 RickPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT | Comcast has a point... For starters..where exactly is this better Verizon fios pricing that everyone expected?
There's plenty of areas now that have both fios and cable and I have yet to see anyone posting any better deals than they were able to get on a cable package.
What that means is that the COMPETITION..is doing NOTHING for consumers in terms of prices. And WORSE yet..look at what's been happening to verizon and AT&T lately with the LOSS of landlines and LOSS of DSL customers. Do you think there is anything conducive in that that will cause verizon to want to LOWER prices?
Guess again folks. The pressure is on them to RAISE their prices faster than cable instead.
And so..that begs the question...why then should any city rush through a verizon deal? What's really in it for consumers? Choice you say? Ok...i'll buy that..to some extent. But does it really pay to try to WEAKEN your cable operator? What might happen then is that THEY have to raise prices to compensate for that..right? And what you wind up with is overall..higher prices. And consumers not winning AT ALL.
If you read that story carefully what you'll also see is this..
"They hope Council will pass the ordinance before its winter break so it can begin the seven-year building process. "
SEVEN YEAR BUILDING PROCESS.
7 years. Why didn't verizon start this a decade ago like the cable co's did? That's why they're in the mess they're in..and now they'd like the whole process just waived and rushed through so they can try to catch up. Is that fair to the industry that spent 100 billion dollars providing you and I what we have today? The telco's have bled every last dime out of profits to spend on their shareholders. Not you and me. And that's why so many people can barely get even dsl today.
I'm all for competition and personally would like to see Verizon ultimately get approved for not only PA..but all the areas they serve. But I do think that questions need to be asked and governments shouldn't just rely on leaps of faith that they will do as they promise. They should agree up front to wire the whole area...not just say "trust us"..we'll get it done in time. Where did trusting them get anyone the last 10 years? And no deal should be approved without careful thought along the lines of what I outlined above. What comcast is now saying is that Verizon should be required to demonstrate how this is really helping consumers. And from what I've seen of their rollouts and pricing..it's a real stretch to say that is really the case.
What I HAVE seen however is Verizon and AT&T getting weaker by the quarter as they lose customers bigtime.
What will that look like in SEVEN years time?
At that rate..there might not even be a Verizon to talk about folks. And that's why this whole thing needs serious examination before approving anything.
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic! |
|
 ptrowskiGot Helix?Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4
 ·VOIPo
| said by Rick:And so..that begs the question...why then should any city rush through a verizon deal? What's really in it for consumers? Choice you say? Ok...i'll buy that..to some extent. But does it really pay to try to WEAKEN your cable operator? What might happen then is that THEY have to raise prices to compensate for that..right? And what you wind up with is overall..higher prices. And consumers not winning AT ALL. Choice is exactly what consumers need, no matter what area they live in. So it is better to have a monopoly than it is to have a choice?
Competition is good for consumers. Choice is good for consumers. If Fios is not a worry for Comcast and their service is superior, they should be just fine.
--
"So, Lone Star, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb."
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage? »www.venganza.org |
|
| reply to Rick
said by Rick:For starters..where exactly is this better Verizon fios pricing that everyone expected? There's plenty of areas now that have both fios and cable and I have yet to see anyone posting any better deals than they were able to get on a cable package. Many Verizon subscribers - including me - have been able to reduce their combined internet/TV bill from Comcast or other cable companies by $30 or $40 by signing up with Verizon Fios. Sure, I don't expect that price gap to last forever as cable responds with more agressive bundle packages of their own and as the fees to the cable networks go up, but for the past 2 years, I saved money with verizon. And have much faster internet and 100+ HD channels to boot.
said by Rick:And so..that begs the question...why then should any city rush through a verizon deal? What's really in it for consumers? Choice you say? Ok...i'll buy that..to some extent. But does it really pay to try to WEAKEN your cable operator? What might happen then is that THEY have to raise prices to compensate for that..right? And what you wind up with is overall..higher prices. And consumers not winning AT ALL. Competition is a good thing for the consumer. Weaken the cable operator?? No, they have to deliver a good product to compete. Not that hard a concept to grasp.
