jslik
That just happened
Premium
join:2006-03-17
clubs:
| reply to openbox9
Re: Sounds Good to Me
said by openbox9  :My point is that is where the business' obligation to the community should end. Businesses lease access to the ROW and then provide services as they deem appropriate. I understand, and that's certainly a point worth arguing. My position is that providing those community communication enhancements above ROW lease/fees benefits everybody, including the provider. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
 ·AT&T Southeast
| reply to jslik
I guess I've miscommunicated my point. I don't have a problem with businesses franchising (leasing) the ability to provide service to a community. My intention was not to argue paying for ROW use. My point is that is where the business' obligation to the community should end. Businesses lease access to the ROW and then provide services as they deem appropriate. |
|
jslik
That just happened
Premium
join:2006-03-17
clubs:
| reply to openbox9
said by openbox9 :I won't dispute the need for local government to take care of the people,but I will argue the ability of local government to extort corporate entities beyond standard corporate taxation. Why aren't McDonalds' franchisees required to pay local governments in a fashion similar to CATV and phone providers? Requiring build-out, access channels, or I-Nets isn't extortion. All those requirements are specifically allowed under federal law, which the telcos/cable folks have signed off on several times in the past. The telcos lack of foresight regarding the marketplace shouldn't be blamed on local government.
McDonald's isn't locating their facilities on public land, so they don't have to pay rent to the city, which the franchise fee truly is. |
|
marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
| reply to openbox9
said by openbox9 :Why aren't McDonalds' franchisees required to pay local governments in a fashion similar to CATV and phone providers? Because the McDonald's franchises are built on private property, unlike the CATV and phone providers.
That would also be why satellite television is not required to pay local governments. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| reply to jslik
I won't dispute the need for local government to take care of the people,but I will argue the ability of local government to extort corporate entities beyond standard corporate taxation. Why aren't McDonalds' franchisees required to pay local governments in a fashion similar to CATV and phone providers? |
|
