Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| morals of big business this is certainly no surprise, but just one more example that big business will say anything (and sometimes do anything) if it lets them continue to make more money than they otherwise would.
Normally, I would expect them to say "we don't want to offer dry DSL, we aren't required to offer it, so we're not going to do it", but for a long time it was politically expedient to pretend that "people don't want it" or "the lines will rot" or the other excuses they have trotted out.
all to keep from admitting there isn't any significant competition and they don't have to respond to customer demand. It appears the reason they are relenting now is that so many younger people, that only use cell for phone, are now coming into the market (graduating, getting their own place) that they run the risk of alienating a significant number of their future demographic. |
|
|
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | Show me a market that doesn't bend to customer demand over time. Of course the telcos will offer dry loops for Internet access, they just waited until they felt the "need" to do so. |
|
 morboComplete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000 | yes. translation: landline losses so great that they were practically forced to offer it or sink faster. good business move. |
|
 RickPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT | reply to openbox9
AT&T has NO CHOICE but to bend.
They are losing more landlines per quarter than AOL did dialup customers.
Their uverse strategy is a FLOP.
Thank god they have the iphone..but even the edge service that runs on is a joke in terms of next generation speeds.
What else do they have? Someone elses satellite tv business?
AT&T IS A DISASTER.
Uverse..MUST GO. FTTH MUST BEGIN NOW.
Jeesh..I've tried to tell them this for over a year now.
When will they listen?
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic! |
|
Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA | AT&T made more money (net income) than everybody last year.. total flop. |
|
ace1974
join:2007-06-09
Goldsboro, NC | You took the words right out of my mouth.. |
|
 en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
1 edit | reply to Rick
I agree on that ... AT&T / POTS is finally seeing what happened to AOL.
Wether or not their Uverse strategy 'works for all' is one thing, however, I do think they _FINALLY_ realize that +40 POTS + FCC/USF fees is not wanted. If POTS were ~$24.95 like Vonage, they wouldn't be losing customers. Allowing basic DSL has kept some, but the problem is... people see POTS not as the necessity it once was.
VoIP + wireless ( UMA is better) is where they need to push voice towards... POTS in that sense is DOA, as its highly taxed, and over priced.
DSL is cheap, but most realize that its subsidized by POTS.
Many don't want a POTS line period, or if they do, its DSL only. I.e. University students don't want a POTS line when they can use a cheap VoIP (skype) or a cellphone, but still want Internet, and don't want to pay $50/month for it.
Cable isn't very cheap (i.e. DTV/Dish is cheaper), but those that use it, tend to see more 'value' (i.e. I _want_ tv service and to watch TV. I don't really care about phone service... just make it work and cheaply - its only 2 way voice).
I don't think they really care about 'next generation speeds' right now. Personally, I don't either. If my wireless cellphone (data tethered) was $25/month, wouldn't have POTS at all, or cable.
I'd have satellite tv, Wireless 3G and cellphone/VoIP.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
