fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | reply to nasadude
Re: Sounds Like a Whiner said by nasadude:let me add one more fact about deregulation: remember when cable was deregulated? I do and the thing I remember most is that everybody was saying how this would lead to lower prices for cable TV. boy, that really worked out, didn't it? Sure 'nuff did! Prices went up about $4.00 right after re-reg! I remember that JUST fine too! |
|
| reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:said by jhboricua:They ILECS didn't seem to complain when GOVERNMENT REGULATION allowed them to build out their heavily government subsidized networks and sanctioned their monopolies. Again, what may have happened 100 years ago is no longer relevant today. Fiber networks are not being built with any form of subsidy. Are you serious? The entire cable/telecom networks are and probably always will be subsidized by the taxes, tax breaks, and monopoly/duopoly powers given to them. The entire cable/telecom industry was built on subsidies. Therefore nothing they have ever done nor anything they will ever do will remove that. They wouldn't exist today and certainly wouldn’t have the money they do have to expand if they weren’t given the concessions they were given.
Don’t get me wrong. I know that building the networks was next to impossible without such. I still think it is which is why I think we should have 1 nationwide network not owned by any service provider (government owned) but available to all that want to provide service to anyone in the nation. However, don't come here peddling your crap that it is not subsidized now. It always has been and it always will be until they forfeit all their tax breaks, welfare programs, and reimburse the country for those, the network and guaranteed profits they were given and still are to this day. Until that time and until they are truly standing on their own 2 feet in a free market with actual competition this won't change no matter how many times they completely rebuild the entire network infrastructure.
Ignoring the history fact as to why they are even here that will always put them in debt to this country, where is all that money they were given to build this network years ago? Didn’t they get over $200 billion in breaks over the last 10 years to build this next gen network which still to this day is not even close to being done. Would you not call that a subsidy? They got probably 5x what it will cost them to build the entire network in the end (Both Verizon and AT&T) and yet they have the tenacity to complain about spending $18 billion to actually do the damn thing. Yet they still want network protection, cherry picking, and to extort local communities to get their way.
I call for the government to strip all of them of our entire networks we are loaning to them and turn them into simple service providers as they should be. |
|
| reply to jhboricua
said by jhboricua:I wonder what would long distance rates would be like without the government regulation intervention in breaking Ma Bell.I wonder if DSL would have been deployed at all in the early 90's if Government regulation intervention hadn't allowed Covad to exist. I honestly can't believe you can say less regulation = more broadband and expect to be taken seriously. Your confusing regulation with an anti-trust action by the Justice Dept. The break-up of MA Bell wasn't a regulatory action, but a court action that resulted in DEREGULATION.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page |
|
| reply to fiberguy
said by fiberguy:I have to give both industries credit that they have both moved forward in the last 10 years. Only, my biggest issue is that phone, the staple and backbone of this country, has not done as much growing as cable has, and certainly has had more opportunity to do so - but chose not to. The telephone companies are constantly making improvements and new innovations, the only problem is that it's not right at the phone jack, so most people are clueless...
Most of the improvements have been inside the network with new switching technologies, faster transport rates, smarter redundancy functions, PIP, and so forth. The problem is that because it is not something right there in the house, then nothing is happening.
As for FIOS and Lightspeed, people are just impatient. Rome was not built in a day, but in today's "instant gratification" mindset, 100% deployment is expected from day 1.
--
Bring back chicken and potato chips - Vote Perot! |
|
|
|
 jhboricuaExMod 2000-01
join:2000-06-06
Minneapolis, MN
1 edit | reply to pnh102
Sounds like a Telco Shill said by pnh102:Again, what may have happened 100 years ago is no longer relevant today. Fiber networks are not being built with any form of subsidy. I stand corrected, this IS the most retarded statement I've seen in a while. I didn't know that little spat between the state of PA and Verizon over billions of tax $$$ in subsidies for a fiber network build-out that never materialized was 100 years ago. 
said by pnh102:Even if the Bells had driven Covad out of business, do you really think that no one else would have pushed them to offer DSL service? Again, the point is that had the ILEC been left to regulate itself, there would have been no deployment in the mid 90's, we still would have been stuck with ISDN and T1 at ridiculous prices. Cable was nowhere ready back then. Were I live it took the cable franchise 5 to 6 years to upgrade their cable plant so they could offer the same functionality that DSL offered.said by pnh102:No one has proven that increasing regulation will lead to fiber deployment. Increasing regulation? What are these new regulations? Increasing implies new, which ones are they?
