supergirl
join:2007-03-20
Pensacola, FL
 ·Cox VOIP
·Skype
 ·Cox HSI
 ·AT&T Southeast
·magicjack.com
| reply to morbo
Re: waiting for the other shoe to fall...
Hate to say it, but the Telcos are really not getting any government support to build-out anymore. The investments the Telcos have made really since the breakup of AT&T came from their own bottom line.
Line sharing was a loser for the Telcos because the worthless 1996 Telecom Act implemented UNE-P, which made the Telcos sell at below even what they could recover on costs--losing about $7 a line so some half-witted CLEC could sell phone service. Even the bigger CLECs still cost them that $7 per line vs. what it cost to maintain it.
Sure, the Telcos get ROWs and so forth but not anything near what they were used to getting 30 years ago.
Even with UNE-P a lot of CLECs, including COVAD, went bankrupt. Telocity was around for about 3 minutes and 45 seconds. It's customers ordered DSL from BellSouth for the free modems then switched to Telocity. I wonder if that was Telocity's idea or a way not to pay Telocity for a modem since they didn't give them away ("A modem is $300 but you could order BellSouth DSL and get a free modem and always just switch to us"). So, BellSouth eventually went back and nailed those folks for $200-300 for the modems.
Line sharing just doesn't work. If you think it does then how about this: K-Mart is having a tough time against WalMart so WalMart has to lease an aisle in a WalMart store just so K-Mart doesn't have to build its own. Or, GM has to allow some factory time so Ford can build a few cars. Line sharing in any other business is stupid especially since Cable doesn't have to line share their telephony service.
If you impose line sharing on the Telcos, then Cable has to have it to on both HSI and Phone Service.
I would like to see real law make the Telcos and Cable tell me exactly where all those damn fees go to not the bulls&&t language that is there now.
--
Saving the world keeps me busy. However, I find Earth very primitive from my home planet of Krypton.
-Supergirl |
|
ke4pym
join:2004-07-24
Charlotte, NC
 ·Verizon BroadbandA..
·Packet8
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by supergirl  :Hate to say it, but the Telcos are really not getting any government support to build-out anymore. Really? What would you call the Universal Service Fee? Sure, it might not be line-itemed as build-out but they're getting gobs of government support at our expense. |
|
supergirl
join:2007-03-20
Pensacola, FL
·Cox VOIP
·Skype
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southeast
·magicjack.com
| said by ke4pym :said by supergirl :Hate to say it, but the Telcos are really not getting any government support to build-out anymore. Really? What would you call the Universal Service Fee? Sure, it might not be line-itemed as build-out but they're getting gobs of government support at our expense. The USF goes to rural carriers not the RBOCs. If the Bells get any of it, it is very little. Forbes Magazine called the USF and outright ripoff that made rural carriers rich at the expense of everyone with a Bell. Forbes called for an end to the USF since the rural carriers were using the money for anything but telephone service including even building out cell and HSI networks. The money freed up so much cash at one rural teleco the telco refunded an entire year of charges to ALL its customers.
The Bells did complain that they should get some of the USF for their rural areas but not sure if they did.
--
Saving the world keeps me busy. However, I find Earth very primitive from my home planet of Krypton.
-Supergirl |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
1 edit | reply to supergirl
said by supergirl :Hate to say it, but the Telcos are really not getting any government support to build-out anymore. ... they don't need govt support, they are f*ing monopolies. How did they become monopolies? Govt support.
the really maddening thing is that in Japan and France, the CLECs, that became successful because of line sharing, now have enough capitol to start building their own infrastructure, such as fiber.
If competitors are not given a chance to share last mile infrastructure, we will NEVER get a competitive market in the U.S.
as for telcos losing money on UNE-P, I posit that's a big line of BS from the telcos. It's so difficult to determine exactly what telco costs are because of shifty accounting and other tricks.
As it is now, the U.S. is likely stuck with the current monopoly/duopoly situation for the next several years. |
|
SD6
join:2005-03-26
| reply to supergirl
I agree with most of what you say, except...
said by supergirl :Hate to say it, but the Telcos are really not getting any government support to build-out anymore. The investments the Telcos have made really since the breakup of AT&T came from their own bottom line. The line sharing ruling is only for the copper lines, which were deployed before the AT&T breakup.
said by supergirl :Line sharing just doesn't work. If you think it does then how about this: K-Mart is having a tough time against WalMart so WalMart has to lease an aisle in a WalMart store just so K-Mart doesn't have to build its own. Or, GM has to allow some factory time so Ford can build a few cars. Bad analogy. Stores and factories are private assets. Line sharing is predicated on the existence of public assets, public subsidies, or deeding of public ROW. Whether or not that should be done is a matter of public policy and debate, but your analogy is really bad. |
|
morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs:
·Charter Pipeline
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to supergirl
i agree that telcos aren't getting the taxpayer support that they once did. however, once the nationwide network has been built, it costs a fraction to maintain it. hence, taxpayer money went to build a monopoly.
what needs to happen is that the lines/pipes need to be neutral----ripped from the arms of AT&T and ilk, and then true competition will flourish by the company that can best provide service. |
|
supergirl
join:2007-03-20
Pensacola, FL | reply to SD6
SD6 - funny the cable analogy wasn't acknowleged. If cable doesn't have to do it, why do the telcos? |
|
King P
Don't blame me. I voted for Ron Paul
Premium
join:2004-11-17
Inman, SC
·Windstream
·Charter Pipeline
1 edit | reply to supergirl
I beg to differ Supergirl. If you remember, the 1996 telecom act also gave the Telcos BILLIONS of dollars with which they were to have FIBER OPTICS laid to every home in their footprint by 2006. Well, its 2007 and where's my fiber line to my house?
