 DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Why bother BA lied to Pennsylvania while getting billions in goodies and they'll do the same to NYC. |
|
|
|
EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA | Most of the "goodies" in this case are related to running a cable TV system... Why would Verizon go through a long approval process, get approved for cable TV, and then not deploy it? Out of sheer hatred for the City of New York? |
|
| I don't see how they lied, they just finished laying underground cable all around my area in PA and are still laying down around the area and stringing on the poles. |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | They were supposed to have had it done years ago, more than 1/2 of PA was to have had fiber by 2004. |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
1 edit | reply to EPS
I never bought into the redlining deal until now. This deal lays out in deal how they're permitted to red line and mark my words...they'll do the best areas first and will be apologetically late with the others.
Meanwhile they will get their goodies like only paying $25 to blow off an appointment. |
|
| said by Dogfather:they'll do the best areas first and will be apologetically late with the others. I don't get it . . . you're saying they should do the WORST (least profitible) areas first? Riiiight. |
|
EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA | Otherwise is clear proof that Verizon hates poor people and/or minorities. |
|
| said by EPS:Otherwise is clear proof that Verizon hates poor people and/or minorities. So if a business chooses to deploy their capital first where it makes the most economic sense, they're racist. Okay. |
|
EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA | I wasn't entirely serious (or serious at all, actually) in my earlier post...
The concern is not so much that less profitable areas will get deployed later, it's whether they'll get deployed to at all. |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
1 edit | reply to myokitis
Yeah, I'm saying they shouldn't deploy in rich neighborhoods first and then get to the others they promise whenever they feel like getting around to it which means a week after never.
This is the same type of shit they pulled in Pennsylvania. They got their goodies first and that gave them the opportunity to just completely blow off their requirements. |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | reply to myokitis
said by myokitis:said by EPS:Otherwise is clear proof that Verizon hates poor people and/or minorities. So if a business chooses to deploy their capital first where it makes the most economic sense, they're racist. Okay. NYC is planting a money tree for Verizon. Verizon, in exchange for access to this very lucrative market should have to follow some basic rules, like EVEN deployment...deployment to all different types of economic areas to insure it all gets done in a timely manner.
Otherwise Verizon is given the opportunity and incentive to break their promises just as they did as BA in Pennsylvania. |
|
| reply to myokitis
said by myokitis:said by EPS:Otherwise is clear proof that Verizon hates poor people and/or minorities. So if a business chooses to deploy their capital first where it makes the most economic sense, they're racist. Okay. Actually, in this country even poor people watch plenty of cable TV. So while there may be some economic incentives for wiring the rich areas first, they probably aren't as strong as a lot of people seem to be assuming. |
|
| reply to Dogfather
The problem was that that Ed Rendell decided that verizon has to go to every single township and sign the deals with them instead of just signing with PA and having that work state wide. There are a lot of different municipalities in PA as there are in many state. I can imagine that taking a lot of time. |
|
 elbm
join:2000-08-03
Reisterstown, MD | reply to Dogfather
There is no evidence of Verizon red-lining in it's current deployment of fttp.
As for the PA thing and those saying BA/Verizon "took the money" and ran-- it is a bunch of mis-truths and a distortion of the facts. |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
3 edits | said by elbm:There is no evidence of Verizon red-lining in it's current deployment of fttp. As for the PA thing and those saying BA/Verizon "took the money" and ran-- it is a bunch of mis-truths and a distortion of the facts. The article has a chart showing exactly how they're redlining.
You're obviously not very familiar with what Chap 30 required BA to do and in 2002, the PA PUC had an opinion differing from yours...
said by PA PUC :
...this Commission has a legal obligation to reject Verizon PA’s 2000 Update and require it to submit a new update specifying its plans to satisfy its legal obligation to provide a modernized network with broadband capability of at least 45 Mbps upstream and downstream, to be available within five days from the customer request date.
That update that was required of Verizon was never done and finally the PA PUC let them off the hook for Chap 30 while VZ got to keep all the money.
As to how much money all means, I would welcome your attempt to refute the testimony of industry expert Dr. Lee Selwyn who lays out the goodie numbers in great detail.
»www.econtech.com/library/LLS%20P···2002.pdf
The fact is, in the mid 90's BA laid out plans for FTTH. To facilitate this, the PUC deregulated and gave other perks that netted BA BILLIONS of dollars. BA then abandoned those plans, opting to follow the DSL path instead.
And when it finally came time for Verizon to deploy fiber, they slapped PA in the face and deployed first in Texas. BA/VZ didn't meet any of the Chap 30 requirements. |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | reply to Lika
That has nothing to do with the original BA Chap 30 requirements. |
|
 PathfinderDazed ConfusedPremium
join:2000-03-26
Mount Vernon, NY
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to Dogfather
said by Dogfather:said by elbm:There is no evidence of Verizon red-lining in it's current deployment of fttp. As for the PA thing and those saying BA/Verizon "took the money" and ran-- it is a bunch of mis-truths and a distortion of the facts. The article has a chart showing exactly how they're redlining. Which article? |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | »www.gothamgazette.com/article/te···/19/2539
The chart shows the richest areas like Manhattan see full deployment right away, while other 'hoods are left to see deployment later (if ever as we saw in the case of PA). |
|
PathfinderDazed ConfusedPremium
join:2000-03-26
Mount Vernon, NY | 100% of single family homes in Manhattan? That's probably about 100. Not a big deal.
Staten Island would be done first. |
|
