Re: @Home ordered to shutdown at Midnight

["Robert A. Hayden" <rhayden () geek net>]

AT&T couldn't move people off of @home because there was still a valid
contract in place, until Excite broke it and turned off service.  

On Sun, 2 Dec 2001, Sean Donelan wrote:

> On Sat, 1 Dec 2001, Matthew S. Hallacy wrote:
> > I've had no problems, apparently some people are on AT&T @Home, while
> > others are on AT&T Broadband, I am an AT&T Broadband customer, some of
> > my friends (Atlanta, Seattle) are AT&T @Home customers who no longer
> > have access, AT&T claims that everyone who lost access lastnight will
> > be online with AT&T Broadband within ~10 days.
>
> Dumb question.  If AT&T knows it will take them 10 days to fix their
> network, why didn't they start 11 days ago?  If AT&T had done that, it
> would have been finished already.  I guess I will never understand
> the logic used by telephone companies.
>
> On the other hand, I don't understand what this gets Excite@Home's
> creditors.  Once AT&T transfers its subscribers to a new network, why
> does it need @Home's network assets.  Over the next 10 days, @Home's
> value to AT&T drops to zero.
>
> Heck, Priori handled their shutdown better.