BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| But the FCC
thinks it's OK if a teleco owns more than 30% of the phone market. Anyone else see the hypocrisy here? By the way if AT&T ever got their TV offering available to all of their market wouldn't that exceed much more than the 30% cap the FCC is putting on cable? |
|
meowmeow
@pacbell.net
| said by BF69  :thinks it's OK if a teleco owns more than 30% of the phone market. Anyone else see the hypocrisy here? By the way if AT&T ever got their TV offering available to all of their market wouldn't that exceed much more than the 30% cap the FCC is putting on cable? Your forgetting that phones are a utility while cable tv is a luxury |
|
smcallah
join:2004-08-05
Home
| said by meowmeow :
Your forgetting that phones are a utility while cable tv is a luxury
What difference does that make? They're still both run by large, greedy corporations.
It's not like telco is angelic because they provide a necessary utility. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA | reply to meowmeow
Please. How are phones any more utility than CATV? The arbitrary "utility" decision was made long ago before CATV existed. |
|
RideRed
Vista needs a popup blocker for Vista
Premium
join:2005-06-18
USA
2 edits | reply to smcallah
The word UTILITY.
The difference is that telephone service has HUGE government oversight, tariff requirements, etc, they have to go the PUC anytime they want anything (like a price increase).
If Verizon were at 30% in video they would be subject to the same ownership limitations.
--
There's only 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to meowmeow
said by meowmeow :said by BF69 :thinks it's OK if a teleco owns more than 30% of the phone market. Anyone else see the hypocrisy here? By the way if AT&T ever got their TV offering available to all of their market wouldn't that exceed much more than the 30% cap the FCC is putting on cable? Your forgetting that phones are a utility while cable tv is a luxury AT&Ts Tv service isn't a utility. And if offered in all of its markets would exceed 30%. AT&T TV whatever it's called, Verizon's FIOS and cable all bring TV into the home for a fee. So why shouldn't the same rules apply to all? |
|
Loker
Premium
join:2004-07-11
Fargo, ND
clubs:
| said by BF69 :said by meowmeow :said by BF69 :thinks it's OK if a teleco owns more than 30% of the phone market. Anyone else see the hypocrisy here? By the way if AT&T ever got their TV offering available to all of their market wouldn't that exceed much more than the 30% cap the FCC is putting on cable? Your forgetting that phones are a utility while cable tv is a luxury AT&Ts Tv service isn't a utility. And if offered in all of its markets would exceed 30%. AT&T TV whatever it's called, Verizon's FIOS and cable all bring TV into the home for a fee. So why shouldn't the same rules apply to all? because they pay out more money than the cable companies.....we all know politicians go to the highest bidder anymore....
--
"While preceding your entrance with a grenade is a good tactic inQuake, it can lead to problems if attempted at work." -- C Hacking |
|
smcallah
join:2004-08-05
Home
| reply to RideRed
And cable companies will be subject to a 30% cap for video AND phone, while phone companies will not. It's not like a cable company is going to move into an area to just offer phone and no video.
So at this point, I doubt that phone companies will even see the 30% cap for video, for the "sake of competition." |
|
hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH | reply to RideRed
But Cable/IPTV and Internet are not. So they can enforce the numbers for those if they set one.
But i agree. No one phone company should control more than 30% of the nations telephone services regardless if they're a utility or not. |
|
RideRed
Vista needs a popup blocker for Vista
Premium
join:2005-06-18
USA
| reply to smcallah
said by smcallah :And cable companies will be subject to a 30% cap for video AND phone, while phone companies will not. Phone companies are subject to the same pay TV subscriber caps.
--
There's only 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't. |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| How?
Where does it say that.. and where have it been mentioned...? No policy has yet to be written.. it's a 'desire to' at this moment.
Further.. do you really think they are going to be able to tell ATT who has FAR more than 30% of the nations homes will have to simply halt their roll outs because they hit 30%?
That's silly.. just like the cap.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-reitchous and lazy ... those who also never take the time to point out a good fortune when the opportunity presents itself. It says a lot about one's moral character." - Unknown |
|
RideRed
Vista needs a popup blocker for Vista
Premium
join:2005-06-18
USA
2 edits | The caps aren't "homes passed" it's "current subscribers" so AT&T being in 35% of homes is irrelevant.
But no fear, as Verizon and AT&T deploy, the total number of subscribers increases (slightly because they'll typically just be stealing subs from DBS and cable) thus decreasing Comcast's share of that increasing total. Additionally, despite Comcast's best efforts they will certainly lose subscribers to telco and DBS video competition just as the telcos have lost subscribers to cable telephone competition.
The only thing this is going to do to Comcast is stop them from continuing to gobble up new cable systems. It has zero impact on their current business or other sources of revenue (telephone, possibly cellular, internet, etc).
This cap is only a horizontal ownership cap, not a vertical one. Comcast is free to expand their business into other sectors like cellular should they choose to.
--
There's only 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't. |
|
mglunt
join:2001-09-10
Fredericksburg, VA | reply to openbox9
That has nothing to do with how something is considered a utility.
A phone is a utility because it is needed to get emergency assistance... fire, police, etc. Last I checked, TV's could not make outgoing phone calls. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA | Ok but in relevance to this topic, why should that matter in regards to capping a provider's market share? |
|
RIRWIN1983
join:2005-08-30
Columbus, OH | reply to mglunt
yes but with tv, you get weather/natural disaster information. |
|
