battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000 | What a great idea!
Brilliant! You have a company that wants to provide service and one that does not. Let's make the one that does not stay. After all an analyst knows everything. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
 ·AT&T Southeast
| Yep, see how well the analysts, consumer groups, and unions like it when Verizon is forced to maintain a market that they don't want. I foresee no capital expenditures for infrastructure improvement and just enough O&M expenditure to maintain what they currently have enough to keep the regulators off of their back.
Verizon being forced to keep the undesirable market is a lose, lose for everyone. |
|
MrMoody
But the Grinch ... did Not.
join:2002-09-03
Smithfield, NC
·Embarq
 ·Skype
·magicjack.com
| This is the same thing I have been saying.
I think the people wanting to keep Verizon are the ones with their hands in Verizon's till in that area.
--
"It is a future in which globalization really does work ... and everybody winds up getting to be part of the third world." - William Gibson |
|
PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
| reply to openbox9
said by openbox9  :Yep, see how well the analysts, consumer groups, and unions like it when Verizon is forced to maintain a market that they don't want. I foresee no capital expenditures for infrastructure improvement and just enough O&M expenditure to maintain what they currently have enough to keep the regulators off of their back. Absolutely. Their attitude almost seems to be "if Verizon wants it, then it automaticaly must be bad". Now I can fully understand how people in these states can view Verizon management as a bunch of rat bastards; I feel that same way about them, for much the same reasons. But if Verizon stays as the region's provider, they're gonna get nothing, zilch, nada, from them. And there's no way these "consumer advocates" or PUC members can force Verizon to do anything when it comes to broadband deployment. These guys are just shooting themselves in the foot.
When it comes to broadband deployment, smaller regional telcos have a much better track record of deploying broadband than does Verizon. Instead, Verizon management has chosen to concentrate investment on delivering TV over optical fiber to only a portion of their subscriber base. If I were these people, I'd tell VZ not to let the door hit them on the way out, and say good riddance.
Of course all of this is probably just posturing and negotiating in order to try to get the best deal. |
|
tschmidt
Premium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
 ·Hollis Hosting
·Verizon Online DSL
·Fairpoint Communic..
| reply to battleop
VT, NH, and ME are faced with a dilemma.
1)Allow the deal to go through and risk financial collapse of FairPoint or their inability to properly manage the three state network they acquired. There is also great concern over FairPoint's ability to raise capital to deliver next generation data services.
2)Thwart the deal an address Verizon's concerns to make the states more attractive. At least in NH Verizon had already been aggressively rolling out FIOS before the deal. That may have been Verizon's game plan all along.
At first I though it might be a good idea having a company who's business model is focused on rural areas. But the more I learn the more concerned I am that not only will they not be able to build out next generation services they may not be able to effectively manage the existing network.
/tom
|
|
mouseferatu
Too many cats, Too many mice
Premium,MVM
join:2004-03-16
Im not sure
clubs:
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Fairpoint Communic..
 ·Comcast
| said by tschmidt :VT, NH, and ME are faced with a dilemma. At first I though it might be a good idea having a company who's business model is focused on rural areas. But the more I learn the more concerned I am that not only will they not be able to build out next generation services they may not be able to effectively manage the existing network. /tom The dilemma that New Hampshire faces is further complicated by the fact that much of Southern New Hampshire is, effectively, a distant suburb of Boston, and is already on FIOS.
Many of us who commute to work in the city or on the 128 tech loop every day depend on good HSI to telecommute when we can. Good HSI is something that many areas here had never experienced before the advent of FIOS.
It is the current "plan" of FairPoint to revert the Southern NH FIOS accounts to DSL. As there is no DSL available to most of us, that leaves us in a rather dismal place. Comcast is crippling along on the less-than-adequate Adelphia equipment that was under-maintained for years, and there is no other game in town.
Verizon services are excellent, but they have always groused about the fact that they got the whole enchilada of rural services when they purchased New England Telephone. What they wanted was Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island.
Isn't it nice if they can keep all of the high revenue generation areas and dump all of the problem areas? And even better, dump them on an already failing utility besides?
I presume its to hell with all of us who get stuck with their mess...
--
"Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crispy and good with catsup." |
|