said by Rick:If you read that story carefully what you'll also see is this.. "They hope Council will pass the ordinance before its winter break so it can begin the seven-year building process. " SEVEN YEAR BUILDING PROCESS. 7 years. Why didn't verizon start this a decade ago like the cable co's did? You mean 30+ years ago. How long did it take for cable TV to reach every house in Philadelphia from the time cable TV was first offered? This would likely pre-date Comcast for whoever were the original cable operators in Philadelphia city. Seven years is not unreasonable given the number of distribution lines that have to be laid down, Central Offices to be upgraded, and buildings to be rewired. |
|
 Frankis chillingPremium
join:2000-11-03
somewhere
2 edits | reply to Rick
Rick,
I dont know about you but I live in an area with both cablevision and fios. I got a good triple play package with verizon with better perks, offers, and price than cablevision was offering. Once my two year triple play package deal is over then I know that I have the luxury of switching to cablevision and getting whatever triple play package they have if verizon cant match it. I can switch back and forth forever and always know i'm getting a good deal. You cant do that in an area that only has one provider. The reason for this is that although you can go with sattellite, they do not offer triple play deals (that i know of).
Whatever way you look at it, it's just a neverending arms race. No company will be stupid enough to stop offering triple play offers as the other one would decimate them completely in sales.
As far as prices are concerned, prices will always go up anyway, even in areas where there is only cable and no dsl or fiber. Hell, I remember cable prices going up all the time when I was growing up back before they even thought of using cable for internet and phone service and you could only get tv from the cable company. In the end competition wont cause prices to go up.
--
At first I thought everyone on the highway was drunk but then I realized I was driving in Florida  |
|
| reply to Rick
I agree and like what you said. It seems to come from someone who has knowledge in the Telecommunications industry. But do not allow them to make you believe they are not making more money then they deserve. Shamefully your local Govt, namely the PUC/PSC lose the battle for you. Enforce the law with these companies and you will see growth, better programing and quality pricing. We also thought our auto industry was the best and untouchable. Open your eyes America we are in a battle. The small guy must be heard and the large corporation made to live with in the law. |
|
 IgnitePremium,VIP
join:2004-03-18
UK | reply to Rick
I have no doubt at all that if it were Comcast going into Verizon territory with a new build you'd be all in favour.
As well thought out as your post is I cannot take anyone with your posting record seriously when it comes to anything involving Comcast, even down to your signature. |
|
 tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ | reply to Rick
said by Rick:What that means is that the COMPETITION..is doing NOTHING for consumers in terms of prices. prices won't change as long as the cable/telco providers have us by the proverbial nuts. its like opec without the oil and the fancy garb.
said by Rick:But does it really pay to try to WEAKEN your cable operator? just goes to enforce the already comcast-schilling impression of you that most people have...
said by Rick:What might happen then is that THEY have to raise prices to compensate for that..right? or they could stop spending money discrediting verizon and trying to keep them out and use it to expand the infrastructure in areas they *are* concerned about.
unfortunately, most (if not all) large mso's/telcos refuse to live by the philosophy "walk softly and carry a big stick". rather than let the quality of the product be its own advertising, we'd rather spend millions of dollars trying to *say* our product is good when we're really scared sh!tless.
said by Rick:SEVEN YEAR BUILDING PROCESS. 7 years. Why didn't verizon start this a decade ago like the cable co's did? rick, listening to what you say you'd like to think comcast *invented* the hfc network. truth be told, most of what is now mso territory is a conglomeration of local/regional cable providers that have spent time/money performing buildouts little by little in the 70s and 80s. once the actual infrastructure was pulled, upgrading takes next to nothing as you can already use existing channels to pull fiber and then slap in some fancy new cmts hardware and you're good to go.
you like to smack down att for still using copper and call verizon foolish for running ftth. guaranteed when fiber becomes more prevalent and comcast is still hanging on to last mile coax and everyone calls *you* foolish, we will all look back on this and laugh. it is only natural that you want to protect your bread and butter. att has copper lines and is trying to buildout to save them. verizon sees value in fiber. they are futureproofing themselves as it is much easier to swap a few sfps than it is to require your customers to purchase or rent new modem hardware. comcast is in the business to protect their video delivery network. hence the pre-emptive anti-competitive move to cap bandwidth. everyone feels it is reasonable, but its a slippery slope. once they feel comfortable, you hold them by the nose and kick them in the pants.
if you *really* feel that comcast has a superior product, why don't you let the actual competition speak for itself and let the customers vote with their wallets?
q.
thanks for the laugh by the way, i needed something to feel better. |
|
| reply to Frank
sat tv has 3play, look @ sbc/dish network |
|
