cwh
join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX | more like tella-half-truth quote:
a) AT&T already promised 100% broadband in their 21 states by 2007 as
part of their AT&T-BellSouth commitments -- never happened.
Wireless and sat broadband do count and are available just about everywhere. Both beat dialup hands down.
quote:
b) When SBC announced U-Verse and Lightspeed in 2004 so it could merge
with AT&T, it claimed it would have 18 million homes by 2007 ---
oops.
They finished this build out late. SO they finished in 2008 rather than 2007. And as of today they are still expanding the service. Quite a bit different than not doing it.
oops.
quote:
c) SBC, when it merged with Ameritech, claimed it would compete in 30
cities outside their region and promised to spend $6 billion on
'Project Pronto', replacing the copper wiring with fiber optics
-Never spent the money, didn't do the build outs.
And pronto took dsl from 0% available to about 85% available. The money got spent and broadband became much more available.
IF this guy cant be honest about the obvious things, why should anyone think he is honest about anything. |
|
|
|
 Doctor OldsI Need A Remedy For What's Ailing Me.Premium,VIP
join:2001-04-19
1970 442 W30
kudos:18 | said by cwh: quote:
a) AT&T already promised 100% broadband in their 21 states by 2007 as
part of their AT&T-BellSouth commitments -- never happened.
Wireless and sat broadband do count and are available just about everywhere. Both beat dialup hands down. Really. Name the AT&T Satellite service.
--
What’s the point of owning a supercar if you can’t scare yourself stupid from time to time? |
|
cwh
join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX | said by Doctor Olds:said by cwh: quote:
a) AT&T already promised 100% broadband in their 21 states by 2007 as
part of their AT&T-BellSouth commitments -- never happened.
Wireless and sat broadband do count and are available just about everywhere. Both beat dialup hands down. Really. Name the AT&T Satellite service. They resell wild blue. |
|
Doctor OldsI Need A Remedy For What's Ailing Me.Premium,VIP
join:2001-04-19
1970 442 W30
kudos:18
1 edit | said by cwh:They resell wild blue. That is not them supplying AT&T or Uverse service as Wild Blue was available Years before AT&T made their so called "promise", that is just AT&T riding on the back of an existing provider making their promise to reach more homes a completely empty one the minute it escaped their lips.
Furthermore, they are saying in Public that they have 90% Uverse coverage right now at 18 Mbps to every one of those homes in that 90%. Now that is a pure and outright lie!
Listen for yourself.
»www.att.com/Common/multimedia/rbc103.t.mp3
quote:
June 10, 2009 RBC Capital Markets Technology, Media & Communications Conference
* Listen to presentation
Jeff Weber
Found at:
»www.att.com/gen/investor-relations?pid=5647
Regards,
Doctor Olds
--
What’s the point of owning a supercar if you can’t scare yourself stupid from time to time? |
|
cwh
join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX | said by cwh:They resell wild blue. That is not them supplying AT&T or Uverse service as Wild Blue was available Years before AT&T made their so called "promise", that is just AT&T riding on the back of an existing provider making their promise to reach more homes a completely empty one the minute it escaped their lips. You are right about this. But it is a mutually beneficial relationship for both ATT and wild blue. Meanwhile ATT probably has 90% coverage with wireless, which is faster and cheaper than wild blue. Covering the last 10% is not going to be cheap or easy for anyone and will likely require government subsidy for any form of wired broadband.
Furthermore, they are saying in Public that they have 90% Uverse coverage right now at 18 Mbps to every one of those homes in that 90%. Now that is a pure and outright lie!
They have never claimed 90% uverse coverage. The intial buildout was to cover some 18M units which is about 1/2 of SBC territory. Those 18M have been covered now and about 90% of those can get the 18M speed.
Listen for yourself.
http://www.att.com/Common/multimedia/rbc103.t.mp3 June 10, 2009 RBC Capital Markets Technology, Media & Communications Conference * Listen to presentation Found at: » www.att.com/gen/investor-relations?pid=5647Regards, Doctor Olds |
|
Doctor OldsI Need A Remedy For What's Ailing Me.Premium,VIP
join:2001-04-19
1970 442 W30
kudos:18 | So Very Wrong. Epic fail at fact twisting and attempted misdirection, but they added the Bellsouth Region to AT&T (11 States that were not SBC so 90% of SBC coverage is 0% of Bellsouth coverage) so they might have 50% to 60% true coverage with wired services (what Wireless AT&T Broadband, that's a big joke as overlapped services do NOT increase penetration --- penetration is providing new service where it never was before). So yes, they are lying to Investors and to Wall Street about the percentages and they are also lying to Investors and to Wall Street when they talk about running fiber to the home which is pure bull.
