| reply to Transmaster
Re: What do you expect said by Transmaster:Their profits on the regulated telcom services is not much so bundling DSL with it means they can make DSL pay for the other bundled services. That's hogwash. Regulated or not, there's still plenty of money to be made on your phone bill. Let's start with all of those bogus fees. Let's not make it sound like AT&T (or any other phone company) is running a charity outfit.
The number one goal of corporate America is to bend the customer over. However, they call it, "maximizing shareholder value" and other cutesy terms.
--
"[Our enemies] never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." G.W. Bush (8/05/2004) |
|
|
|
 TransmasterDon't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY | I should have said so they can make even more from their regulated services. I agree the Telco's are no charity service except to their battalions of Lawyers, how else can they get their 7 series BMW's.
--
The older I get the more I prefer the company of my dogs over that of man kind. |
|
PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR | quote:
Their profits on the regulated telcom services is not much so bundling DSL with it means they can make DSL pay for the other bundled services.
Actually, I think it's the other way around. To "bellhead" companies like AT&T, sellling flat-rate DSL service isn't too interesting. They do it as a customer-rentention mechanism: they have to do it, in areas where they have competition from cable MSO's. They don't want to lose the revenue stream they get from selling all those traditional telco services. So they are loathe to just sell DSL by itself. BTW, they would also like to tap into the pay-per-stream revenue the MSO's get from TV, too: thus Project Lightspeed, and FIOS in the case3 of Verizon.
This also goes a long way to explaining why DSL is largely unavailable in areas where the telcos face no cable competition. |
|