The telco's continue to get support from the government. You don't have to look any further than Chairman Martin at the FCC. The man is so obviously pro-telco that its sickening. The government may not necessarily dole out cash to them anymore, but look at all of the ridiculous fees that they allow these companies to tack on to our bills!
--
Forget 'em, Support the Indies.
»www.ind-music.com |
|
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
| reply to supergirl
They should. But then again I am one that would declare all networks should be confiscated (since they were built with tax money or profits based on government protection regardless of time) and one fiber network that runs every where that any service provider can lease to gain access to any customer that wants any service. |
|
unoriginal
join:2000-07-12
San Diego, CA
| reply to supergirl
»www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib···lar.html
The CA Utilities Commission cut the rural fund charge, but then raised the overall monthly service total by 25c/mo instead.
Also "Among those who have lobbied for the reduction or elimination of the surcharges are cable television providers. Since phone companies can use the money for anything they want, the cable companies argue, it could be used to provide competing television services." |
|
SD6
join:2005-03-26
| reply to supergirl
said by supergirl :SD6 - funny the cable analogy wasn't acknowleged. If cable doesn't have to do it, why do the telcos? The telcos don't have to share their recent deployments... |
|
SD6
join:2005-03-26
| reply to King P
said by King P :If you remember, the 1996 telecom act also gave the Telcos BILLIONS of dollars with which they were to have FIBER OPTICS laid to every home in their footprint by 2004. Well, its 2007 and where's my fiber line to my house? Just in case there is anybody out there who might be tempted to believe/repeat this, it is SOOOO untrue. |
|
King P
Don't blame me. I voted for Ron Paul
Premium
join:2004-11-17
Inman, SC
·Windstream
·Charter Pipeline
1 edit | said by SD6 :said by King P :If you remember, the 1996 telecom act also gave the Telcos BILLIONS of dollars with which they were to have FIBER OPTICS laid to every home in their footprint by 2004. Well, its 2007 and where's my fiber line to my house? Just in case there is anybody out there who might be tempted to believe/repeat this, it is SOOOO untrue. »www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm···isid=186
There...is that clear enough for you?
*edit* oh and here's more:
Pennsylvania: Teletruth Files 'Broadband Fraud' Complaint
»www.lightreading.com/document.as···id=46736
--
Forget 'em, Support the Indies.
»www.ind-music.com |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| reply to SD6
said by SD6 :[The telcos don't have to share their recent deployments... that's because the FCC was successfully lobbied by Verizon to exempt fiber from sharing reqts. And a little bit of "we won't build it if you don't exempt it" threats. |
|
elvey
Spamassassin
join:2001-02-17
San Francisco, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
·Comcast
·SONIC.NET
1 edit | reply to supergirl
Umm... AT&T is a government authorized and protected monopoly. If that isn't government support, I don't know what is.
They took in 63 BILLION DOLLARS last year.
They made a gross profit of 28 BILLION DOLLARS last year.
Sheesh. |
|
SD6
join:2005-03-26 | reply to King P
Ahh, another unfortunate ignorant caught in the clutches of Teletruth. Their complaint was thrown out of court and they have been debunked. The claims just get more and more grandiose with time... |
|
StickToTheFacts
@cox.net
| reply to supergirl
said by supergirl :Telocity was around for about 3 minutes and 45 seconds. It's customers ordered DSL from BellSouth for the free modems then switched to Telocity. I wonder if that was Telocity's idea or a way not to pay Telocity for a modem since they didn't give them away ("A modem is $300 but you could order BellSouth DSL and get a free modem and always just switch to us"). So, BellSouth eventually went back and nailed those folks for $200-300 for the modems. Okay, let's stick to the facts here...
1. Telocity provided modems to their customers at no cost.
2. Telocity modems were designed and provisioned BY TELOCITY at their office, so in order to use Telocity, you needed to use a Telocity modem. Using a third party modem with Telocity did not work.
3. Please provide proof that Telocity customers ordered Bellsouth services for the modems and then switched to Telocity where the Bellsouth provided modem would do no good (see #2). |
|
StickToTheFacts
@cox.net
| reply to SD6
said by SD6 :Ahh, another unfortunate ignorant caught in the clutches of Teletruth. Their complaint was thrown out of court and they have been debunked. The claims just get more and more grandiose with time... Doesn't change the fact that certain Bell companies promised one thing and failed to deliver it... |
|
StickToTheFacts
@cox.net | reply to elvey
Please provide a link that shows ATT had a 28 TRILLION dollar profit ?
Are you sure you didn't mean BILLION? And even then, 28 Billion in profits is suspect. |
|
Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
1 edit | reply to elvey
2006
AT&T net sales: $63B (as in billion)
Op Inc: $10B
Net Inc: $7.356B
Gross profit is a meaningless statistic. |
|
