Search:  

 
 
   All ForumsHot TopicsGallery






how-to block ads


 
Forums » Martin, Comcast, Continue Lover's Feud » Regulator demands for info increases costs
Share Topic:
RSS topic:
toggle:
flat / full
normal / watch
Post a:
Post a:
Martin trying to shine before getting the boot by Obama? »
« Re: Moving channels to digital...  

Rob
In Deo speramus, God Bless the USA
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
·Comcast

Re: Regulator demands for info increases costs

said by TKJunkMail See Profile :

The scope of the FCC's investigation was broad, seeking data going back to 2006. "After reviewing their request for information, we determined that it would have taken over 1,500 man hours just to compile the information for 2008."

"We stand ready to work with them and to see how best to proceed from this point. The amount of information was so substantial and the amount of time very short," the Comcast spokeswoman said.
And people wonder why businesses, both large & small, hate regulatory agencies. It is the cost of providing huge amounts of info to feed the bureaucrats constant demands for data and then waiting interminably for OKs to do anything. This isn't just the FCC, but the dozens of agencies that a business has to satisfy to do anything.
I use to agree to that. The Sarbanes Oxley Act, for example, requires a lot of money and a lot of man hours for a small broker firm in order to stay compliant.

But then again, look at Enron, Worldcom, Adelphia, and all the recent companies who had little or no regulation.
JSRoman
Premium
join:2005-03-10
Callahan, FL

2 edits

Re: Regulator demands for info increases costs

Disagree. Plenty of regulation. The problem was their Chief Officers broke the law and all ended in jail or in the grave. These companies failing had very little to do with not enough regulations.
jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
·surpasshosting
·ViaTalk

Re: Regulator demands for info increases costs

Correct. Enron and the rest found loopholes in the existing mountains of regulations and used them to gain illicit profits. More regulation = more loopholes.

Case in point -- why weren't the CEOs of Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac marched into a courthouse in front of the cameras, under arrest for being dishonest about the health of their companies? Isn't that what SOx was supposed to prevent? Billions were lost (except by the execs) yet there's been no public outrage, no death threats like Enron executives received, and no one had their character smeared in the press.

Strange....

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest

Re: Regulator demands for info increases costs

said by jester121 See Profile :

Correct. Enron and the rest found loopholes in the existing mountains of regulations and used them to gain illicit profits.
They weren't loopholes. They just basically violated accounting standards and broke laws to make their company stock value increase. It wasn't a legel loophole, it was then and is now illegal.

Now, they did take advantage of lax oversight and regulation to make the frauds succeed.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast

said by Rob See Profile :

But then again, look at Enron, Worldcom, Adelphia, and all the recent companies who had little or no regulation.
The executives who broke the law were punished under existing law. There was no need for Sarbanes-Oxley.
--
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty

espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
·voip.ms
·Vitelity VOIP
·Callcentric
·VoiceStick
·ViaTalk
·Comcast
·Embarq

said by Rob See Profile :

But then again, look at Enron, Worldcom, Adelphia, and all the recent companies who had little or no regulation.
Sarbanes Oxley is a response to those events, and reflects the typical government response to an issue:

Too much, too late, and in the wrong place.

You have to wonder what the FCC would even do with that data, other than mark the check box that they've received it.
Forums » Martin, Comcast, Continue Lover's FeudMartin trying to shine before getting the boot by Obama? »
« Re: Moving channels to digital...  


Saturday, 28-Nov 21:17:53 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.
page compression OFF
Most commented news this week
· [122] Time Warner Cable Fires Broadside At Broadcasters
· [112] New AT&T Ad Campaign Hits Back At Verizon
· [96] Apple Joins AT&T Verizon Snark Fest
· [87] New Bill Takes Aim At Higher Verizon ETFs
· [80] TiVo Sees Record Customer Losses
· [70] Verizon CEO: Hulu Will Be Dead Soon
· [69] In-Flight Internet Headed For Bumpy Landing?
· [69] Weekend Open Thread
· [62] Thanksgiving Open Thread
· [40] EFF Wages War On Fine Print
Most people now reading
· Windows 7 boot manager editing questions [Microsoft Help]
· Why would I want an e reader? [General Questions]
· 3.x Feral Druid - Bear Tanking Guide [World of Warcraft]
· [How to] Install Asterisk on an Asus WL-520GU router [VOIP Tech Chat]
· [Newsgroups] Newzleech down? [Filesharing Software]
· Why does it take so long? Mail question [General Questions]
· ToC 4th boss - Preliminary Strategy for Twin Valkyr [World of Warcraft]
· Linksys N routers: open to Cisco's snooping? [Security]
· Using DIR-615 C1/3.01 with Trendnet TEW-652BRP in N Mode [D-Link]