dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2010-03-05 10:07:45: Updated, reworded, clarified houses vs homes in two instances: As we noted yesterday, the FCC has started their sales pitch for the national broadband plan, which is scheduled to be unveiled in twelve days. ..

page: 1 · 2 · 3 · next


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

Start Small

quote:
... they're not really going to have the courage to touch on transparent billing issues like the use of below the line faux taxes and fees to jack up the advertised price after sale.
And this is why so many people think that government in general is pretty much useless.
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service.


ipv456

@comcast.net

Markets served by only one carrier?

"many of whom live in markets served by two or fewer carriers; carriers who keep prices high and lag on network investment because they have no competitive incentive to do otherwise"

How many markets are served by only one carrier, where that carrier is a Cable company, CLEC or alternative provider?

Are we just talking about markets that are served by Telco's that were funded by the government to provide rural service?



cableties
Premium
join:2005-01-27

1 recommendation

Jump the economy Stupid!

I was thinking, out loud. And it made some sense.

If you provide bandwidth to places that don't have it, it will spur growth.

Looking beyond infrastructure (like repair, maintenance, power req), you create jobs. I would move in a heartbeat to some rural land I own if only 20+Mbps speeds were available.

Honestly, the communications companies in this country are doing nothing to help the economy for the rest of us. Only their pockets and those that lobby for them.

They've created this "tower of babble" ...
--
Splat



Bill Dollar

join:2009-02-20
New York, NY

1 edit

He has no plan for competition

This interview is telling. Kudos to Steven Levy for actually following up on Genachowski's verbal diahareaa a couple of times.

But, look... his plan for competition is the same as Micheal Powell and Kevin Martin's... the mythical "third pipe."
--
Wired: But the competitive structure itself is such that no one is willing to deliver the kinds of speeds at the kinds of prices that we’re seeing elsewhere there.

Genachowski: There are reasons, absolutely, to be concerned. The barriers to entry in this area are high. Building networks is very expensive; you can’t do it as an entrepreneur in your garage. A reason to be hopeful lies in the potential of global broadband to provide more competition throughout the ecosystem. As the next generation of mobile broadband rolls out, if we can get it to roll out quickly, if it rolls out universally, and if it hits high enough speeds, it could become a legitimate substitute for people who have wired broadband, in the way that wireless telephone service is becoming a substitute for wired, and that’s providing some competition.
---
His first answer, transparency leading to more informed consumers, didn't fly with the reporter. So what does he do? He tells us that we should be "hopeful"; that "if" mobile BB is a) rolled out quickly; b) is made universally available; and c) if it hits high enough speeds, that it *could* become a substitute for wired, and provide competition.

Genachowski is living in fantasy land. This sounds nice, but LTE won't be our savior in next gen broadband no more than 3G was in current gen. It won't be a viable substitute, and the providers have every incentive to not make it one.

He just showed he could care less about consumers. He wants there to be more transparency, so you know better how you are getting ripped off, and he's got some of that good Obama-Administration "Hope" that the 3rd Pipe Fairy will come and save us all, at last.



Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
kudos:38

While LTE will certainly do more than BPL yeah -- always with the miraculous "fourth pipe" that will rush in at the last second and save the day, no matter which party is running the FCC.


openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2
reply to cableties

Re: Jump the economy Stupid!

said by cableties:

Looking beyond infrastructure (like repair, maintenance, power req), you create jobs.
Create jobs or relocate them? Assuming you currently have a job, what job will be created by you moving to your rural property?


Bill Neilson
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Arlington, VA
reply to ipv456

Re: Markets served by only one carrier?

said by ipv456 :

"many of whom live in markets served by two or fewer carriers; carriers who keep prices high and lag on network investment because they have no competitive incentive to do otherwise"

How many markets are served by only one carrier, where that carrier is a Cable company, CLEC or alternative provider?

Are we just talking about markets that are served by Telco's that were funded by the government to provide rural service?
I lived in a major Southern City that only allowed me one option for Internet.

I also just moved to Arlington and out of DC because my area in DC only allowed me Verizon DSL....that was IT. In DC?


FFH
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5
reply to Bill Dollar

Re: He has no plan for competition

Here is the only thing that will come from the broadband plan:

Wired: Will you ask for a universal service fund for broadband?

Genachowski: The universal service fund over the last several decades has promoted near-universal deployment of telephone service in our country. It needs to be transformed to a broadband universal service fund. That’s the path that we’ll lay out in the broadband plan, transforming it over time so that it doesn’t support yesterday’s communications technology but supports tomorrow’s. We’ll be suggesting options to do it over 10 years or faster.
Unfortunately, the usf will be revamped and expanded to increase the tax burden on internet users; cellphone users; and telephone users and the extra usf money will be doled out in those favored congressional districts so that the pols voting for this can send some pork to their home districts.


Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
kudos:38

One person familiar with the plan tells me they believe there will be a new $1 fee (or more) levied on each broadband connection. I'll give you one guess where the majority of that money is going to go. AT&T and Verizon have been lobbying to "reform" the USF for five years, but their version of "reform" involves more money going to them, less money going to small carriers, and the same level of FCC accountability in tracking money expenditures we've grown used to...



ipv456

@comcast.com
reply to Bill Neilson

Re: Markets served by only one carrier?

