dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2009-09-24 15:23:41: If you've paid attention, you know the modern "network neutrality" debate took off in 2005, when then AT&T CEO Ed Whitacre proudly, though dumbly, proclaimed that Google got a "free ride" on his network. ..

prev · 1 · 2

McShaken
Premium Member
join:2006-02-20
Olympia, WA

McShaken

Premium Member

Not Enough Competiton

The behavior of AT&T and other large providers clearly shows that there isn't enough competition. I'm all for a business making a profit, but when a few large corporations go to such lengths to corner the market and then take every possible advantage to provide less and less, yet charge more and more, then something's got to give... laws need to be changed to allow more competition (including municipalities) to jump into the ISP broadband market. What we've got now is a joke.

rfceo
@comcast.net

rfceo

Anon

Re: Not Enough Competiton

You are right that there needs to be competition, but that was sold off by the government. When the telcos persuaded the government to change laws regarding line sharing. Most Americans probably know nothing about this. Do you wonder why AOL no longer sells connectivity? The telcos WILL NOT Sell it to them, for a fair wholesale price. The telco retails this for $39.95 and wholesales it for $39.90, a company cannot be profitable for a nickel a month. Being in the ISP Biz for over 10 years I have seen literally thousands and thousands of ISPs being squeezed out of existence, all made possible by changing the law put in place in 1996 to protect from this.
You need to research what really paid for the phone lines.
The tax breaks that telcos received upon promises of a national high speed network to every home.
The taxes you paid for telephone services.
Do you have multiple(more than 3) choices of where to get your service?
If allowed to control content will you be able to visit the site of your favorite politician? Yes they can block that if they want to.

Broadband maybe needs to be considered a vital part of the national infrastructure and have tight controls over connectivity and level playing fields.
Or maybe the government needs fewer involved so they can shut it down as is done in other countries???

ArgMeMatey
join:2001-08-09
Milwaukee, WI

ArgMeMatey

Member

Re: Not Enough Competiton

said by rfceo :

You need to research what really paid for the phone lines.
The tax breaks that telcos received upon promises of a national high speed network to every home.
The taxes you paid for telephone services.

Yep. The players just want to sweep this under the rug. You've got a bunch of grifters who spent most of the 20th century getting fat and lazy as sanctioned monopolies operating on Rate of Return, and when their easy ride came to an end, they found that cheating was the only way to hang on. Karl's probably written up this part of the story, too.

»www.newnetworks.com/FTCc ··· izon.htm

rfceo
@comcast.net

rfceo

Anon

Re: Not Enough Competiton

not to mention the fact that the telcos wanted NOTHING to do with the INTERNET when it started.
and NOTHING to do with DSL when it was launched.

THE PUT NO R&D into the development of either of these. How much R&D do you think they will do for future advancements.

They have driven a lot of the innovators out of the market.
Looks like we may have to rely on foreign markets for new technology.

tschmidt
MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
·Consolidated Com..
·Republic Wireless
·Hollis Hosting

tschmidt to McShaken

MVM

to McShaken
said by McShaken:

The behavior of AT&T and other large providers clearly shows that there isn't enough competition.
Do you really want dozens of companies stringing up power lines and communication cable to serve first-mile customers?

First-mile is barely profitable now with only one or two players in a market. That is why Verizon sold northern New England to FairPoint. Who in their right mind would invest the capital to be the fifth company to wire up a neighborhood.

We need to draw a distinction between first-mile access providers which are an oligopoly at best and the services carried over those facilities.

First-Mile access requires extensive regulation to force companies to act in the long term interest of customers rather then the short term interest of of company.

Internet services on the other had are extremely competitive and barriers to entry are few. As such the need only the most basic of regulation.

/tom
prev · 1 · 2