1 edit | Profits are bad; losses are good socialist philosophy Most usage-oriented plans have less to do with network capacity, and more to do with placating hungry investors, for whom ridiculous profits are never enough if there isn't staggering quarter-over-quarter improvements. The oft repeated, but never proved, suppositions of those whose socialist beliefs and anti-corporate philosophies see the bogeyman behind any action not resulting in something for free for the masses.
God forbid anyone make a profit on their invested savings.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
Pv8man
join:2008-07-24
Hammond, IN | let me fix that last sentence for you TK.
"God forbid anyone make a profit off of the undermining of the peoples privacy and charge more for less then they are now...again" |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
I think you broke a record for most strawmen in a post just then. I count at least two.
I'm glad you've identified my evil plot to stop all companies from making any money whatsoever. I wasn't sure that would come through as a central thesis. |
|
| said by Karl Bode:I think you broke a record for most strawmen in a post just then. I count at least two. I'm glad you've identified my evil plot to stop all companies from making any money whatsoever. I wasn't sure that would come through as a central thesis. It comes thru loud and clear on most of your editorials.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
|
|
RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | reply to Karl Bode
Definitely the most in one sentence. Not to mention a herd of high horses.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
I also hate puppies. |
|
1 edit | I know. You've posted that before. 
But in the last Corporate Overlord newsletter I read, I think the story was you cooked puppy burgers for dinner. 
|
|
Reviews:
 ·WOW Internet and..
| reply to Pv8man
But privacy doesn't matter when it comes to Google services, right?
SO only the ISPs are bad then.
 |
|
 BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:Most usage-oriented plans have less to do with network capacity, and more to do with placating hungry investors, for whom ridiculous profits are never enough if there isn't staggering quarter-over-quarter improvements. The oft repeated, but never proved, suppositions of those whose socialist beliefs and anti-corporate philosophies see the bogeyman behind any action not resulting in something for free for the masses. God forbid anyone make a profit on their invested savings. god forbid companies think of CUSTOMER first since it is well known that "the customer is always right even when he's not". FACT. |
|
 MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:Most usage-oriented plans have less to do with network capacity, and more to do with placating hungry investors, for whom ridiculous profits are never enough if there isn't staggering quarter-over-quarter improvements. The oft repeated, but never proved, suppositions of those whose socialist beliefs and anti-corporate philosophies see the bogeyman behind any action not resulting in something for free for the masses. God forbid anyone make a profit on their invested savings. Who is talking about something for free? We already pay an arm and a leg for some of the world's worse broadband service and yet, it's not enough. The corporations want to make it even worse by instituting caps ... now we have money hungry folks like Arbor Networks who want to sell DPI.
The socialist argument is lame and I'm surprised you've stooped that low. Or are you parroting all Republican talking points now just because it's the thing for the side that lost to do? As hard as it is for you to believe, there is a middle ground. When corporations rule the roost, you get this mess that we're in right now. |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
I'm sure there are a few newsletters out there that suggest as much.  |
|
 CheesePremium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
kudos:1 | reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:I know. You've posted that before. But in the last Corporate Overlord newsletter I read, I think the story was you cooked puppy burgers for dinner. Dead puppies.....aren't much fun..... |
|
KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | reply to BF69
said by BF69:said by fAcEtIOUs:Most usage-oriented plans have less to do with network capacity, and more to do with placating hungry investors, for whom ridiculous profits are never enough if there isn't staggering quarter-over-quarter improvements. The oft repeated, but never proved, suppositions of those whose socialist beliefs and anti-corporate philosophies see the bogeyman behind any action not resulting in something for free for the masses. God forbid anyone make a profit on their invested savings. god forbid companies think of CUSTOMER first since it is well known that "the customer is always right even when he's not". FACT. well that is only that rock outside Stew Lenards back in Danbury, CT that says the Customer is Always Right....
Telecom sadly doesnt face the reality of business with customers like retail does, because they know the customer will do what? bail to another company that treats them like shit with an open wallet.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports |
|
Pv8man
join:2008-07-24
Hammond, IN
1 edit | reply to hottboiinnc
I can choose to NOT use google.
