companies announcing their own good news to describe who else it benefits. The Tellabs deal is for, at least primarily, advanced voice/data switches. I think, but my qualifications for this guess are shaky, that this relates to the Sprint backbone system. That would suggest that the implication for AFCI is second order, but who knows? Moreover, it certainly means that a customer for whom AFCI is an approved vendor, approved enough that Sprint allowed their rep to be quoted in the AFCI release, is growing their network big time. I think that is good for AFCI. Next, consider that Sprint is fighting the Bells to get get a shot at the local service market. That is AFCI's territory, so the more successful Sprint is, the better for AFCI. Add to that Sprint's recent offering to provide businesses with local and long distance integrated service. That is explicitly based on Cisco technology and Cisco is a well established AFCI partner. Finally, the more Sprint baggers the FCC with the argument that the Bells are suppressing the development of high speed local service, the more the Bells will be under pressure to buy AFCI type equipment. Some things I'd like to know, if someone with tech knowledge is here are: 1. How big an increase in capacity does a 100M in switches for ATM traffic represent? 2. How direct is the connection, if any, between that increase and local loop carriers?