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 : (LVLT) - Level 3 Communications -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J Gunn who wrote (1635)	2/10/1999 2:40:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3873

JG, I think I can shed some light here: >>Is there someone out here who can comment on LVLT build out in NYC vs. Bell Atlantic leasing MFNX for NYC? Does this mean that LVLT is going head to head with Bell Atlantic? or is this more directed to MFNX? << One of LVLT's biggest draws in the Big Apple right now is not for IP over anything, rather it is for its ability to deliver bulk bandwidth for a variety of legacy applications, as well as next gen applications. The IP thing will follow in greater numbers, for sure, but not right now for many users' needs. LVLT is being lumped in, in the minds of the largest IT shops, as a contender for the delivery of massive amounts of inter-city T3s, OC3s, etc. And they are gaining ground quickly in this respect with the top banks, brokerages, certain service providers, their own offerings, etc. And on those routes where they are not already sharing conduit with Frontier, who in turn is leasing from QWST, they serve as a viable alternative path to QWST for reliability purposes. So much for the lnog hual... The Short Haul: To meet this demand, they have been cutting deals, more or less on the fly, in order to make the end points to large user locations viable. In this case, they are effectively reselling BEL's or MCI's or whomever's T3s and OC3s to the local end points. In the process, it's my guess that they are loss leading in order to respond in time. They'll pay a price, in other words, to gain a foothold in new markets. But this is neither profitable at this time, nor sustainable over the longer term. By obtaining franchise rights, they can build to suit their focused goals by delivering these services to large users at reduced costs, obviously, and they can at the same time exert leverage for better resale pricing from some of the incumbents, either outright, or by cutting fiber-swap deals. It would not surprise me to see LVLT obtaining some of their future silica in NY City from MFNX itself. Even though they're in the same game, they each have related, yet different, end games. After all, MFNX is now providing routes to BEL, as well, and this was thought to be out of the question just a few short months ago. Before MFNX was who they are today, they were National Fiber Networks, and their main charter was to be the carriers' carrier of choice in NY City and elsewhere, where the provisioning and placement of fiber along routes is concerned. This is right up their proverbial alley. Reagrds, Frank Coluccio

To: J Gunn who wrote (1635)	2/14/1999 10:49:00 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3873

Hi J, The BEL-MFNX deal is to provide capacity for BEL to offer long distance service between White Plains and NYC. AFAIK, muffin-X is not involved intracity with BEL. <Does this mean that LVLT is going head to head with Bell Atlantic? or is this more directed to MFNX?> L3 was going head to head with all the ILECs long before this little piece of the puzzle fell into place. L3 and muffin have different business plans. L3 will provide dumb bandwidth to ISPs and other business users (VPN will compete directly with T-1s) L3 is a basically a long haul network, with colocation facilities. Muffin is more of a last mile solution provider. There, of course, is some overlap but I believe the best way to look at this is that the FO Rogues are hoping to eat the ILECs lunch. HTH