The way I see it, the problem is that the ILECs wants to have their cake and eat it. First it was "we're not deploying fiber unless there's a guarantee that we won't have to share it" and they got their wish. NOW is, "we're not deploying unless we're allowed to cherry pick our deployments or be exempt from franchise agreements ". At the same time, they purchase laws and put road blocks after road blocks to prevent others from deploying competing services even when they have no intention of serving the community in question.
I guess you think they would behave nicer if there was less regulation.
But please enlighten us, what's preventing them from deploying under the current regulations? Or, What are these 'increasing' new regulations that prevent fiber from being deployed?
--
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein
Jose A. Hernandez * IT Technician * MPLS, Minnesota, USA * My website: Zerochill |
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to pnh102
Re: Sounds Like a Whiner said by pnh102:... Today's cable service isn't the same crappy analog garbage we had in the 1980s. Cable companies only charge the maximum that their customers will pay for their service, anyone who doesn't like the pricing can always cancel and not pay a red cent to them. Well, I remember the price increases for that crappy analog garbage.
And cable or any other company can pretty much charge what they want when they have a monopoly.
You are exactly right - if I don't like the pricing, I can always cancel and not pay a red cent to them. For me, that means going without broadband because I HAVE NO OTHER CHOICE BUT CABLE.
I could also cancel my electricity and water if I don't like the price - I wonder if some of those folks in Baltimore looking at the 72% price increases are going to cancel their electricity? Why don't you write a letter to the legislature telling them your solution to that problem? |
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| reply to fiberguy
said by fiberguy: Sure 'nuff did! Prices went up about $4.00 right after re-reg! I remember that JUST fine too! the only thing re-regulated was basic cable. Even the FCC doesn't hide the fact that cable TV rates have been going up much faster than inflation, ranging from 5-8% per year for the past several years. |
|
 tsu9
join:2001-08-17
Wheeling, IL | reply to fAcEtIOUs
Re: Sounds Litke a Whiner Just a nitpick: "deregulation" is a regulatory action. It just isn't the sort you're used to thinking about, so I can understand your comment. |
|
 lml2000Whazzup
join:2000-08-17
Los Angeles, CA | reply to nasadude
Re: Sounds Like a Whiner said by nasadude:let me add one more fact about deregulation: remember when cable was deregulated? I do and the thing I remember most is that everybody was saying how this would lead to lower prices for cable TV. boy, that really worked out, didn't it? That's b/c there's no real competition & the deregulation applied to non-basic programming packages. I say "real" b/c the only competition presently existent if from DBS. Now that DTV is owned by Newscorp (Murdoch), which owns FOX, there's no incentive to compete against their brethren content providers with substantial investment in programming & cable (i.e. TimeWarner, Cox, Disney). The real renegade that spurred competition on the video platform was Charlie over @ DISH, & he's pretty much blown his wad @ this stage, going after lower-end households. Now he's trying to pump-up HD b/c for another year, he holds the most capacity to deliver HD programming among MSOs & DTV. So, IMHO, Charlie is no longer a player . . . & competition is gone until the telcos start to deliver on their decade old promise of video over twisted pair.
I don't think AT&T's strategy will work well as I believe more bandwidth is needed. Perhaps the latest rumblings regarding Stephens bill is the ability of providers to water down HD. This works in AT&T's favor b/c FTTN will be short on bandwidth regardless of the BS coming out of San Antoe'n. |
|
 JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA | reply to nasadude
Deregulation has always been for the benefit of the companies involved, not for the customers. 'Nuff said. |
|
 batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to Minister
said by Minister:You drink too much telco Kool-Aid. quote:
Likewise, any town that decides to get in the way of AT&T's Project Lightspeed deployments is also guilty of holding back progress. Get the people out of the way, and you will see technology progress.
