thongsai
join:2002-07-04
Santa Rosa, CA | monopoly no more
and every1 was saying that not being forced to share was bad.. of course they want deals.. i hope sbc does same.
--
»thongsai-roms.shorturl.com/ |
|
Bill
Light Up The Halo
Premium,VIP
join:2001-12-09
clubs:
| Good move on Verizons part
Verizon is making itself look good by doing this.
They are sharing their network even though they don't have to. They are trying to make themselves not look like money hungry businessmen, in my opinion.
The big question I'd have is exactly how much would FIOS be through a third-party provider? Is it going to be much more expensive? Or will it be the same, like it is right now with third-party DSL providers? According to DSL Extreme, it's too early in their plans to say how much it'll cost.
--
The new Secure-Wifi.net is open!
|
|
11337845
Live free or die
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Seattle, WA
| Interesting
It makes you think what Verizon's motive is. Are they really trying to be nice guys?
Nah. It just makes economic sense. They've made a huge investment in FIOS and they want to reap the returns. The best way to do so is to have more lines in use. The more ISPs that offer the service, the more customers that will sign up and use their service in one way or another.
For Verizon, it's a win-win situation.
--
Join me and those that think as I do. Revolt against the powers that be. Tell them that they are hypocrites. Let them know that their control is weak and pointless. Urge them to let us evolve into our own society and flourish as we should. |
|
apilosov
join:2002-12-27
Forest Hills, NY | Not true.
Verizon *is* obligated to provide ISPs access to the FIOS deployment, at least until FCC rules in favor of the waiver of Computer II requirements.
(See their most recent FCC petition) |
|
OreoleO
Wanna Settle This Outside??
join:2004-05-22
Feasterville Trevose, PA
1 edit | .
Maybe they are selling the other companies the access (like a 1 time thing plus monthly charges), so they can recap the money on their investment much quicker. |
|
Tzale
Proud Libertarian Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
Sweden
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Optimum Online
| reply to 11337845
Re: Interesting
said by 11337845  :It makes you think what Verizon's motive is. Are they really trying to be nice guys? Nah. It just makes economic sense. They've made a huge investment in FIOS and they want to reap the returns. The best way to do so is to have more lines in use. The more ISPs that offer the service, the more customers that will sign up and use their service in one way or another. For Verizon, it's a win-win situation. Who cares?
It's a business. Verizon wants to make money, and the only thing that can come from this is more competition and a better deal for the consumer. If Verizon is doing this (I don't care WHY) they are HELPING me by letting me pick the best deal for myself. I won't be stuck with Package A or Package B but instead will have different options from different ISPs.
-Tzale
--
Hey OOL, throttle this! I'm going to FIOS...Verizon FIOS Forum |
|
DonLibes
Premium,ExMod 2001
join:2003-01-19
| reply to apilosov
Re: Not true.
said by apilosov :Verizon *is* obligated to provide ISPs access to the FIOS deployment, at least until FCC rules in favor of the waiver of Computer II requirements. (See their most recent FCC petition) Could you provide a pointer and/or a better explanation? I can't even imagine why they would be require to provide access to other ISPs. (If so, will the rates be regulated? If not, what's the point?) |
|
11337845
Live free or die
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Seattle, WA
| reply to Tzale
Re: Interesting
said by Tzale :Who cares? 1. The news item was incredulous about Verizon doing something like this without their hand being forced.
2. Your points don't disagree with mine.
3. Uh? |
|
hescominsoon
join:2003-02-18
Brunswick, MD
·Comcast
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to apilosov
Re: Not true.
said by apilosov :Verizon *is* obligated to provide ISPs access to the FIOS deployment, at least until FCC rules in favor of the waiver of Computer II requirements. (See their most recent FCC petition) NO they are not. They won the ability to have their fiber service be exclusive to them. They ahve to share their copper plant..they are not obligated to share their fiber plant(hence why they are rollling it out so aggresivly.)
--
God Blesshttp://www.emmanuelcomputerconsulting.com-- carpe ductum -- "Grab the tape" |
|
Tzale
Proud Libertarian Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
Sweden
·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online
| reply to 11337845
Re: Interesting
said by 11337845 :said by Tzale :Who cares? 1. The news item was incredulous about Verizon doing something like this without their hand being forced. 2. Your points don't disagree with mine. 3. Uh? I viewed your post as being sceptical about Verizon. Next time please quote my entire reply, not just the "Who cares?" It makes it look like I don't care about them sharing.. But in reality I am saying that I don't care what their INTENTIONS are but that they are doing GOOD for us.
-Tzale
--
Hey OOL, throttle this! I'm going to FIOS...Verizon FIOS Forum |
|
KoolMoe
Aw Man
Premium
join:2001-02-14
Annapolis, MD
clubs:
·Verizon FIOS
·Speakeasy
1 edit | reply to 11337845
It's interesting how VZ complains about having to allow competitors access to their copper, complaining they can't make any money under such a rule, but then turn around and voluntarily offer access to their Fiber.
