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 : Novell (NOVL) dirt cheap, good buy? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Paul Fiondella who wrote (24759)	12/23/1998 3:24:00 AM
From: PJ Strifas	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42771

OFF TOPIC but relevant: The AOL Netscape deal was NEVER only about software, trust me. If there's one company I know it's AOL. They don't do anything like that anymore. For them, it's all about the marketshare and the portal and e-commerce. They want to cut their best competitor (web portal) at the knees much like they did CompuServe. They didn't buy CompuServe for anything other than it's brand and the fact that the brand name was accepted by business customers. AOL tried for years to get AOL Enterprises to help create online areas (private) for corporate clients. They had some success (Century 21 Realty is one such story) but they could never break into the mainstream Fortune 1000 companies. CompuServe filled that void in AOL's brand. Now Netscape will do the same thing for AOL only it will be e-commerce that's the prize this time. It's the e-commerce and the internet play that makes this deal attractive to them. Remember, AOL is based on a proprietary system (content-wise) and they really need someone to help them make that move to internet-standards et al. Sun Microsystem will do that for them with their hardware and Netscape's software (webservers, e-commerce servers, transaction servers etc) and Java. I won't kid myself, they have made this move at a good time, when ANYTHING seen as competition versus REDMONIANS will receive the graces of Federal Big Brother. Peter Strifas PS - For the record, I think MSFT is wrong in their view of MSIE and Windows95/98. If MSIE is integrated into the OS, they why do they build browsers (seperate applications) for other platforms? Do they build file managers for UNIX or Macs? NO so why a browser? Actually, I'd like to see the industry do something about MSFT's OEM licensing tactics but unless someone builds PCs and sells them without sending $$ to Redmond, that won't happen. If anything, the FED has opened some eyes to some of the truth. Don't even try and defend MSFT nor point to others having done the same thing. That doesn't disprove what they have done, nor lessens the (negative)impact they are having on the industry.

To: Paul Fiondella who wrote (24759)	12/24/1998 3:10:00 AM
From: Jack Whitley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42771

<<Incidentally anybody who thinks that the AT&T monopoly breakup somehow shows that the trend toward monopoly isn't going forward should look at how that 4.5 cent a minute business rate was arrived at --- at the expense of higher local rates for consumers and long distance residential access fees. Moreover the Baby Bells are recreating the AT&T monopoly on a regional level. We still do not have a wide pipe going to the home. IT's an old story Jack.>> I didn't reference AT&T to show that "the trend toward monopoly isn't going forward" (where did you get that?). I referenced AT&T to show that no matter how strong the monopoly, and they were one of the most omnipotent ever, there are no monopoly Thousand Year Reichs in any industry in this country, software included, MSFT included. Your statement in post 24747 - <<The problem is that monopoly not freedom is the future in this industry. Novell should consider a merger NOW!!! In the end it will save jobs.>> ...I totally disagree with and I indicated why earlier. Regarding 4.5 cents per minute long distance for business being achieved on the backs of consumers, nothing could be further from the truth. Business rates in long distance that are dropping into the 4 cent range are due to LD companies achieving core transport costs of $0.001 cent per minute using ATM and DWDM in fiber. With core transport costs that low (and going much lower), LD companies with new networks can offer 4.5 cents, pay the RBOC access fees, and still have healthy margins. The other LD companies have to make the same improvements. Competition has driven these improvements. Consumer long distance has never been cheaper, with more choices than ever. If consumer local rates have gone up, that would have nothing to do with long distance rates for businesses going down. In fact, the steady rise in long distance minutes, both voice and data, means more access fees for the RBOCs, so increased LD access fees for RBOCs could actually subsidize local rates if the RBOCs wanted to do that. But that is up to the RBOCs, interexchange carriers don't drive higher local feels to RBOCs or consumers, RBOCs do. RBOCs are getting squeezed more and more by CAPs bypassing them for business customers, and companies like Sprint announcing they are going to start bypassing RBOCs in 30 cities. Expect many of this type announcement now. Some RBOCs have merged, but they are never going to be the monopoly AT&T was, there are too many fierce competitors in the LD market, And that is assuming the RBOCs are ever allowed to sell interexchange long distance on a large scale. Bell South was ruled against by a federal judge two days ago regarding their request to be allowed to compete with interexchange carriers in LD without opening access to their local network and customers. The RBOCs can merge all they want, but they are going to have to open up, or they are going to get slammed. All of this is the end result of the government realizing that AT&T was keeping prices artificially high, and stifling competition and, effectively innovation. AT&T was a powerful monopoly, dominant with powerful alliances. AT&T looked invincible, just like you portray MSFT now, but the AT&T monopoly was eliminated, and competing companies came in and carried telecom to places that people couldn't even imagine when AT&T was the only game in town. The same thing can and will happen to MSFT. MSFT is trying to learn to network past the domain controller architecture while Novell is becoming an internetworking company, and the alliances with Lucent and Nortel are going to put Novell in places they have never been. Cisco will capitulate if AD starts to crap out on their customers, when and if they get a working version. Monopoly is not the future in this industry, Novell doesn't need to sell out to anyone to keep growing, and to grow their stock price. jww