Nightwchtr
join:2001-09-10
Falls Church, VA | Smells Fishy
Sounds like a good plan but like all things that start out good will probably not be good for consumers in the long run only time will tell. |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
 ·Comcast
| FCC Sanity?
Wow... for once they are right!
It is indisputably, irrefutably true that the biggest obstacle to next-generation broadband/TV service deployments are pesky local governments which put up inane build-out requirements for providers. Like any commodity, a lack of competition leads directly to high prices.
The only real solution here is for voters to get on the ball and vote out local government officials which continue to stand in way of progress. The last thing we need is more Federal bureaucracy in what really should remain a state/local issue.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. |
|
plk
bo may sleep in loft
Premium
join:2002-04-20
Ogden, IA | reply to Nightwchtr
Re: Smells Fishy
Yup...Another back office sweetheart deal for selling out this country.....whats new! They will tell us after the deal..... PLEASE |
|
chemaupr
join:2005-06-06
Alexandria, VA
| "build-out requirements."
really, limit "build-out requirements." That, if anything, is the only benefit I find on franchise agreements. Well, I guess people leaving a feet away from what they provider feels is profitable know will have to stick a out a couple of thousands to get service/ |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| anybody's fault but his
FCC Chief Kevin Martin blames rising cable rates on local municipalities...
this is the same logic that blames the american people (or the press or the Iraqis) for the mess in Iraq.
It apparently hasn't occured to Martin that the reason we have no competition is the FCC keeps approving megamergers and deregulating monopolistic industries. |
|
qdemn7
Smurf in My Loop
Premium
join:2003-09-16
Fort Worth, TX
| reply to pnh102
Re: FCC Sanity?
I hope they put a stop to Munis asking for anything NOT having to do with BB/TV service. No Community Centers, no swimming pools, no more of the local politicians buying votes by saying "look what I got for you." And you shouldn't need more than about 10 Public access Channels either.
--
Those who complain the loudest about their loss of rights under the Patriot Act seem to be the first ones to try to take away others rights under the Second Amendment. |
|
cbrain
join:2000-05-21
Silver Spring, MD | Why now?
Cable rates have increased above the rate of inflation for as long as I can remember. I agree with his observations and goal, but I wonder about the timing of addressing this problem as the telcos want to enter the market. |
|
franchisescandal
@verizon.net
| video tax?
you can look at it two ways, either a greedy municpality.. or a local cable company looking for job security, maybe a little of both. it's quite possible there may even be a truce between satellite and local cable companies to stop or slow down telco's entry into video. if telcos pass on these costs to the consumer, it's quite likely people will not buy video from them, backfiring on those franchise fees-- you can't GET what they don't COLLECT. a viscious circle whereby satellite and local cable monopolies win, which is to say despite the record number of 'settled' franchise agreements won by telcos, they aren't shy of passing on these costs to the end consumer. a reform must 'get at' a MAXIMUM determined value of concessions to a franchise without any possibilty of a waiver, with resonable adjustment for inflation. this is an up-hill holy grail because it's no secret that the telcos are flush with cash (fresh from mega merger) for their buildouts. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| reply to qdemn7
Re: FCC Sanity?
said by qdemn7  :I hope they put a stop to Munis asking for anything NOT having to do with BB/TV service. No Community Centers, no swimming pools, no more of the local politicians buying votes by saying "look what I got for you." And you shouldn't need more than about 10 Public access Channels either. I agree with you. And even 10 is about 8 more public access channels than are needed. 99% of the people NEVER even watch 1 public access channel.
--
--
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
xerxes3642
join:2006-02-24
Saint Charles, MO
·Charter Pipeline
| time limit
he wants to put a time limit on negotiations. If they don't finish a franchise with a local municipality in three months, they get to operate without an agreement. what will make the telco's just hold out until the time limit expires and then operate without a franchise anyway? This is a terrible proposal only benefiting at&t and not any consumers. don't believe their lies. |
|
RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs: | That is not what was said last year
Did not the providers blame the higher rates on what they have to pay for certain mandatory channels like sports?
