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 : LAST MILE TECHNOLOGIES - Let's Discuss Them Here -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bernard Levy who wrote (2921)	2/21/1999 6:26:00 PM
From: lml	Respond to of 12823

DSL Consolidation Bernard, thanks for the response. I see your take on industry consolidation refers to DSL equipment manufacturers & not DSL network providers (the ILECs & CLECs). Perhaps you could provide a primer on how these equipment providers are position, not only in the DSL space, but the broader network equipment space that would include HFC, Sonet, wireless, etc. It appears that in the intermediate term there will be multiple market segments to pursue & that the deployment of DSL will not be the sole opportunity available to the these companies. I am curious as to why you believe consolidation within the DSL space is so ripe.

To: Bernard Levy who wrote (2921)	2/21/1999 6:44:00 PM
From: lml	Respond to of 12823

ISDN v. IDSL et al. Bob, thanks for your concise straight-up answer. Bernard, thanks also for your opinion on the decision analysis. The issue you raise is one I am dealing with now. Notwithstanding that ISDN in California is probably the cheapest in the country, it is still expensive relative to DSL if you're needs are essentially Internet connectivity (compra video conferencing). I try to keep my costs down by limiting my online time during peak hours when I'm charged by the minute. So what ISDL offers me, other than a de minimus increase in bandwidth, (which in my case would be an increase from a present 115.2K due to the serial port throughput constrant on my notebook PC), is the relief from tracking my online time during peak hours. But what I do weigh in the purchase decision, since it is an interim one just like ISDN has been, is the upfront costs & the likelihood (or unlikelihood) that cable or ADSL service will become available within the next 12 months. At present, Flashcom is offering $175 purchase cost of the modem, plus a $100 setup fee. A competitor waives their setup fee, but charges $395 for the modem (router). Is there that much difference in the price/quality of these modems? Or is it more a function of the pricing structure of these CLECs? If I can get these CLECs down a bit, I might bite. They appear willing to deal. One thing is evident -- price competition w/i the DSL does exist. And I don't think PacBell, who presently does not offer IDSL, no longer wishes leave this space to the CLECs. So pricing competition should intensify. As I see it, even if viewed as an interim solution, offering IDSL keeps the ISDN-Internet customer w/i the purview of the ILEC. Without an IDSL solution, the ILECs leave open the opportunity for the CLECs to "steal" the present ILEC-ISDN customers. IDSL is also attractive to ILECs because it reduces the demand on its existing switching equipment. As far as DirecPC, I've looked into that as well. Upfront costs would amount to $500-700. I'd have to settle for a 28.8 Kbps upstream connection & tolerate sporatic-delayed throughput that is capped at 384 Kbps. My decision on DirecPC -- as an intermin solution -- was "thumbs down" (with credit respectfully due to the late Gene Siskel.)

To: Bernard Levy who wrote (2921)	2/22/1999 8:12:00 PM
From: Hiram Walker	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 12823

Bernard at all, I thought this belonged here. news.com Telecom revolution in the heartland By John Borland Staff Writer, CNET News.com February 22, 1999, 1:00 p.m. PT In the heart of Iowa's farming country, the citizens of a tiny town called Hawarden are helping lead a rural communications revolt. With a population of just 2,500, the town has built a fiber optic network that will give its citizens communications services as modern as anything in the heart of Silicon Valley. In the process, Hawarden officials have earned the political enmity of state telecommunications giants like GTE and US West, who have sought to limit the town's ability to offer telephone and Internet services over the new system. But last week--on the same day that federal regulators approved AT&T's merger with Tele-Communications Incorporated--the town won a state Supreme Court battle that finally will allow it to turn on its own telephone and high-speed Net services. The decision also sets the stage for nearly 50 other Iowa towns that have built their own communications infrastructure or are making moves to do so, according to a state utility trade association. Hiram

To: Bernard Levy who wrote (2921)	3/13/1999 12:55:00 PM
From: MikeM54321	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12823

Re: DSL Consolidation "I may be wrong, but I would be surprised if any of the DSL companies (PAIR, AWRE, ORCF, WSTL) remains independent. The options are essentially to merge or die (WSTL?). Given its low valuation, PAIR makes a very attractive target at current levels. I hate to speculate idly on possible buyers, but it is rather obvious that over the long run, ILECs will want to deal with companies which offer complete systems, i.e DSL + networking + optical infrastructure." Bernard, In reference to your above comments, I came across an article that agrees with you about PAIR. Here's what they say, "There are; however, a few smaller component suppliers within the ADSL market that could be attractive. Pairgain Technologies, which made our list, has perhaps the best ADSL technology. Aware and Westel Technologies are two companies that did not make our list because they did not meet the screening criteria detailed below." Here's the link to a Yahoo reprint of the article. I can't recall where I originally read it: fnews.yahoo.com MikeM(From Florida)