--
What’s the point of owning a supercar if you can’t scare yourself stupid from time to time? |
|
Doctor OldsI Need A Remedy For What's Ailing Me.Premium,VIP
join:2001-04-19
1970 442 W30
kudos:18
1 edit | reply to cwh
said by cwh:They have never claimed 90% uverse coverage. The intial buildout was to cover some 18M units which is about 1/2 of SBC territory. Those 18M have been covered now and about 90% of those can get the 18M speed. Listen for yourself. You better listen again or ask for a transcript because the speaker from AT&T clearly states that all areas (including Bellsouth's 11 States) are at 90% for Uverse and those all have 18 Mbps speeds available, nothing about 18Mil members or subscribers and nothing about the former SBC territory.
--
What’s the point of owning a supercar if you can’t scare yourself stupid from time to time? |
|
cwh
join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX | reply to Doctor Olds
said by Doctor Olds:So Very Wrong. Epic fail at fact twisting and attempted misdirection, but they added the Bellsouth Region to AT&T (11 States that were not SBC so 90% of SBC coverage is 0% of Bellsouth coverage) so they might have 50% to 60% true coverage with wired services (what Wireless AT&T Broadband, that's a big joke as overlapped services do NOT increase penetration --- penetration is providing new service where it never was before). So yes, they are lying to Investors and to Wall Street about the percentages and they are also lying to Investors and to Wall Street when they talk about running fiber to the home which is pure bull. Both SBC and Bellsouth have about 80-85% dlsl coverage. So there is no way to get zero with belsouth.
Add in wireless coverage and their coverage probably reaches 90-85%. You right wireless is more expensive and slower than wired broadband, but it is also a far better solution to rural area than wired broadband. |
|
cwh
join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX | reply to Doctor Olds
said by Doctor Olds:said by cwh:They have never claimed 90% uverse coverage. The intial buildout was to cover some 18M units which is about 1/2 of SBC territory. Those 18M have been covered now and about 90% of those can get the 18M speed. Listen for yourself. You better listen again or ask for a transcript because the speaker from AT&T clearly states that all areas (including Bellsouth's 11 States) are at 90% for Uverse and those all have 18 Mbps speeds available, nothing about 18Mil members or subscribers and nothing about the former SBC territory. I have listened to just about every investor talk done by att for the last several years. I can you this they have never claimed 90% uverse coverage. They have stated initial build goals of about 50% and expanding from there.
And just about every quarter they release coverage numbers. Take a look at their quarterly reports and transcripts. Their publicly stated numbers are 18 million units pass by 2008( about 50% sbc) and about 30Million units pass by 2011(about 50% of bellsouth )
I will relisten to that audio cast tonight, but I am pretty sure it does not say what you are thinking it does. |
|
cwh
join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX | reply to Doctor Olds
I listened to the audio again, and you should do the same.
There is only mention of 90% of the uverse base being able to get 18meg service, not 90% of the att units being able to get uverse.
And yes they do mention they have passed 18M units and the number of subscribers they have. |
|
| reply to cwh
Re: more like tella-half-truth -- funny but not accurate. You really didn't go to the actual documents we linked to.
a) 100% by 2007 --- there are whole sections of the AT&T's territories where they neither have 200K DSL available or offered a wireless alternative. --- At least that's what we've been told in emails from various customers throughout the AT&T-region -- which is now 22 states ---
and as we pointed out, AT&T was also supposed to offer $10. DSL to first time users -- In our recent survey of San Diego CA phone, broadband, internet, cable and wireless customers, only 1 in 33 was able to find the offer --- at least 7 of the 'new customers' didn't have the discount, was never given the offer, and AT&T certainly didn't tell them that it existed.
B) They finished this build out late. SO they finished in 2008 rather than 2007. And as of today they are still expanding the service. Quite a bit different than not doing it.
Excuse me, but AT&T mislead the regulators about the 18 million homes in multiple respects.
The 18 million number, was never changed when, say, AT&T added BellSouth, which has 9 states.
However, it was for TV-based service, not internet. "U-verse video connections of 1,329,000 in 1st Q, 2009" --- passing homes of 14 million means either the company can’t really sell the stuff with an uptake rate of 9%, or the homes passed are for any service, including just internet, which we believe to be the case. ---
Here’s the details of what they said: --- And it was in the annual report – notice it is 'super-high-speed' and a ‘fiber optic network. It doesn't’t say – copper-fiber, which can’t handle ‘super-high-speed.