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| reply to cbrain
Re: Why now?
said by cbrain :... but I wonder about the timing of addressing this problem as the telcos want to enter the market. no need to wonder - Martin works for the telcos, not the consumer. I also think Martin is getting desperate that there be some glimmer of competition, whether it's real or not.
The bi-monthly or so "BPL is GREAT" press release doesn't seem to be working.
Just asserting that competition exists usually works with the gullible congress and gullible press, but the annual cable rate increases sort of reveal these assertions for the lies they are.
That leaves "unleashing" the telcos to offer TV service without requiring local franchises. This will work until the rules get passed and it becomes obvious that duopoly competition is only marginally better than no competition. |
|
CableTool
Poorly Representing MYSELF.
Premium
join:2004-11-12
| reply to RayW
Re: That is not what was said last year
The providers arent saying this.. the FCC is. And whats funny is if they believe this they are basically saying "YOUVE BEEN SCREWED BY YOUR LOCAL GOVT FOR YEARS!! And now we know why!"
Theyve spent so much time and implemented so many restrictions to make sure there was not a monopoly.. and now they are saying all their efforts CREATED a monopoly. Which is convenient after all the CableCos jumped through all their freaking hoops to obtain local agreements..
Ridiculous.
--
CableFAQ.org/Technicians Unplugged
|
|
itguy05
join:2005-06-17
Camp Hill, PA
| reply to pnh102
Re: FCC Sanity?
quote:
Like any commodity, a lack of competition leads directly to high prices.
Which is why FIOS, DirecTV, Dish, and Comcast are roughly (within $5/mo) the same price for each other... Also the reason FIOS also raised rates this year.
Competition almost never guarantees low prices. It just makes you feel better about the price you pay. A panacea if you will. |
|
qdemn7
Smurf in My Loop
Premium
join:2003-09-16
Fort Worth, TX
| reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail :I agree with you. And even 10 is about 8 more public access channels than are needed. 99% of the people NEVER even watch 1 public access channel. Very true, I was just being generous for a very large city, say over 5 million.
--
Those who complain the loudest about their loss of rights under the Patriot Act seem to be the first ones to try to take away others rights under the Second Amendment. |
|
Titus Pullo
I came, I saw, I slept
join:2004-06-26
 ·Embarq
| Please teach this in high school
Historically and logically, nearly any instance of the Federal government looking to usurp the powers of the state (or local municipality) is for the benefit of the few and not the many. Anyone that believes otherwise is history's fool.
--
"I am not young enough to know everything."
Oscar Wilde |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | reply to nasadude
Re: anybody's fault but his
Uh.... competitors haven't been merging for the most part. |
|
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
| reply to RayW
Re: That is not what was said last year
said by RayW :Did not the providers blame the higher rates on what they have to pay for certain mandatory channels like sports? ESPN is part of it, its something like 4 dollars per subscriber to the cable system maybe more nowdays. and a cable company cant decide to say make ESPN optional because in the contract with disney i think ESPN has to be on everyone's TV for the cable co to have any other disney owned channels.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| reply to itguy05
Re: FCC Sanity?
said by itguy05 :Which is why FIOS, DirecTV, Dish, and Comcast are roughly (within $5/mo) the same price for each other... Also the reason FIOS also raised rates this year. Cable would have gone out of business if not for satellite TV, however. Had satellite not initially provided some sort of competition for cable TV, cable providers would not have offered new services like On Demand, DVRs, real high definition programming and the like.
said by itguy05 :Competition almost never guarantees low prices. It just makes you feel better about the price you pay. A panacea if you will. Competition does allows you to play the providers against one another to get a better deal for yourself. Quite a few people have used with success the threat of moving from one provider to another as a means to get their current provider to continue a promotional rate where it would have otherwise expired.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. |
|
Maxo
Your tax dollars at work.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL
clubs: | reply to Nightwchtr
Re: Smells Fishy
Why do they need it to be secret until after the vote? No need to keep it secret unless there's something to hide. |
|