I would think Verizon fits a Telco definition.

In the major Southern City was your only option for Internet a Cable company, CLEC or alternative provider?



FFH
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5
reply to Karl Bode

Re: He has no plan for competition

said by Karl Bode:

One person familiar with the plan tells me they believe there will be a new $1 fee (or more) levied on each broadband connection. I'll give you one guess where the majority of that money is going to go. AT&T and Verizon have been lobbying to "reform" the USF for five years, but their version of "reform" involves more money going to them, less money going to small carriers, and the same level of FCC accountability in tracking money expenditures we've grown used to...
Seems we agree once again.


SSidlov
Other Things On My Mind
Premium
join:2000-03-03
Pompton Lakes, NJ

Without a high degree of government direct partnership....

In the US, we are proud that capitalism works. Companies do the investment, sometimes with special tax breaks or incentives, but private companies OWN the resulting product. This has been the case for broadband in the US. Private companies own the copper, fiber, and cable; not the US government.

This is not always the case elsewhere in the world. Government built/funded the base infrastructure and leased it back to private businesses so that competition was possible.

Nowhere in the USA does the density of population reach the major Asian countries that everyone likes to point to as having 'fast and cheap' competitive internet services. 70% of our population doesn't live in one city and it's environs (BosNewWash or any segment of it, still isn't as dense as Seoul or Tokyo or Hong Kong). Since our infrastructure is privately developed and held, the companies that are willing to invest wish to produce as soon as possible, profits to justify that investment. They have little interest in expensive deployments in lightly populated areas and are quite willing to skip towns where they feel the income levels are too low but always make sure that urban areas are covered.

Internet infrastructure must be thought of in the same manner as the interstate highways. It's a necessity, vital for our future and the government should partner with companies if necessary to build out the next generation of the networks by collecting small modest fees from all end-users just as they did with the rural phone service tax. However instead of giving away windfalls in money, just for the no-profit areas, they should partake and partner in the profitable areas too. By having an interest in the infrastructure that they can control and resell, the possibility of smaller and specialized service providers can be created by sharing and paying for access to that infrastructure. Absurd fee structures by private companies to stifle competitors won't happen, even if a competitor is partnered with government in any particular segment they won't be able to block competition. Smaller companies leasing from the government's portion would be willing to come forward since they will not have to have vast sums for infrastructure investment -- just enough capitol for a few years leasing as they try to garner customers. The possibility of a 'gaming network ISP' that specialized in low latency high speed consumer equipment rather than generic ISP deployment could be possible. More tiering of services that are geared to niche segments of the population with specialized portals for private and professional use.

It's not socialism but a guarantee that the market IS competitive while making sure that the USA, nationally is prepared and directly invested in what used to be called the 'Internet Super Highway." And making sure that the highway is accessible to everyone.
--
»www.Warpstock.org



mod_wastrel
iamwhatiam

join:2008-03-28
kudos:1

So, basically, taxpayers should actually get what they're paying for... for a change. Unlikely to happen... the lobbyists will never allow it--legislators and government regulators are already too much in their pockets. The Information Super Highway will never be like the U.S. Interstate system: mostly free and accessible to all. (Just look at all of the laws that prevent communities from creating their own municipal networks.)



BillRoland
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Ocala, FL
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Cox HSI

said by mod_wastrel:

So, basically, taxpayers should actually get what they're paying for... for a change. Unlikely to happen... the lobbyists will never allow it--legislators and government regulators are already too much in their pockets. The Information Super Highway will never be like the U.S. Interstate system: mostly free and accessible to all. (Just look at all of the laws that prevent communities from creating their own municipal networks.)
The taxpayers are also paying for that "free" interstate too. Would a "free' BigMac really be free if I have to pay $2.99 for it?
--
"Don't steal. The government hates competition."
Beyond AM. Beyond FM. XM


TamaraB
Question The Current Paradigm
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Da Bronx
Reviews:
·Optimum Online
·Clearwire Wireless
reply to ipv456

Re: Markets served by only one carrier?

My ONLY option here in this Brooklyn NYC Neighborhood is Verizon DSL. No cable service, no fiber.

I have 1Mb service because the copper here can't handle more. I tried to upgrade to 3Mb, and it was discovered that the wire is too old and degraded. It's Dry Loop service, so the wire is not under any tariff requirements, therefor there is no requirement for VZ to even maintain it, let alone make it better.

How is this location EVER going to get 100Mb service without the government mandating some minimum level of access? Remember the way it used to be for POTS service? They HAD to provide a minimum level of service no matter where you lived.

If this is the situation in some parts of urban America, imagine how bad things are in rural America.

100Mb to 100 Million, simply improves service to those already serviced, but does nothing for those under-serviced or unserviced at all. A "NATIONAL" broadband plan has to have broadband access for "all" as A FIRST PRIORITY.