2004 annual report -- Project Lightspeed
In June 2004, we announced key advances in developing a network capable of delivering a new generation of integrated digital television, super-high-speed broadband and Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) services to our residential and small business customers, referred to as Project Lightspeed. In October 2004, the FCC clarified that rules designed for traditional telephone networks would not be applicable to new broadband networks and services. We are conducting trials using the proposed technology and, if successful, we expect to begin our build-out of our fiber-optic network in the first quarter of 2005. We expect to reach approximately 18 million households by year-end 2007 and expect to spend approximately $4 billion over the next three years in deployment costs and approximately $1 billion in customer-activation capital expenditures spread over 2006 and 2007.
Where does it say -- We're only using copper, we're only offering slow speeds, and we didn't add the BellSouth territory in our upgraded projections?
c) And pronto took dsl from 0% available to about 85% available. The money got spent and broadband became much more available. IF this guy cant be honest about the obvious things, why should anyone think he is honest about anything.
Yawn... DSL was a bait and switch, not what was promised --- Pronto was again sold as 'fiber optic upgrades, not using the old copper wiring for a slow broadband service, that was considered inferior by SBC et al in 1992 when the they filed to get changes in state laws for more money ---
According to the SBC 1999 Annual Report, the merged SBC-Ameritech company would start a new $6 billion fiber optic broadband plan called “Project Pronto”.151
“Broadband Initiative in October 1999: As the first post-Ameritech merger initiative,
SBC announced plans to offer broadband services to approximately 80 percent of SBC's United States wireline customers over the next three years (Project Pronto). SBC will invest an estimated $6 billion in fiber, electronics and other technology for this broadband initiative. The build-out will include moving many customers from the existing copper network to a new fiber network.”
Notice again – this is ‘move customers from a copper networks to a ‘fiber network”…
|
|
cwh
join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX | said by Kushnick :
You really didn't go to the actual documents we linked to.
I have read enough to know you are twisting things to fit your agenda
a) 100% by 2007 --- there are whole sections of the AT&T's territories where they neither have 200K DSL available or offered a wireless alternative. --- At least that's what we've been told in emails from various customers throughout the AT&T-region -- which is now 22 states ---
and right now they can get broadband via sat. Yes they resell it, but it about the only way to get the last 10% without significant government subsidy. ANd wireless really is the way to go serve these people, because of the low population density.
and as we pointed out, AT&T was also supposed to offer $10. DSL to first time users -- In our recent survey of San Diego CA phone, broadband, internet, cable and wireless customers, only 1 in 33 was able to find the offer --- at least 7 of the 'new customers' didn't have the discount, was never given the offer, and AT&T certainly didn't tell them that it existed.
It was available and people did get it. Not a huge deal anyway as it was not big discount to begin with.
Excuse me, but AT&T mislead the regulators about the 18 million homes in multiple respects.
The 18 million number, was never changed when, say, AT&T added BellSouth, which has 9 states.
It got changed to 30M by 2010. I think 30M is delayed to 2011 due the slow economy. I
However, it was for TV-based service, not internet. "U-verse video connections of 1,329,000 in 1st Q, 2009" --- passing homes of 14 million means either the company can’t really sell the stuff with an uptake rate of 9%, or the homes passed are for any service, including just internet, which we believe to be the case. ---
Mature markets are getting 15% penetration. THat means they are only getting slightly lower penetration compared to fios at 1/3 to 1/2 the investment. ANd the deployment is faster than fios as well.
Here’s the details of what they said: --- And it was in the annual report – notice it is 'super-high-speed' and a ‘fiber optic network. It doesn't’t say – copper-fiber, which can’t handle ‘super-high-speed.
2004 annual report -- Project Lightspeed
In June 2004, we announced key advances in developing a network capable of delivering a new generation of integrated digital television, super-high-speed broadband and Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) services to our residential and small business customers, referred to as Project Lightspeed. In October 2004, the FCC clarified that rules designed for traditional telephone networks would not be applicable to new broadband networks and services. We are conducting trials using the proposed technology and, if successful, we expect to begin our build-out of our fiber-optic network in the first quarter of 2005. We expect to reach approximately 18 million households by year-end 2007 and expect to spend approximately $4 billion over the next three years in deployment costs and approximately $1 billion in customer-activation capital expenditures spread over 2006 and 2007.
Where does it say -- We're only using copper, we're only offering slow speeds, and we didn't add the BellSouth territory in our upgraded projections?
Lightspeed was all about VDSL deployment, so you cannot spin it as a fiber only network buildout. ANd considering the bellsouth merger did not happen till 2006, it is kinda hard to put those details in a 2004 report.
c) And pronto took dsl from 0% available to about 85% available. The money got spent and broadband became much more available. IF this guy cant be honest about the obvious things, why should anyone think he is honest about anything.
