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 : America On-Line (AOL) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kelvin Taylor who wrote (4054)	1/30/1999 9:40:00 AM
From: Lynn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 41369

Hi Kelvin! After my initial posting I read on this thread and elsewhere [news items] that AOL and the other IPs are concerned the cable guys, at this point, are having their way keeping them out of the (potentially) lucrative high speed, cable access market. Going back to my initial posting, this does not have to cause AOL financial problems or even lessen their customer base _if_ they modify their subscription and pricing terms. In the early days of the WWW [which many of us remember], when AOL, Prodigy, Compuserve, et al did not have internet access but were closed communities, before subscribers could even send e-mail through the internet, information at web sites was free. The idea of paying for information available through the internet [e.g. gopher, web, of FTP] seemed ridiculous. Then the WSJ came along with a web site and after a very short time, offered one free month before a yearly charge. This was considered a daring concept--charging to access information--but not only did it work but it worked very well. Gradually, other free sites have slowly started to change from being free to charging people--SI is one of the previously free sites. What does all this mean in terms of AOL today, as it faces competition from the cable companies for subscribers? First, there is a large group of people, existing AOL subscribers as well as others [many of whom do not own PCs yet] who will not be willing to or can not afford to spend the extra money for high speed cable access. Then there are people like me who live in an area that will never get the cable [Cox has exclusive cable rights to the county I live in and made this statement]. AOL does not have to worry about losing this present and future pool of subscribers. AOL can continue to increase its customer base, and thereby revenues, to include people who have high speed, cable access if it opens its door to the outside, internet world. Just as now AOL offers people a free trial period for people who dial in, so too could it offer a free trial for people who access their web site through their high speed, cable provider to look around. Then, at the end of the free trial period, people could "subscribe" to either AOL as a whole or to specific areas of AOL. If they charged the same amount at the WSJ for a yearly "all of AOL" they could make a bundle, a real big bundle, of money. Not only would people with cable service be their potential customer pool but also people who use other IP providers [Bell Atlantic, AT&T, local IPs, people with free, .edu accounts]. Actually, offering various subscription options would keep down AOLs costs because this new, huge market would not require AOL adding to its infrastructure--these people would not be dialing in so AOL would not have to increase their modem pool, local access numbers, etc. So, in closing, I see a real future for AOL, Kelvin. The only question I have right now is a good entry point to pick-up some shares. Not one who does TA and unable to look at a chart and figure out the "50 moving average" when people say this [for other stocks, not necessarily AOL], I have no basis of knowledge for figuring out AOL's dip factor. Normally this would not bother me, but the money I have allocated to pick-up shares is in my IRA which means I can not just throw in some more cash [and no way am I selling shares of my other stocks to buy AOL]. Lynn