republican-creole
Search:  

 
 
   All ForumsHot TopicsGallery






how-to block ads


 
Forums » TelcoTV Bills Not Created Equal » "Consumer friendly"-- which consumers?
Search Topic:
Uniqs:
90
Share Topic:
RSS topic:
toggle:
flat / full
normal / watch
Post a:
Post a:
the truth »
« Not just a republican issue  
AuthorAll Replies


John T

@btcentralplus.com

"Consumer friendly"-- which consumers?

Of course, build-out requirements are friendly for some consumers but less so for others. Fewer build-out requirements are generally better for the (generally wealthier and/or urban) consumers who live in areas that are actually profitable to serve. Build-out requirements generally do a lot to make the profitable consumers subsidize the less-profitable (especially those in rural areas), rather than just the company doing the subsidizing.

In more extreme cases, companies may choose to just not build a network that will be unprofitable if they have to build it everywhere. That same network might be profitable if the company is allowed to cherry-pick. I'm not sure that NO ONE getting a fast network is better than only a few, but for some the "digital divide" is very important.

Verizon doesn't make enormous profits from FIOS, which only exists in wealthy neighborhoods now because it's not profitable anywhere else and still isn't profitable there for many years yet. They DO make tremendous profits from their legacy phone network (and DSL), which was built with all sorts of build-out requirements and monopoly franchising and regulation.

Consumer-friendly regulation would focus on forcing Verizon, AT&T, and Qwest to allow cheap resale of their phone networks for DSL. The phone network is the one that was subsidized and regulated all these years with build-out requirements, and the capital spending has all been paid for. Focusing on build-out requirements for a not-even-profitable-yet network is by contrast quite strange to me.

Incumbents, like Verizon in phones (and DSL) and the cablecos in TV, should be regulated, especially since monopoly franchises helped pay for their networks. Competitive upstarts should have a freer hand, even when it's a company that is an incumbent in another area, like cable cos doing phones and telcos doing TV, particularly when the competition involves building tremendous new infrastructure at massively unprofitable expense.


marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO

Build-out requirements apply only to video, not to broadband internet.
Also, build-out requirements do not apply for competitive overbuilds nor unprofitable overbuilds. What build-out requirements do, is require service for marginally profitable non-competitive areas.
Forums » TelcoTV Bills Not Created Equalthe truth »
« Not just a republican issue  


Monday, 09-Nov 09:23:50 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.
page compression OFF
Most commented news this week
· [156] Cable Uncapper Faces Criminal Charges
· [140] AT&T Sues Verizon Over 3G Ads
· [112] Why Run Fiber When You Can Run Ads That Pretend You Do?
· [109] Comcast Is Simply Getting Huge
· [93] Apple Cooking Up New $30 A Month TV Service?
· [83] Bits Of ACTA Agreement Leaking Out
· [81] Will 'Three Strikes' Come To The United States?
· [78] Verizon To Double Smartphone ETFs?
· [77] Verizon: Droid Tethering Will Cost $30 Extra
· [73] Comcast, NBC Deal Almost Complete
Most people now reading
· Framed for child porn 151; by a PC virus [Security]
· Divorce advice... [General Questions]
· My cat is reluctant to exercise. [General Questions]
· 3.x Feral Druid - Bear Tanking Guide [World of Warcraft]
· Is Gear Score now the new requirement to get pug invite? [World of Warcraft]
· [WIN7] Which Services in Win 7 Have You Turned Off? [Microsoft Help]
· Connecting to Google Voice Via SIP [VOIP Tech Chat]
· Hit and run [General Questions]