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 (3927)	5/29/1999 9:36:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12823

DSL connections may be cheaper after June <?> forbes.com May 28, 1999 By Charles Dubow NEW YORK. 03:15PM EDT—On June 1 new FCC regulations are scheduled to go into effect that could make broadband connections through DSL (digital subscriber line) technology cheaper and easier to get. But that is conditional on whether the regional Bell operating companies (RBOCs) are willing to play ball. One of the biggest stumbling blocks to offering DSL technology is that RBOCs like Bell Atlantic and SBC own the networks but are reluctant to share them. By law, however, the RBOCs have to allow other communications companies--called CLECs (competitive local exchange carriers)--access to their local loops. In practice, however, the RBOCs have a history of making it as difficult as possible for the CLECs. The problem is that the RBOCs want to offer their own DSL technology. Because they are legally compelled to share their networks—networks that the federal government allows them to have--they resent the fact that these CLECs, who depend on this access, can come along and undercut their prices. One example of the ways that the RBOCs have tried to stifle competition is by requiring CLECs to construct separate "cages" in their central offices to house their high-speed data equipment. In the past, CLECs looking to sell access through an RBOC's facilities have typically paid up to $100,000 per central office to construct these cages. This comes on top of paying negotiated interconnection fees, making the costs of selling competitive DSL services too expensive for smaller companies that are not as well capitalized. The new FCC rules mandate that the RBOCs offer "cageless" access to their central offices. "Under cageless co-location," says Cynthia Brumfield of Broadband Intelligence in Bethesda, Md., "local telcos can theoretically make space or racks available in the central office for competitors' hardware, obviating the expense of constructing costly cages and enabling new entrants to get into the market earlier and with less capital." CLECs are among the most aggressive vendors of DSL services. Three of the most competitive are Englewood, Colo.-based Rhythms NetCommunications (nasdaq: RTHM), San Francisco-based NorthPoint (nasdaq: NPNT) and Santa Clara, Calif.-based Covad Communications (nasdaq: COVD). The question is whether this will really help. Apparently it will. As Dhruv Khanna, executive vice president and counsel for Covad, says: "I normally try not to gush, but for this we really have to. We are putting in our first cageless unit in late June in one of SBC's companies." Will all the RBOCs be willing to open their networks as fast? "The majority of incumbents are waiting for the deadline to go into effect," says Khanna. "Our reading is that it's the law and they have to start delivering cageless co-locations. We're very excited about this because it will make DSL much more competitive. We can't say enough nice things about the FCC."

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (3927)	5/30/1999 2:54:00 AM
From: Daniel G. DeBusschere	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12823

Frank- I just got TCI cable @Home service installed today and its working very well on a Win98 PC. I have LAN like access to all my data at the office. I just spent the last year and a half beta testing Windows 2000. The article from tele.com about IXC that you referenced provides voice links to the office PBX. This is the only added functionality that the trail provides that could not otherwise be provided by Win2000 and a standard TCI cable connection. Since many home to office telephone connections are still flat rate, I am not sure what the value of adding this local traffic amounts to. At any rate, most of the pay off is already available if cable connections are made available to telecommuters. Armstrong and (Paul) Allen have already figured this out.