New Englanders Fight For DSL Future > Futile

reply to PDXPLT

Re: Futile

I was working for an Independent telco in Utah when it bought some exchanges from US West. While the service we provided was significantly better, we also raised prices after 6 months, by like over %10. We also got a bunch of subsidy money. (USF, NECA pooling, dirt cheap loans, etc.) Also, we weren't Union, so those Union jobs went away (we made significantly less than US West employees). So, from personal experience, I understand the trepidation these people have.

reply to pnh102
That website sure is odd. They're opposed to Fairpoint because they'll only sell "yesterday's technology", i.e., DSL rather than FIOS.

So they want to stick with Verizon. Even though with VZ, they won't even get DSL(?).

Perhaps they think there's some way they can force VZ to sell them FIOS(?). I think alot of this is FUD driven by the unions, who don't want to lose a union shop, and really don't care whether broadband gets deployed or not.

Umm, it's all driven by the unions. They're the only one's with something to lose. It's not like any service will be worse than what Verizon is offering, especially since Verizon has publicly written the area off anyway. Imagine how bad their service could be? 1 CSR for the whole area? :P

reply to viperlmw
Isn't this all really just an argument about whether it's better to be a bigger frog in a smaller pond or a smaller frog in a bigger pond?

calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies!

reply to Ahrenl
You are so incredibly uniformed. I would ask you to talk to ALL verizon employees. It's not just "union folk" that are opposed to this deal. a huge amount of management are opposed because they know all about Fairpoint. They only problem they have is if they speak against fairpoint, they will be fired.

Sorry, didn't realize how many Verizon employee's weren't in the union. Regardless, you can substitute my union comment for "all verizon employee's". Either way, it's not going to negatively effect customers. If they're actually worried about major community job loss, then that's what they should say. Obviously they've decided that, that's not the case, so they've chosen to go a different direction.

Ahreni,
It's just not that simply defined. It isn't even an employee versus company thing. It's a company that the public relies on for the best, most reliable service. They are trying to bail out on an entire region that contrary to popular thought is a profitable region. Verizon, no doubt would like to ramp up their FIOS rollout as quickly as possible, but myself and tens of thousands of others do not want it done at our expense. Fairpoint does not offer anything to anyone of any appreciable number. They are talking about offering an outdated technology to less than 20% of the state. That's not moving forward, it's moving us backward. Verizon has an obligation, as a company that offers a public utility to maintain excellence. If they want to sell us, then they need to sell us to someone that will maintain that level of excellence, not a pissant little company that thinks DSL is the future.

Fairpoint will be offering the same service that Verizon is offering now; which will be much better than any service provided by Verizon if they're FORCED to stay there.

They have every right to sell any part of their business to anyone else, unless it's a national security problem. If you think it's unfair that they're profiting from the sale of a public utility, well that could be a valid argument. But since that's not what anyone is arguing you don't get to use that now.

It's not like Verizon is particularly well known for great service.

I don't think anyone is saying it's not profitable in its current state. I mean they have a regulated monopoly, of course they've set the price above their costs. What they're saying is that there is no reasonable price they can charge that will make it profitable to build out a next generation network in the area because of population density. Since that's the direction they're taking the company, they want to sell off the areas where it won't be possible to companies that want to continue the old business model. This area is a perfect example of somewhere that should start it's own Muni network. Then Fairpoint and others can offer service over the network, and each resident can choose weather or not they want to use them.

Don't give me the invalid "don't use tax payer money" argument, since this is exactly what Revenue bonds which sell like hot cakes, are used for. For those that don't know what revenue bonds are, they are bonds that are ONLY backed by revenue generated from a specific municipal project. (ie. the fiber network) So if the network, for some reason, isn't profitable, or takes more to build than thought, only the bond holders are harmed. The municipality only has the obligation to try and succeed.

..."which will be much better than anything Verizon offers if its forced to stay there."

this is one area where you and a select few are completely wrong. I know people that work for the company. They are currently (that means right now) installing FIOS in current communities that already have it, as well as installing DSL in far away rural areas. Verizon pulled back on DSL and FIOS for obvious financial reasons, but if they have to stay they just can't sulk in the corner and pout. They will have to do something, and they will.
I'm curious, What is it you think they will do when the deal falls through?

