<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Yes, it would cause &#x22;competitive harm to the incumbents. in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r18762363</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 19:49:41 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 19:49:41 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Yes, it would cause &#x22;competitive harm to the incumbents.</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18762363</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1428893"><b>ddpardue</b></A> : Of course it would cause competitive harm. The FCC would have to admit, hopefully, that there truly is a broadband access problem in rural America. This might mean they would have to change current policies which solely support the incumbents' business model. God Forbid, they might even have to create a real competitive market, which would be good for the economy and consumers, but certainly not in the best economic interests of the "BIG 3". So yes, I agree with the statement that fully disclosing their current incorrect, inadequate, shamelessly incumbent suportive data would cause "competitive harm", but only to the incumbents. To the rest of us, it would be a breath of fresh air.!!]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18762363</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:48:33 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
