What the HELL is OPEN ACCESS--You get pissed and
close your system when MSFT tries to use part of it's
"open ness", yet you go whining to Congress to give AOL
open access to broadband. DAMN, you can't have it both
ways, Steve Case!! Always open to you but closed when
you want it to be ain't going to cut it for
I can't predict how far or how long the down
trend will be or how low it will go. One thing I have
learned about the market after being in it for many years
is NEVER SAY NEVER.
I do not expect any compeling
positive or negative news that will move the stock to a
point that is NON-REVERSABLE at this time.
have to look back to is the past as a reference point
and incorporate what I know at this moment and try to
make logical decisions.
However, based on the
leadership from STEVE CASE and the strategic decisions made
from AOL in the past years, I STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT
AOL WILL BE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN LAST NIGHT'S
CLOSE (100 1/8) by the end of the year. The open access
well, I think any real meaningful and lasting results
will not come until the year 2000 and after. But,
remember, the cable issue does not impact AOL's financial
status much on the near term. AOL has solid customers
which need and like its service and AOL is doing VERY
well with what it has. Therefore, I really am not
worry about AOL on a near term and especially on the
long term. I will not put all my eggs in AOL's basket
since I may need some of my funds in the near future.
But, I am willing to commit a substantial portion of
my portfolio in AOL based on its fundamental and
what I BELIEVE WILL HAPPEN WITH THE OPEN ACCESS
HOPE THIS HELPS, REGARDS!
At the very beginning, it looked as if San
Francisco's decision to not FORCE AT@T to open to ISP at this
time is bad. However,
but when I read more about
what happened, it looks VERY good for open access and
for AOL. San Francisco supervisors are unanimously
FOR OPEN ACCESS and will file a FRIEND OF THE COURT
BRIEF to the federal court in support of the Portland's
In other words, it is completely FOR open access and
is against AT@T. San Francisco can't really change
any meaningful agreements made with vendors until
DECEMBER so it is now just waiting. By no means, is the
open access issue dead, if fact, the support from San
Francisco helps with the momentum already in place for open
access. OPEN ACCESS WILL BE ENFORCED. It may take some
time, but will become law. Does anyone really think
that AT@T will have another monopoly again? NO WAY, we
are approaching the year 2000. Enlightened minds will
not go backwards to 50 years ago when MONOPOLY is
So, in short, DO NOT LET THE "SHORTS" BAD TALK YOU
INTO SELL YOUR AOL STOCK. THEY WANT YOU TO AND WILL
TRY TO SCARE YOU INTO DOING SO. AOL has VERY good
fundamentals and will continue to do well in the future. It
may run into BUMPS along the way, but the journey for
the long term I believe is UPWARDS.
REGARDS from a experienced investor and a AOL LONG!!!
WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--July 26, 1999-- San
Francisco's Board of Supervisors today unanimously passed a
resolution to support open access to the city's high-speed
Internet cable network, and agreed to file a
friend-of-the-court brief in support of Portland, Oregon's battle
against AT&T in the federal courts.
Coalition, a national group of 200 independent Internet
Service Providers working for a fair, open and
competitive Internet cable network, hailed the city's
adoption of an open access policy. The Board of
Supervisors amended the city's franchise agreement with AT&T,
and included a provision that will allow the city to
impose open access subject to certain conditions. The
city intends to take up the issue of open access again
in December when its franchise agreement allows it
to unilaterally impose open access.
access continues to gain momentum. From Northern
California to Southern Florida, communities are taking a
stand and voting for what is best for their citizens,''
said Greg Simon, Co-Director of the openNET coalition.
``San Francisco officials understand the importance of
open access and that's why they are supporting
San Francisco's vote follows similar
votes in Portland, Oregon, and Broward County, Florida,
requiring AT&T to sell open access to its high-speed cable
network. The votes occurred as part of AT&T's request for
transfer of local franchises from Tele-Communications,
Inc. and MediaOne, which it has purchased. AT&T's
purchase of two of the nation's four largest cable
companies give the former telephone monopoly access to 60
percent of all American homes.
``We continue to
be encouraged by these votes since all we're asking
for is a chance to buy the high-speed access,'' Simon
said. ``We want to pay for access, but AT&T is intent
on continuing to build its monopoly and shut out
smaller ISPs to the detriment of consumers.''
Cable is the only high-speed path to the Internet that
is not required to allow competing ISPs to buy
access. The result of the open nature of the telephone
network over the last few years has been the development
of a vibrant Internet marketplace of thousands of
innovative ISPs competing for customers.
believe that there is no reason for cable to be treated
any differently than every other technology,'' said
Rich Bond, Co-Director of the openNET Coalition.
The resolution ``establishes that it is the policy of
the City and County of San Francisco to support, open
non-discriminatory access to broadband access services...'' The
resolution urged city staff to ``take all possible actions
to implement this policy at federal, state and local
level'' including filing an amicus brief.
Portland, Oregon, and nearby Multnomah County voted last
spring to require AT&T to open its cable network and
sell access. AT&T then sued the city and lost. U.S.
District Judge Owen Panner ruled that local communities
have jurisdiction and the right to require competition
in the public interest. AT&T has appealed the ruling
the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.
San Francisco's Board of Supervisors decided on
Monday to file a ``friend of the court'' brief in
support of Portland's right to require competition in a
communications network as important as high-speed Internet
Commissioners for Broward County,
Florida, voted earlier this month for an ordinance
requiring cable companies to sell access to their
high-speed Internet networks to rival ISP's. Broward County
was then sued by Comcast