<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Expect this to be overturned in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r17495427</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Sat, 28 Nov 2009 16:36:29 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Nov 2009 16:36:29 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: Expect this to be overturned</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17498991</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1107926"><b>CableTool</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><SMALL>said by  cwh <A HREF="/useremail/u/1357547"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</SMALL><br><br>But answer this, how well are the poor(if you call poor being able to afford cable tv poor)served by living under monopoly conditions?<br> </DIV>Extremely well, because the incumbant cable provider was held to build out contracts and provided them with cable as they did the rest of the town. <br><br>Now, statewide franchise..whole different ball game. No one is running fiber past Cabrini Green. But there is cable there. <br><SMALL>--<br>CableFAQ.org/<A HREF="http://cablefaq.org/forum">Technicians Unplugged</A><BR></SMALL>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17498991</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 2006 07:52:56 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Expect this to be overturned</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17498960</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/189562"><b>moonpuppy</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><SMALL>said by  TKJunkMail <A HREF="/useremail/u/594412"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</SMALL><BR><BR>And demands that new franchisees do a full build-out in 3 to 5 yrs when the incumbent cable company took a couple decades to do so is ludicrous and the reason for the FCC rules.<br> </DIV>Wrong. It has been done before.<br><br>Baltimore City signed a franchise agreement in 1984 with United Cable and was required to have 100% build-out in 4 years. They came close save for a few pockets here and there.<br><br>Now, if you think this will spur innovation, again I bring out Baltimore City. They just recently got cable modem service 3 years ago (16 years after they first started.) <br><br>So the 3 to 5 year build out rules are not ludicrous but very obtainable.  :uhh:]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17498960</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 2006 07:39:51 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Expect this to be overturned</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17497836</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/594412"><b>TKJunkMail</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><SMALL>said by  cwh <A HREF="/useremail/u/1357547"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</SMALL><br><br>[<br>In simple terms, how much money are investors willing to spend to possibly take 15-20% market share away from the incumbent.  The franchise agreement keeps the bar high and investors away. It is that simple.<br> </DIV>And demands that new franchisees do a full build-out in 3 to 5 yrs when the incumbent cable company took a couple decades to do so is ludicrous and the reason for the FCC rules.<br><SMALL>--<br>--<BR><A HREF="http://tinyurl.com/bqv2h">My BLOG</A><BR><A HREF="http://tinyurl.com/yz8xto">My Web Page</A></SMALL>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17497836</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 20 Dec 2006 23:27:28 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Expect this to be overturned</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17497823</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1357547"><b>cwh</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><SMALL>said by  majortom1029 <A HREF="/useremail/u/1404694"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>  :</SMALL><BR><BR>Still , how does that protect the monopoly. Those rules protect the people in the not as rich areas so that the whole town will get wired. ! village out of a whole town is not competition.<br> </DIV>How does it protect them? It discourages investors from creating competition. It makes the build out risk too high for investors. <br><br>In simple terms, how much money are investors willing to spend to possibly take 15-20% market share away from the incumbent.  The franchise agreement keeps the bar high and investors away. It is that simple.<br><br>But answer this, how well are the poor(if you call poor being able to afford cable tv poor)served by living under monopoly conditions?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17497823</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 20 Dec 2006 23:24:36 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Expect this to be overturned</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17497773</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1404694"><b>majortom1029</b></A> : Still , how does that protect the monopoly. Those rules protect the people in the not as rich areas so that the whole town will get wired. ! village out of a whole town is not competition.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17497773</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 20 Dec 2006 23:16:59 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Expect this to be overturned</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17497646</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1357547"><b>cwh</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><SMALL>said by  majortom1029 <A HREF="/useremail/u/1404694"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</SMALL><BR><BR>How do the current ones keep cable a monopoly. So making them have a certain amount of the town wired by a certain date, or have public access channels helps keep cable a monopoly? wow<br> </DIV>Build out requirement rules both time and area will greatly discourage investors against competing with a incumbent cable company.  This is what protects the cable company from competition. Is is one thing to have a build out rules when there is no competition but it is quite a different rule when an incumbent exists.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17497646</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 20 Dec 2006 22:51:39 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Expect this to be overturned</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17496932</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1404694"><b>majortom1029</b></A> : How do the current ones keep cable a monopoly. So making them have a certain amount of the town wired by a certain date, or have public access channels helps keep cable a monopoly? wow]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17496932</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 20 Dec 2006 20:49:54 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Expect this to be overturned</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17496487</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1294605"><b>Fatal Vector</b></A> : "Come jan, the dems will most definitely overturn this godawful ruling. The local communities have every right to demand the telco's play by the same rules the cableco's do."<br><br>If memory serves (and it usually does) The cable franchise thing was the result of an FCC order creating it many moons ago. Which means that the FCC has the authority to modify the terms and abilities of local governments in implementing franchises.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17496487</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 20 Dec 2006 19:28:56 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Expect this to be overturned</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17495599</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1357547"><b>cwh</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><SMALL>said by  karlmarx <A HREF="/useremail/u/1394754"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</SMALL><BR><BR>Come jan, the dems will most definitely overturn this godawful ruling. The local communities have every right to demand the telco's play by the same rules the cableco's do.<br> </DIV>The current franchise agreement only insure that cable stays a monopoly.  Build requirements keep small investors completely out of play and greatly slow the big boys.  This is good news for consumers.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17495599</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 20 Dec 2006 16:59:11 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Expect this to be overturned</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17495452</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/594412"><b>TKJunkMail</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><SMALL>said by  karlmarx <A HREF="/useremail/u/1394754"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</SMALL><br><br>Come jan, the dems will most definitely overturn this godawful ruling. <br> </DIV>Even if the Dems can pass new laws on the subject, there is little likelihood they can override a Bush veto. And even if so inclined, this would not be a Dem priority in a new Congress and it would be many months at a minimum before new laws would be crafted. They will be busier addressing a larger military and Iraq issues. TV will be far down the list.<br><br>Much more likely that it would go to the courts where it could take years to resolve.<br><SMALL>--<br>--<BR><A HREF="http://tinyurl.com/bqv2h">My BLOG</A><BR><A HREF="http://tinyurl.com/yz8xto">My Web Page</A></SMALL>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17495452</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 20 Dec 2006 16:39:56 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Expect this to be overturned</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17495427</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1394754"><b>karlmarx</b></A> : Come jan, the dems will most definitely overturn this godawful ruling. The local communities have every right to demand the telco's play by the same rules the cableco's do.<br><SMALL>--<br>Stick it to the MAN. Support your local torrent sites. Proudly providing 100mb of upstream for all your TV, Movie, and MP3 needs.</SMALL>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17495427</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 20 Dec 2006 16:36:12 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
