<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Re: out of the frying pan.. in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r22364709</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 17:21:44 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 17:21:44 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: out of the frying pan..</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22364713</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/939879"><b>openbox9</b></A> : There are more than two wireless service providers ;)]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22364713</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 09 May 2009 18:41:32 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: out of the frying pan..</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22364709</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/939879"><b>openbox9</b></A> : Well, this thread is about wireless service areas, so I assumed....<br><br>Anyway, if there's no competition now, why should the FCC/FTC attach conditions with additional mergers/buyouts? The competitive nature of the playing field isn't going to improve by attaching conditions to the buyouts. I'd much rather prefer a behemoth cable company competing against a behemoth telephone company than I would numerous little no-name companies that aren't really competing with each other now. Obviously the best consumer option is for additional competitive entries into the marketplace, but I honestly don't see that happening.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22364709</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 09 May 2009 18:40:55 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: out of the frying pan..</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22363141</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1407044"><b>cornelius785</b></A> : so the correct term is now duopoly, not monopoly.  you get all the fun of monopolies, but with twice the 'competitiors'.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22363141</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 09 May 2009 10:33:08 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: out of the frying pan..</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22362839</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/995903"><b>tmc8080</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  openbox9 <A HREF="/useremail/u/939879"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by  tmc8080 <A HREF="/useremail/u/995903"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>  :</small><br><br>from one monopoly into another..</div>Not really a monopoly if there are two ;)<div class="bquote"><small>said by  tmc8080 <A HREF="/useremail/u/995903"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>  :</small><br><br>we all suppose that some commitments will come for bringing 100% of these 85 markets into the U-Verse deployments too, right?</div>What do wireless service areas have to do with wireline service areas?<br> </div>Didn't say anything about wireless.. as for the monopoly part.. that holds, but needs clarification: AT&T and Verizon are telco monopolies in their respective geographic locations which for the most part DO NOT overlap. In a sense the governement allowed many of the RBOC's to merge with the strongest Bell CORE LD companies or are a merging of massive RBOC assets in the case of Verizon (northeast//ny metro) is the *BEST* telco market to be in.. most ROI, most customers per square mile). AT&T got sloppy seconds (Bell South). <br><br>As for cable companies.. Comcast is the beohemuth to rule them all.. unfortunately with so few companies.. real competition has taken a beating.. and I see AT&T's gobbling up of more markets further proof that there will be no reversal of that pattern in the short term (outside of very competitive markets to begin with)-- though the fcc/ftc probably should step in and sttach some conditions which AT&T will thumb their nose at.. eventually leading to a breakup or re-regulation of sorts so that something positive will eventually come of all of it..]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22362839</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 09 May 2009 08:36:12 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: out of the frying pan..</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22360691</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/939879"><b>openbox9</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  tmc8080 <A HREF="/useremail/u/995903"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>from one monopoly into another..</div>Not really a monopoly if there are two ;)<div class="bquote"><small>said by  tmc8080 <A HREF="/useremail/u/995903"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>we all suppose that some commitments will come for bringing 100% of these 85 markets into the U-Verse deployments too, right?</div>What do wireless service areas have to do with wireline service areas?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22360691</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 17:57:44 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>out of the frying pan..</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22360447</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/995903"><b>tmc8080</b></A> : from one monopoly into another..<br><br>we all suppose that some commitments will come for bringing 100% of these 85 markets into the U-Verse deployments too, right? (and if you believe that... take a look at my little bridge I wanna sell ya)<br><br>at&t isn't doing that well with even the FTTP deployments they have now, much less crappy fttn/c they push with adsl plus. no 100mbit tiers announced... nothing. they even backed away from $15 dsl until all of bellsouth was wired... oh well for best of intentions..]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22360447</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 17:02:58 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
