To: gc who wrote (10913 ) 4/16/1999 2:47:00 AM From: Lee Martin Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 41369
GC and thread, Your post is exactly why I think the cable co's need AOL more than AOL needs them. The cable co's are spending billions upgrading their equipment to enable broadband services in the houses they pass. What % of the houses passed are actually signing up for broadband? I'm going to go out on a limb and venture a guess that whatever the number is, it's lower than the cable co's would like. So they have committed themselves to invest billions of $$ into broadband equipment, and it's anyone's guess when they will sign up enough subscribers to turn a profit. What they need is something to drive customers to sign up for their broadband services. Might an existing AOL customer who's cable line just got upgraded and wants faster access, but likes all the features AOL offers and doesn't want to go through the hassle of changing his email, buddy lists etc. be that "something" the cable co's are looking for. In other words, if they had an partnership with AOL, the customer could simply get his AOL through a cable box instead of a modem. AOL would take care of all the billing and most of customer service issues just as they do with dial up modems. The cable co. would have spent zero marketing $ to acquire this customer which should allow them to focus on what they do best, installing cable boxes. Bottom line: IMHO by partnering with AOL the cable co's would see a surge in subscriber revenue which would put their broadband investment in the black much sooner than current projections. As revenues increase broadband deployment will snowball, along with all the "killer entertainment and ecommerce apps." that are waiting on broadband. These apps. or "content" will the sustaining force driving people to broadband, just as new software drove people to upgrade their PC's until recently when PC speed exceeded the need. OK- now let's hear why I'm wrong. Comments anyone? Regards,Lee