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 : METROMEDIA FIBER NETWORK (MFNX) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Scotsman who wrote (196)	2/10/1999 11:54:00 PM
From: geotrader	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1983

Cabot Newsletter says sell! I agree after big run to protect profits in this correction. Hot Stocks newsletter will be next over the weekend. Back to the $20's folks.

To: Scotsman who wrote (196)	2/11/1999 7:51:00 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1983

Hi Scotsman, > Am I correct in the analysis that Qwest is primarily working intercity, not infracity?< Primarily, yes, but this is an ever-shifting game board. They are also into long distance, jump-started by their acquisition of an existing second tier, and they've made an entry into VoIP (of sorts), which makes them a "virtual" local play by some measures. From a speculative standpoint, I'm waiting for them to announce local arrangements, much like MCI Metro (now WCOM), perhaps starting off with the NFL cities, then deeper into the brush. >>And is MFNX primarily infracity, not intercity?<< Their initial entry was intracity (from the standpoint of what makes up MFNX today, succeeding the NFN entity). More recently they have expanded their reach into major national corridors... never releasing a plan to cover the whole nation, but slowly they are making inroads into major regional markets (Midwest, Northeast, SanFrancisco, etc.). What they don't do invoume in the long haul, they make up for in terms of density in the inner cities. They also have an international presence, as we've discussed earlier. In short, they have no self-imposed boundaries in their charter as to where they may go, as far as I can see, and they are making their moves in accordance with a strategy of logical, next step expansion, adding contiguously to existing routes, and hop scotching in response to selective opportunities. This contrasts, to some degree, to the build it and they will come mentality, but there is an ample portion of that here, too. > And for the BIG question (cnn Evans and Knovac) is LVLT now moving more against MFNX with their NYC contract and less against Qwst, or are they just moving to capture the entire enchilada?< I've already commented at some length on this in another post, which I'll try to find. I don't view LVLT's franchise move in NYC as one that can be characterized in a simple manner. One would have to be familiar with the terms of the franchise rules to fully grasp what privileges and obligations exist. It's conceivable to me that LVLT would actually take to cutting up the streets in some situations, and in others they may only be taking up shared "tenancy" in some conduits (and individual strands) owned by others. They may use the construction resources of Empire City Subway (the custodian of the underground duct system in NY) for subsidiary cuts to user locations, or the agency of others, in order to meet their needs. In turn, MFNX and even ECS employs a number of local Electricl/Fiber firms to augment their own construction forces.... which are approaches no different from TWX, or MCI's or even BEL's in many instances. There are standing routines that they all use, often dependent on one another's concurrent activities, in order to leverage from each other's "street openings" and municipal permits. HTH, Frank Coluccio