So apparently the only difference is VZ doesn't like having a cap on the rates they can charge. That's understandable.
The real question then becomes what VZ will charge competing ISPs for access to their fiber? Assuming it's proportionally, significantly more, how will ISPs justify their higher costs?
They'll have to have very lean operating expenses or be able to throw premium service on top of the generic connection.
This model can work. SpeakEasy is a good example. They're not public so I don't know their financials, but they seem to be doing well servicing the 'higher end' market even though their prices are higher-end too.
I'd have had a little more respect for VZ and the rest of the ILECs if they had just said, upfront, that they don't like rates resulting from TA'96. Occasionally out would come 'the cap is too low', even though they never justified it with true costs. How come everyone has to play games and try to spin everything...."Technically impossible", "Unfair regulation", "Confusing for customers" - blah.
I'm glad VZ will offer access. I just hope they do it in a way that there can be pseudo-competition and not higher-priced versions of the same VZ service.
(and I say pseudo-competition because when the company owning the lines also provides service, the resellers are at the mercy of that company - that's not really competition).
KM |
|
yoonix
Floating Taco Of Doom
Premium
join:2001-03-27
Teaneck, NJ | Speakeasy Fios!
Excellent. I was all ready to leave Speakeasy for Verizon Fios when Fios gets here, but it seems like I might not have to. |
|
11337845
Live free or die
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Seattle, WA
| reply to KoolMoe
Re: Interesting
VZ complains about sharing copper because they have no investment to worry about. Those lines are already in use for POTS, so using them for DSL is quite less expensive than FIOS.
Again, it's all about the money for them. A business will always do what's in its best interests. It just happens that this time it benefits the consumer.
Watch out for them to stop sharing their FIOS lines when these contracts end and they've proven their service is viable to the consumer.
--
Join me and those that think as I do. Revolt against the powers that be. Tell them that they are hypocrites. Let them know that their control is weak and pointless. Urge them to let us evolve into our own society and flourish as we should. |
|
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
·Cox HSI
·Speakeasy
| reply to 11337845
said by 11337845 :It makes you think what Verizon's motive is. Are they really trying to be nice guys? Nah. It just makes economic sense. They've made a huge investment in FIOS and they want to reap the returns. The best way to do so is to have more lines in use. The more ISPs that offer the service, the more customers that will sign up and use their service in one way or another. For Verizon, it's a win-win situation. It's not just that, it's that, when they sell to an ISP, that ISPs going to pay for blocks of lines, whether or not they have the customers to pay for them. This allows Verizon to get back their investment quicker.
-tom
--
"Some people have morals, standards and ideals about quality, but I'm an American: I couldn't care less." --Tony Pierce (paraphrased) |
|
11337845
Live free or die
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Seattle, WA
1 edit | That's exactly what I said. 
EDIT
OK, well not exactly. But it's what I was thinking when I wrote that. |
|
apilosov
join:2002-12-27
Forest Hills, NY
| reply to hescominsoon
Not true.
No, you are confused.
Verizon does not have to offer access to fiber/FIOS as a UNE to CLEC/DLEC. (Rates for UNE are cost-based). (Think: Covad cannot put their own fiber-DSLAM-equivalents and get access to FIOS same way as they do copper). (Think: No "layer 1" unbundling).
Verizon *does* have to offer access to ISPs on "equivalent interconnection" terms as they offer to Verizon Online. ("Layer 2" sharing). This requirement is due to "Computer II" case and associated requirements. They are fighting this one as well, FCC forbearance petition 04-440.
In this case, costs are not state-regulated, and basically, VZ only has to be a few pennies cheaper than their retail rate to qualify for the "equivalent interconnection".
VZ-affiliated ISPs *can* order FIOS services. |
|
fegul
Premium
join:2004-08-23
united state | Comcast Please?
I hope Comcast signs on, because Verizon probably won't be coming to my area in my lifetime. |
|
rawgerz
In Debt we trust
Premium
join:2004-10-03
Grove City, PA
·Verizon Online DSL
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
1 edit | Not a bad idea..
i always thought that verizon should provide fiber to a town and the local isp(s) do the hook up to the customers, that way its less of a monopoly, this shouldent be too much of a surprise after all how can ONE isp serve the whole country..it cant
--
Read this! |
|
Rob850
join:2003-04-11
Mary Esther, FL | reply to fegul
Re: Comcast Please?
I doubt if comcast will do something like this. Maybe in 10 years or so we will have fiber to our homes.
Rob
--
»www.robfwb.com |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| I think it's great...
This may appease regulators while Verizon accelerates subscriber base. Getting customers is more than just putting the cable in the street, it's also the marketing which can get expensive. Sure we here count the days but there are many who don't know the difference or see the point of a 5+Mb connection. This is where the marketing dollars of other ISPs like DSL Extreme help Verizon. Verizon gets a good portion (guessing since they're in the position to set the price) the money for the sub without having to do the legwork.
It's a win-win for Verizon and their customers. Appease regulators, increase subscriber base.
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network www.theanimenetwork.com |
|
