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: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (3773)	5/18/1999 7:48:00 AM
From: MikeM54321	Respond to of 12823

Re: Jim Jubak's Take on the Last Mile Thread, Jim wrote a two-part column today that may be of interest to novice last mile investors. So far it's pretty basic knowledge of the cable vs copper broadband game. And he also brings up fixed wireless, sort of? I think he is missing a point that Bernard mentioned earlier about how much bandwidth will be needed in the future. If you leave out this fairly significant estimate, then one may be able to draw different conclusions about what, "expensive," means. But overall the article pretty much sums of the state of the broadband access game. He has a teaser conclusion for Part II. I think I already know the answer. I believe he may be suggesting a company called, "Citrix Systems" (sym:CTXS) may be the winner in the broadband access game. Citrix Systems takes a long time to explain but it would make some sense. Especially since Citrix is now being referred to, very loosely, as an infrastructure play. It's a little discombobulated conclusion to draw, but I am only guessing that he is heading there. Maybe I'm completely wrong. But anyway, if you want to know the general state of Last Mile solutions, the article is of interest. MikeM(From Florida) Here's the link:http://moneycentral.msn.com/articles/invest/jubak/3225.asp ************************ Why AT&T goofed in the long run** Ma Bell is paying a high price to buy TCI and MediaOne, but the telegiant's strategy is on the wrong track. Here's why I think MCI WorldCom and Sprint are making smarter moves. By Jim Jubak AT&T has grabbed the headlines and the assets in the last year. CEO Michael Armstrong has spent $109 billion to buy TCI and MediaOne Group (UMG), vaulting his company to the top of the heap in cable television and giving AT&T (T) a pipeline for delivering Internet access and local and long-distance phone service to more than 60 million U.S. homes. And what have MCI WorldCom (WCOM) and Sprint (FON) done to counterattack? They've bought a handful of nearly bankrupt companies that specialize in wireless cable television. The biggest deal so far? Sprint's pending $152 million acquisition of People's Choice TV (PCTV), a company with all of $5.6 million in revenue and a rapidly declining customer count. Doesn't seem like an adequate response, does it? Certainly it isn't if all you do is count the number of customers acquired and the amount of communications pipeline secured. AT&T seems to have gained the upper hand in the communications industry, so much so that we've started to hear worry about the company's stranglehold on cable, Internet access and maybe even the phone system. AT&T has succeeded in reassembling the old Bell system that the Department of Justice so laboriously rent asunder. Big deal, I say! I think AT&T had to do what it did or become completely irrelevant in the next decade. But I think the company has paid a big price -- too high a price, in fact -- to win the last war. AT&T has paid a lot to gain control of the assets that used to assure control of customers and the communications system just when those assets have lost their old power......