Liz
join:2000-06-24
Potomac, MD | reply to JTRockville
Re: Verizon Goes to Court to bring FIOS TV to Mont County MD said by JTRockville: ... • Verizon will not commit to upgrading everyone in MC under any circumstances. What do you base that comment on?
I understood fiber is lower maintenance and Verizon intends to convert their entire system eventually. Verizon has over 100 video agreements so far. How many does Montgomery County have? I maintain an open mind but the numbers don't make my county look very good, and ongoing Comcast performance make them look very bad. |
|
|
|
 JTRockvilleData HoPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
 ·Verizon FiOS
1 edit | said by Liz:said by JTRockville: ... • Verizon will not commit to upgrading everyone in MC under any circumstances. What do you base that comment on? I understood fiber is lower maintenance and Verizon intends to convert their entire system eventually. Verizon has over 100 video agreements so far. How many does Montgomery County have? I maintain an open mind but the numbers don't make my county look very good, and ongoing Comcast performance make them look very bad. My comments are based on Romer's letter in this Gazette article:
... snip ...
Under Verizon’s anti-consumer approach, significant portions of the county would be excluded from the Verizon’s services without any firm indication when those communities would receive cable service. For example, Rockville, Takoma Park, Chevy Chase, Gaithersburg and parts of Bethesda and Silver Spring would not be included.
... snip ...
-Bruce Romer
»www.gazette.net/stories/071906/m···39.shtml
If VZ committed to upgrading their entire footprint in NJ within 6 years, why are they balking at a committment to upgrading their footprint here?
Montgomery county has awarded 2 video franchises, which is double what the vast majority of country has awarded.
Liz  , would you be happy if your legislators overlooked your interests by allowing VZ to leave your neighborhood unserved? Despite the fact that VZ has made such a committment everywhere else?
I know I won't be happy if such a franchise is awarded. And I'd give unlimited odds towards the chances of VZ trying to block a muni effort, should such an effort surface in areas where VZ won't commit. |
|
JohnAPremium
join:2003-09-16
Pittsburgh, PA | said by JTRockville:If VZ committed to upgrading their entire footprint in NJ within 6 years, why are they balking at a committment to upgrading their footprint here? One more time. It's extremely unlikely that this was ever discussed. Initial proposals from each side is probably all that was ever seen or heard.
There were much bigger fish to fry than density when they did talk, and those are being litigated. Density means nothing to Verizon. Half of Allegheny County is done, and there have been no incomplete CO builds here. When they build it, they build it all. What do density clauses mean if they build out entire COs? You can't compare MC to NJ. They got what they wanted in NJ. They're going to get it in Pa too. How would you deal with MC, if everyone else deals, and they sit there insisting they're right, or they're just too busy getting elected to take care of the peoples' business. |
|
Liz
join:2000-06-24
Potomac, MD | reply to JTRockville
said by JTRockville:My comments are based on Romer's letter in this Gazette article: ... snip ... Under Verizon’s anti-consumer approach, significant portions of the county would be excluded from the Verizon’s services without any firm indication when those communities would receive cable service. For example, Rockville, Takoma Park, Chevy Chase, Gaithersburg and parts of Bethesda and Silver Spring would not be included.... snip ... -Bruce Romer » www.gazette.net/stories/071906/m···39.shtmlIf VZ committed to upgrading their entire footprint in NJ within 6 years, why are they balking at a committment to upgrading their footprint here? Montgomery county has awarded 2 video franchises, which is double what the vast majority of country has awarded. Liz , would you be happy if your legislators overlooked your interests by allowing VZ to leave your neighborhood unserved? Despite the fact that VZ has made such a committment everywhere else? I know I won't be happy if such a franchise is awarded. And I'd give unlimited odds towards the chances of VZ trying to block a muni effort, should such an effort surface in areas where VZ won't commit. His comment is "spin." What does he say under oath.
I never felt like the county did a good job with the video franchise or ever had my best interest as even a consideration. They just didn't want the complaint statistics too high. It is very easy for me to doubt county spokesmen based on my observations. That doesn't mean I automatically trust Verizon, but I view this current situation as a major failure of our county. Verizon is ready to serve my neighborhood and home, but the county is the barrier. The county failed to get Comcast to serve you at a level they serve my neighborhood. Why do you take their side before the facts are in. I look forward to getting the true story under oath. I'm willing to place a sizable wager against our elected officials and paid staff. How do you explain so many signed Verizon franchises and only one law suit?  |
|
 PaulGo
join:2005-01-29
Gaithersburg, MD | So why did Verizon withdraw from New Hampshire? Did they face the same problems as Montgomery County or perhaps they do not have the resources to expand FiOS as quickly as they want. I still think they are pursuing their own political agenda, and are trying to pressure the states and municipalities into doing things their way. Verizon may have over extended itself in the FiOS build-out and a convenient way of slowing it down is doing the "compliant" states / counties first. |
|
JTRockvilleData HoPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| reply to Liz
said by Liz:How do you explain so many signed Verizon franchises and only one law suit? VZ wants to change federal law. They only need one suit to do it. |
|
JTRockvilleData HoPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| reply to JohnA
I don't think this is the density issue either - in fact, I gave statistics that illustrate density couldn't be the basis for exclusion (the areas Verizon won't commit to are quite dense).
It is more likely, as you say, a CO issue. For whatever reason (it doesn't appear to be based on density - or income either, for that matter), Verizon does not want to upgrade all the COs in MC. At a minimum, that's the stance they wanted to bargain from. Universal coverage is a standard provision. If Verizon's proposal never got beyond that, I'd say they are just as unwilling to bend as MC cable office. |
|