But I cant change to an ISP that does not decimate consumer privacy if my only options are con-cast and AT&T. |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
If network usage correlated to network failure, then charging more for using more could make sense... but it doesn't. The only thing reasonable customers typically expect from a network is a best effort to meet the advertised speeds most of the time, with the understanding that some periods of the day will unavoidably see slow-downs. More customers using more bandwidth over time is normal growth, and they should expect upgrades as more customers are added to a segment, to alleviate constraints due to not enough bandwidth. But given that network segments still sit idle to a significant degree for a large part of the time, charging more for using more is, in fact, a rip-off. Yes, some few customers may have outrageously excessive usage, and they perhaps should be dealt with appropriately, but caps and overage fees are, by and large, little more than a rip-off, aka outrageous profit--revenue that doesn't correlate to a matching investment. |
|
Mr Matt
join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
kudos:1 Reviews:
 ·CenturyLink
·Comcast
·Embarq Now Centu..
 ·Millenicom
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
The oft repeated, but never proved, suppositions of those whose socialist beliefs and anti-corporate philosophies see the bogeyman behind any action not resulting in something for free for the masses.
God forbid anyone make a profit on their invested savings. |
|
RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | There appears to be an echo in here.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:Most usage-oriented plans have less to do with network capacity, and more to do with placating hungry investors, for whom ridiculous profits are never enough if there isn't staggering quarter-over-quarter improvements. The oft repeated, but never proved, suppositions of those whose socialist beliefs and anti-corporate philosophies see the bogeyman behind any action not resulting in something for free for the masses. God forbid anyone make a profit on their invested savings. It is not the profits. For some reason businesses think they should always grow and make even more. Even those that have solid profits seem to think they should make more and quickly.
That thinking is just to me odd. Once some point is reached the trick should be to replace any outdated revenue streams with new streams to stay where you are and keep bringing in nice solid profits.
Sort of like at my last job. Every year workers should be this much faster. Uh? this work has been going on many many years. A ten percent faster worker every year each and every year. Not physically possible. Same with 10 percent more profits etc. each and every year. Some year will disappoint you. Like said the trick should be to replace declining revenue streams with new healthy ones. Thus bring in a nice consistent profit. No everyone does not want just profit they want those numbers always increasing. Charge more for something that has been there done that some new startup will eventually get you. |
|
MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | reply to RadioDoc
said by RadioDoc:There appears to be an echo in here. Parrots can only repeat, not come up with original ideas. |
|
Mr Matt
join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
kudos:1 Reviews:
·CenturyLink
·Comcast
·Embarq Now Centu..
·Millenicom
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
 TK, I do not believe that you understand the true issue here. Those responding to this newsletter are not opposed to Capitalism. They are frustrated because Broadband service providers form an Oligopoly where there is limited or no competition. In a true capitalistic environment there are many competitors that compete with each other to drive prices down and force factors in the industry to improve services. In the current market the ISP's take the position that we are not Burger King, so if you want it your way and do not like how they treat you F@#K Off. That was the way the Bell System employees treated customers before the Bell System was broken up.
The real problem with Broadband Service is the lack of competition. The only choice that Broadband Subscribers have is service provided by CATV or Telephone Companies. Until Subscribers have sufficient choices they will have to suffer from corporatism.
I worked for a large regional ISP for several years. They only offered Dial-Up Internet Access. The biggest problem my employer had was competition. The Company started out in the mid 90's offering Measured Dial-Up access for about $25.00 per month. By the time they sold out to a National ISP, competition had forced the company to offer flat rate Dial-Up accounts for around $15.00 and by 2005 the price had dropped to about $10.00 per month. The biggest concern in the marketing meetings was churn. The tendency for dissatisfied customers to go somewhere else. The company saw the hand writing on the wall, that dial-up was obsolete, so they sold their business to a national ISP.
If subscribers could look in their local telephone directory and find ten or fifteen companies offering broadband service, prices would go down, and abuses such as invasion of privacy would stop. |
|
