BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
1 edit | reply to RadioDoc
Re: Comcast hates competition!
there are multiple choices. In Chicagoland alone Comcast has competition from WOW and RCN in various suburban and city areas. U-Verse is ramping up. Should Comcast be allowed to become so huge that they can control program origination? They're already in the shit for withholding their sports network from competitors. Once again Uverse is not subject to the 30% rule. is that fair? No. Those areas with more than one cable providor are in the extreme MINORITY. And if not having 2 means one doesn't live in the "developed world" then 99% of America is a 3rd world country then.
As for satellite, what are their market shares? Do you even know? doesn't matter if they had 50% the TV market they would NOT be affected by this rule adn that's kind of the point. They certainly have more than 30% of the satelite market. |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
 ·AT&T Midwest
1 edit | That's priceless.
U-Verse currently is a form of video on demand and will never even approach a 30% market share as such. Nice straw man.
The rule states 30% of the video market. That you want to ignore the definitions and wrap your argument around false assumptions (let along ignoring reality) speaks to how vacuous your argument is.
Go read the rules.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH | How is U-Verse a form of VoD? I didn't know you got to select what shows you wanted to watch all the time. I thought it was just like cable just according to AT$T used a different platform for delivery. |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest
| It's video over IP which is not sent until you 'order' it via the remote, which is the same as VoD. The only difference is that it picks up live program feeds instead of recorded feeds. It has more in common with SDV than traditional digital cable.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
LeftOfSanity
join:2005-11-06
Felton, DE
| said by RadioDoc  :It's video over IP which is not sent until you 'order' it via the remote, which is the same as VoD. The only difference is that it picks up live program feeds instead of recorded feeds. It has more in common with SDV than traditional digital cable. Wow.
And that makes a difference? Its still TV service. VoD is content stored on servers, not a live feed. Hence = TV. But even if it was, So? |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | In the context of the FCC rules, there is a difference. By your definition, YouTube is cable if you watch it on your TV. So would be anything via Apple TV.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
anonomous
@comcast.net
| Why does the FCC have all those stupid technicalities? What is it, for the bells to be able to get around obstacles cable can't(thanks to FCC chairman Martin  ). I'm no cable fan boy(I think FIOS is a great service overall), but Martin has an extreme bias and it isn't right. |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest
2 edits | What technicalities are you complaining of? These rules were written before Martin was on the FCC and came via directives from Congress. The Communications Act is not an FCC document...they are tasked with implementing it.
Cable is the one who fought to have their non-video services classified as "information services" not subject to common carrier regulation. The rest of this stems from that.
Don't believe everything you read on company websites.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