Bob

--
Would you ever go over to Czechoslovakia, and marry me daughter for me?"



SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17
San Francisco, CA

1 edit
reply to pnh102

Re: Start Small

In some areas, you are spot-on!



Bill Dollar

join:2009-02-20
New York, NY
reply to TamaraB

Re: Markets served by only one carrier?

Have you tried this, from Dave Burstein:

"One million New Yorkers can get free WiFi through 187 access points across Harlem, the South Bronx, and Brooklyn in the neighborhoods that need it most. If your WiFi can see smartnetnyc, urbanwifitv or smartnetnych, you should be able to register on the splash page that comes up. When I visited them Saturday, 392 users had logged in by 1:30, although until now they have had zero publicity. more »bit.ly/5hJbaY"



BillRoland
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Ocala, FL
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Cox HSI

1 recommendation

What I would like to see

Rather than incessantly complain about any and every proposal that comes up about this, can you offer your own comprehensive plan on how to cure the problem? The two requirements I have are:

1. Must not involve federal government takeover of ISP industry or the creation of a new bureaucracy
2. Must not involve declaring broadband a universal human right
--
"Don't steal. The government hates competition."
Beyond AM. Beyond FM. XM



Michael Turk

@cox.net

100mbps to 100 million HOUSEHOLDS, not people

Genachowski has said he wants 100mbps per second to 100 million households, not 100 million people. That would be 260 million people.

Read it in his own words...

»reboot.fcc.gov/blog?entryId=172819



TamaraB
Question The Current Paradigm
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Da Bronx
Reviews:
·Optimum Online
·Clearwire Wireless

1 edit
reply to Bill Dollar

Re: Markets served by only one carrier?

said by Bill Dollar:

Have you tried this, from Dave Burstein:
The Only WIFI I see here apart from my own is a good signal from OptOnline. OptOnline does not service this area with cable, but their wifi signal is available. So, I called them and asked if I could subscribe to their WIFI as a separate account. NO! was their immediate answer.

I will keep my eyes open for those you mentioned, but to date they are not here.

EDIT: It shows up here as optimumwifi with good signal strength.

Bob
--
Would you ever go over to Czechoslovakia, and marry me daughter for me?"


ipv456

@comcast.com

Broadband Public Option

Are people arguing for a "single payer" system in this country for Boadband.

Seems like a trend.



mod_wastrel
iamwhatiam

join:2008-03-28
kudos:1
reply to BillRoland

Re: Without a high degree of government direct partnership....

I thought that's what I said: built by taxpayer money therefore mostly free (to use because our money paid for it in the first place--still some tolls here and there though) and accessible. Perhaps my syntax wasn't clear enough.


mlundin

join:2001-03-27
Lawrence, KS

1 recommendation

reply to SLD

The time it takes to embrace technology...

I was once told that the time it takes for the first 10% of the population to embrace a technology is roughly equivalent to the time it takes for the next 80% to embrace it (90% total). The final 10% embrace at a much slower pace. Therefore, instead of arbitrarily setting a speed that an arbitrary number of people should have available, the analysis should look at what the top 10% of speeds are and try to get those to 90% of the people in the same time frame that it took those top 10% to migrate from the national average to their current speed. Does any of that make sense?


thehondaboy

join:2009-07-19
Auburn, GA

1 recommendation

People and Households. Sometimes considered different things

It was a good post Karl. Very passionate. It's just unfortunate that the error in the mix up of people and households sort of leaves the whole argument to fall in on itself.

But on the other hand you got 18 people to jump off the cliff with you before anyone fact checked what was being said. That's like a small cult!


cburkart

join:2010-02-09
Pensacola, FL
reply to ipv456

Re: Broadband Public Option

said by ipv456 :

Are people arguing for a "single payer" system in this country for Boadband.
No. Broadband provision involves huge fixed costs and very small variable costs. Providing service once the fiber has been laid is comparatively very cheap. Providing health care once a hospital has been built still involves considerable expense (caregiver salaries, consumables, insurance, etc.)


Bill Neilson
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Arlington, VA
reply to ipv456

Re: Markets served by only one carrier?

Cox Cable

I used DirecTV for TV but Cox was the only competition for internet



FFH
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

1 edit
reply to TamaraB

said by TamaraB:

My ONLY option here in this Brooklyn NYC Neighborhood is Verizon DSL. No cable service, no fiber.

Don't you live on a boat?
»Re: Veterans Stimulus Checks anyone?


Bill Neilson
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Arlington, VA
reply to Karl Bode

Re: He has no plan for competition

Of course it does....we shouldn't be shocked that the major corporations are running this train

They have for some time now and will continue in the future


Eek2121

join:2002-10-12
Newton, NJ
reply to Bill Neilson

Re: Markets served by only one carrier?

Forget that, there are several markets outside metropolitan areas that have NO high speed options. My mother's house for instance in rural Dickson, TN doesn't even have a cable TV option, much less cable internet.



DaveDude
No Fear

join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
kudos:1
reply to ipv456

Re: Broadband Public Option

Soon America will be so weighted down in debt. The tax for a big mac will be 400%.