I fixed your quote for you. You must be joking. You don't thing politicians represent the PEOPLE do you? Politicians represent special interest wile they pander the the people. |
|
| reply to achuchma
said by achuchma:said by fiberguy:I have to give both industries credit that they have both moved forward in the last 10 years. Only, my biggest issue is that phone, the staple and backbone of this country, has not done as much growing as cable has, and certainly has had more opportunity to do so - but chose not to. The telephone companies are constantly making improvements and new innovations, the only problem is that it's not right at the phone jack, so most people are clueless... Most of the improvements have been inside the network with new switching technologies, faster transport rates, smarter redundancy functions, PIP, and so forth. The problem is that because it is not something right there in the house, then nothing is happening. As for FIOS and Lightspeed, people are just impatient. Rome was not built in a day, but in today's "instant gratification" mindset, 100% deployment is expected from day 1. Their are two kinds of people in this world
1. Those that are serious and get things done on schedule
2. Those that are carefree and wants to take all the time in the world
which kind are you? |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | reply to achuchma
said by achuchma:said by fiberguy:I have to give both industries credit that they have both moved forward in the last 10 years. Only, my biggest issue is that phone, the staple and backbone of this country, has not done as much growing as cable has, and certainly has had more opportunity to do so - but chose not to. The telephone companies are constantly making improvements and new innovations, the only problem is that it's not right at the phone jack, so most people are clueless... Most of the improvements have been inside the network with new switching technologies, faster transport rates, smarter redundancy functions, PIP, and so forth. The problem is that because it is not something right there in the house, then nothing is happening. As for FIOS and Lightspeed, people are just impatient. Rome was not built in a day, but in today's "instant gratification" mindset, 100% deployment is expected from day 1. So basically the only upgrades they have done is what we never see? how is that suppsoed to help us? |
|
| said by patcat88:So basically the only upgrades they have done is what we never see? how is that suppsoed to help us? Does it have to be a tangible object in your hands to believe that it will actually be a benefit to you?
--
Bring back chicken and potato chips - Vote Perot! |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | said by achuchma:said by patcat88:So basically the only upgrades they have done is what we never see? how is that suppsoed to help us? Does it have to be a tangible object in your hands to believe that it will actually be a benefit to you? It has to be be something i can order or see, the only upgrades the telcos do is to cheapen it for them to operate, not our service; 10c a min long distence existed in 1996 from att, prices havnt gone down. Where is residential consumer ISDN? |
|
Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA | reply to achuchma
said by achuchma:The telephone companies are constantly making improvements and new innovations, the only problem is that it's not right at the phone jack, so most people are clueless... Most of the improvements have been inside the network with new switching technologies, faster transport rates, smarter redundancy functions, PIP, and so forth. The problem is that because it is not something right there in the house, then nothing is happening. As for FIOS and Lightspeed, people are just impatient. Rome was not built in a day, but in today's "instant gratification" mindset, 100% deployment is expected from day 1. They may be upgrading but they are not innovating. Innovations are being done by smaller companies that don't demand guaranteed profit, and had to work for their capital, instead of just sticking out their hand and threatening to allow all their non-duplicatable assets to fall to disrepair (while they simultaneously buy back stock and pay dividends) |
|
batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
| said by Ahrenl: They may be upgrading but they are not innovating. Innovations are being done by smaller companies that don't demand guaranteed profit, Who is guaranteeing Verizon a profit? You people post things that just aren't so. Keep screwing around with FIOS and it won't happen. FIOS is a bad idea anyway as a Nation Wide Wireless Network has been purposed. |
|
Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA | said by batterup:Who is guaranteeing Verizon a profit? You people post things that just aren't so. Keep screwing around with FIOS and it won't happen. FIOS is a bad idea anyway as a Nation Wide Wireless Network has been purposed. Verizon has included a guaranteed profit clause in each round of government regulation that have lobbied. It was just recently mentioned, although I can't find where now, here's a thread where it is mentioned again. I'd look around for the original source, but you'll probably never read this anyway.. |
|
batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
| said by Ahrenl:said by batterup:Who is guaranteeing Verizon a profit? You people post things that just aren't so. Keep screwing around with FIOS and it won't happen. FIOS is a bad idea anyway as a Nation Wide Wireless Network has been purposed. Verizon has included a guaranteed profit clause in each round of government regulation that have lobbied. It was just recently mentioned, although I can't find where now, here's a thread where it is mentioned again. I'd look around for the original source, but you'll probably never read this anyway.. That thread points to a group run by CLEC and ISP. They can't back up what they say because they are liars. I researched there lies about broadband in Korea and it is total BS.
Everyone parrots their lies but I know the truth, you know the lies. |
|
Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA | Of Course. Except the story wasn't what stated it. It was people backing up the industry, and I've found many others who will attest to this too.
You can keep your truth, I'll stick with reality. |
|