As far as your tax payer money suggestion, it means nothing. Do you think, for a moment that Maine, NH, and Vermont are going to all of sudden link up and create their own little phone companies? Do you think for a moment that a government run phone company is actually going to run smoothly and be profitable.

And let me educate you. It is substantially cheaper to run and maintain a mile of fiber than it is to do the same with copper. MUCH of the fiber needed for most of the state is already in place. Verizon would just need to co-ordinate separate nieghborhoods and towns in whatever order it would be done... The expense is not so much in running the fiber. it's the actual equipment that is used to run FIOS that is ridiculously expensive.

And lastly, do your homework. Just because you have never heard of Fairpoint before doesn't make their customer service better. In fact, their customer complaint rate is twice that of Verizon.

They will absolutely not upgrade an area that they have determined will not become profitable. THAT'S WHY THEY'RE TRYING TO SELL IT. IF the deal falls through, they will look for other buyers, and continue cutting back support staff to absolute minimums to scratch whatever profit they can from the area.

I didn't suggest that Maine, NH, VT create their own companies. I suggested they build their own network (which you say is inexpensive and largely in place already, which I doubt, but I have no idea) and lease it to whatever companies would like to offer service on it. Those lease payments can then be used to pay off the revenue bonds, and maintain the network.

It certainly is cheaper to maintain, and lay a mile of fiber than copper. But the copper is ALREADY run, so when you compare the immediate cost of maintaining copper versus RUNNING AND MAINTAINING fiber, you're upside down again.

I didn't say Fairpoint's customer service is better. I said it would be the same that it is now, which will be better than what Verizon will leave behind if it's forced to stay there.

Thanks for all the "education".

You're welcome. Heres some more.

Fairpoint communications was the very, absolute, no doubt about it, LAST company that Verizon chose for this sale. So, when the sale falls through they won't just look for another buyer... Their won't be any others. Check on Citizens and Embarq communications.. They were MUCH better poised to buy the three states than Fairpoint, but they saw right through everything. They know it is a horrible deal.

Second, Maine, NH, and Vermont are among the top 5 most profitable properties in the Verizon footprint. They are marketing and installing FIOS in their least profitable states (Mass, Rhode Island, and New Jersey) in order to finally make some type of a profit.

Third, most of the copper in the farther reaches of all three states are in such bad condition that they need to be replaced fully. There are many, many homes in areas that already have DSL access that are less than a mile from the Central office, but cannot receive service because the lines are so screwed up. So, replacing that copper with Fiber is cost effective. (look at me, right side up as always!)

And lastly, stick to your gut when you say you have "no idea". That much is completely obvious. I do know beyond a shadow of a doubt that all that fiber is already in place. In fact, most of it has been in place for years and years.. it's just laying their waiting to be used (see, "dark fiber")

oh wait, one more thing.. obviously you never did well in math class. When I say that Fairpoints customer service is twice as bad as verizon then it would not stand to reason that "it would be the same it is now".

Let me know if you want to know anything else.

Well, you're persistent if not a complete idiot... Lets break it down (again), shall we?

Why is it a horrible deal? Because it's unprofitable, or because the price is too high? If it's a matter of price, then it's a matter of lowering that price to sell to another. If it's unprofitable then you've just contradicted exactly what you say in the next paragraph. Either way, you've obviously drank the kool aid..

Why? Because they are spending Billions of dollars just to acquire a company. A telecommunications company that has historically for the past ten years had declining revenue in Telephone service, and is making ho hum profits with DSL. Also, in order to get to that last 20% of rural homes in NH alone is going to be a very expensive, long, drawn out undertaking. That doesn't even include wiring, and installing DSL in nearly all of Maine and Vermont. In the short term (3-5 years) it's a money maker, but in the long term it's a losing proposition especially because Fairpoint is relying on old internet technology and does not intend to upgrade anything.