Yawn... DSL was a bait and switch, not what was promised --- Pronto was again sold as 'fiber optic upgrades, not using the old copper wiring for a slow broadband service, that was considered inferior by SBC et al in 1992 when the they filed to get changes in state laws for more money ---
According to the SBC 1999 Annual Report, the merged SBC-Ameritech company would start a new $6 billion fiber optic broadband plan called “Project Pronto”.151
“Broadband Initiative in October 1999: As the first post-Ameritech merger initiative,
SBC announced plans to offer broadband services to approximately 80 percent of SBC's United States wireline customers over the next three years (Project Pronto). SBC will invest an estimated $6 billion in fiber, electronics and other technology for this broadband initiative. The build-out will include moving many customers from the existing copper network to a new fiber network.”
Notice again – this is ‘move customers from a copper networks to a ‘fiber network”…
Once again pronto was about adsl buildout, so a complete fiber network was impossible. Pronto took broadband and adsl from 0% coverage to 80-85% coverage that exists today.
These are the reasons why tella-half-truth is an accurate statement. You are unable to report simple truths without spinning them. While you may not be happy with the speed or quality of the telcos buildout, they have not done nothing like you keep suggesting. |
|
Doctor OldsI Need A Remedy For What's Ailing Me.Premium,VIP
join:2001-04-19
1970 442 W30
kudos:18 | said by cwh:said by Kushnick :
You really didn't go to the actual documents we linked to.
I have read enough to know you are twisting things to fit your agenda It is quite simple. You cannot accept the truth or the facts. That is the only thing that is being twisted and you are trying to portray "The Corporate View" with your Satellite Rhetoric (which is laughable) as it appears the only reading you are doing is from the AT&T Lobbyists (how do you keep up the the constant revisionism?, LOL).  Hell, even my Grandmother knows what it means when the Telcos promise to move you from Copper to Fiber and then AT&T(along with its predecessors) run Uverse as good old Copper POTS to the house saying oops, Fiber to the Node is close enough/good enough. The only Telco to keep up with Fiber to the home promise is Verizon. AT&T/SBC/PacBell all lied and mislead the citizens which they continue to do to this very minute.
--
What’s the point of owning a supercar if you can’t scare yourself stupid from time to time? |
|
cwh
join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX | said by Doctor Olds:said by cwh:said by Kushnick :
You really didn't go to the actual documents we linked to.
I have read enough to know you are twisting things to fit your agenda It is quite simple. You cannot accept the truth or the facts. That is the only thing that is being twisted and you are trying to portray "The Corporate View" with your Satellite Rhetoric (which is laughable) as it appears the only reading you are doing is from the AT&T Lobbyists (how do you keep up the the constant revisionism?, LOL). Hell, even my Grandmother knows what it means when the Telcos promise to move you from Copper to Fiber and then AT&T(along with its predecessors) run Uverse as good old Copper POTS to the house saying oops, Fiber to the Node is close enough/good enough. The only Telco to keep up with Fiber to the home promise is Verizon. AT&T/SBC/PacBell all lied and mislead the citizens which they continue to do to this very minute. said by Doctor Olds:said by cwh:said by Kushnick :
You really didn't go to the actual documents we linked to.
I have read enough to know you are twisting things to fit your agenda It is quite simple. You cannot accept the truth or the facts. That is the only thing that is being twisted and you are trying to portray "The Corporate View" with your Satellite Rhetoric (which is laughable) as it appears the only reading you are doing is from the AT&T Lobbyists (how do you keep up the the constant revisionism?, LOL). Hell, even my Grandmother knows what it means when the Telcos promise to move you from Copper to Fiber and then AT&T(along with its predecessors) run Uverse as good old Copper POTS to the house saying oops, Fiber to the Node is close enough/good enough. The only Telco to keep up with Fiber to the home promise is Verizon. AT&T/SBC/PacBell all lied and mislead the citizens which they continue to do to this very minute. The only problem is the pronto or lightspeed where never promised to be all fiber networks. Pronto was more fiber and adsl. lightspeed was even more fiber plus vdsl. The revision that is being done is by tella=half-truth. |
|
Doctor OldsI Need A Remedy For What's Ailing Me.Premium,VIP
join:2001-04-19
1970 442 W30
kudos:18 | I'll take tell a Tel a half Truth any time/every time over never tell the truth/never keep a agreement/always empty promise making/non-competition and competition smothering AT&T any day.
AT&T would rather block people from getting broadband in a non-AT&T serviced area, than allow the people to get services that AT&T was never going to supply to the area in the first place and has no investment in the area since it doesn't meet their cherry picked/fields of cash density guidelines for deployment/build out of AT&T and that alone is done to hide/conceal how much of a large area in total that they do not offer coverage in that they want Congress and Investors (how is your stock?  to believe.
--
What’s the point of owning a supercar if you can’t scare yourself stupid from time to time? |
|
