[11447] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: The whole CIX concept is flawed
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joseph W. Stroup)
Sun Apr 3 03:11:38 1994
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 1994 19:57:52 -0800 (PST)
From: "Joseph W. Stroup" <nettech@crl.com>
To: Barry Shein <bzs@world.std.com>
Cc: jlw@cs.columbia.edu, bilse@eu.net, com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: <199404022253.AA19609@world.std.com>
Barry, the $10k fee was IMHO to be a barrier, at least at one time.
$10,000 to me is credit card money these days. Its not that for many
small people starting up.
Its time to build a parallel T-3 network with Cisco 7000 series routers
and rock-n-roll.
Joseph Stroup
On Sat, 2 Apr 1994, Barry Shein wrote:
>
> >From: James Waldrop <jlw@cs.columbia.edu>
> >In fact, the $10K seems to me to be more of a barrier to entry --
> >an anticompetitive agreement among certain large ISPs. Sprint
> >can afford to pay the $10K, and is probably happier than not
>
> A $10K/yr fee is not enough to be considered anti-competitive. The
> mere existence of someone who cannot raise $10K is not proof to the
> contrary, we can probably find someone who can't raise $10. $100K/yr
> might be more in the range, $1M/yr I'd say certainly. But $10K/yr? I
> mean, what kind of capital are these businesses using? An outfitted PC
> costs about that much. I think what people are saying when they say
> $10K/yr is a barrier to entry is simply that they'd rather spend the
> $10K on something else, not that it's some insurmountable barrier.
>
> -Barry Shein
>
> Software Tool & Die | bzs@world.std.com | uunet!world!bzs
> Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD
>
