smcallah
join:2004-08-05
Home
| reply to meowmeow
Re: But the FCC
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. |
|
RideRed
Vista needs a popup blocker for Vista
Premium
join:2005-06-18
USA
2 edits | 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. |
|
smcallah
join:2004-08-05
Home
| 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. |
|
