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 : AUTOHOME, Inc -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DOUG H who wrote (10479)	6/5/1999 3:10:00 PM
From: E. Davies	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

I thought MSO's paid ATHM access fees, not the other way aropund You are missing the fundamental nature of the setup and the issues. AT&T/Cox/Comcast etc. owns the wires and the network up to the head end. ATHM takes it from that point at moves it to the internet-- they provide internet service. In other words ATHM is an ISP. The other ISP's out there want to be able to do what ATHM does themselves. Currently the MSO and ATHM share the subscription fee, noone really pays the other. But if "equal access" were to be regulated ATHM would be considered to be paying the MSO for access to the wires just like all the other ISPs. My understanding has been that the problem with "ATHM" speed has been the inadequecy of the cable operators last mile solution rather than the ATHM network itself. IOW, ATHM, as sold to you by TCI. In this you are likely correct. ATHM's network is likely not yet fully utilized and ATHM could likely be in a position of providing a transport service between the MSO's head ends and a ISP's place of operation. But anyone who wanted to run a network to the head ends and bypass ATHM altogether would be permitted to do so. Thats the point of "equal". Not many could afford it, but some could and would do it IMO. Eric