Oh yeah, I'm sure that's the case. Verizon is dumping all their profit centers to boost capital spending in all the places they don't make money. There's a bridge in Brooklyn I want to sell you...

Don't believe me? It's a financial fact. Sift through the Verizon financials to find out on your own. And you can keep your bridge.

Not if you're not going to replace the copper, regardless if you're customers can get DSL or not.

That makes no sense.

The cost of laying fiber isn't the long haul ("dark fiber") it's the last mile. There's no "dark" last mile fiber.

So, you've run the fiber that's in place? You have knowledge of what is up where? My guess is that you don't.. you're just pulling all of this out of your butt. Contrary to your popular belief, much of the fiber is already in place along every highway, major road, and thoroughfare. In most populated areas it's already in most of the neighborhoods. Wherever it isn't its basically just a matter of running a drop from the pole to the house. Don't speak to something you have no idea about.

The deficiency is in English, which would be incorrectly qualifying the first "it". "Fairpoints customer service" would be the same as it is now. Better?

Sure. So you would be happy with sub-standard service? Service that is even worse than Verizons?

So, I guess that's about it... Let me know when you would like to educated again.

Your pal,
NHPublius

I think I'm losing IQ points every time I read another one of your posts. Everything you say is backed by nothing but conjecture and guesswork. I suggest before you reply again next time that you actually do some research and educate yourself...
With that said, lets get into it again...

1) Verizon offered the northern states to Fairpoint for a slightly lower price than what was expected. I don't see 2.7 Billion as deal any way you look at it.

2) You overestimate Verizon and their business model. Yet again you speak to something you know nothing about

3) So if you don't replace the copper, then most of the areas that Fairpoint says they will upgrade will be not be upgraded....

4) You can place a drop where ever you want to. It's called fiber splicing.

5)What it has to do with anything is Fairpoint is statistically a lower ranking company in concerns to customer service than Verizon is.

6)"fallacies", huh? did you pull out your thesaurus for that one? If fallacies means "backed by fact" then I guess I'm guilty as charged..

Lastly, heres something else to chew on... Morgan Stanley just reduced it's rating on Fairpoint due to no confidence in their business plan....

Until next time,
your pal...

I always find it interesting how quickly people like Aherni and Bostones1 shutup once they are bombarded over and over by the facts.... Where are you?

Either you want me to stop posting or you don't.

Since you didn't actually bring anything up, I had decided not to respond. All you did was state the opposite of what I said, or that I was wrong.

1.) Nothing to do with them lowing the price in the future to attract more bids.

2.) Apparently reality has changed, and that's why I'm wrong..

3.) Yes, but what's that got to do with VZ not upgrading copper, vs the cost of upgrading to fiber? Nothing.. once again you just blather on..

4.) Just adding drops in the middle of a long haul fiber run is not going to work.. Otherwise I'll just go add a drop to the fiber line going right by my house.. That's been there for 15 years btw.

5.) Statistically lower ranking on average. How do you think they'll treat the customers they're forced to retain, on infrastructure they won't spend money to support. I imagine they'll need a new scale for how bad it will get.

6.) Logical fallacies: »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy
I'll leave it up to you to select the plethora (you can look that one up too) you've decided to use.

6b) ...or because they have a massive short position.

Oh, I want you to stop posting, its just that your so darn entertaining.

Nothing has changed.. you know nothing about Verizon's business model.

Listen carefully.... You can add a fiber drop ANYWHERE within a fiber span... that includes the fiber right in front of your house.. but if it's been hanging there for 15 years it's probably not the best type of fiber to splice into (single mode vs multimode... go ahead and look that up)

They will treat customers that "they're forced to retain" the same as any other customer they have... that's part of their business model silly!

And lastly, Morgan Stanley is not just another firm looking for a short position.. They are Fairpoint's CHIEF financial adviser in this merger.. which means that Fairpoint hired them to look over this deal top to bottom to make sure it's in the best interest of Fairpoint and it's investors. They have access to intimate knowledge that we, as the public are not privy to.

hugs and kisses