XBL2009
------
join:2001-01-03
Chicago, IL |  When will we get real broadband at prices we can afford?
I want to wake up one morning and read that at&t and Comcast have gone bankrupt. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
2 edits | said by XBL2009  :When will we get real broadband at prices we can afford? I want to wake up one morning and read that at&t and Comcast have gone bankrupt. And exactly how will that get you broadband you can afford?
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
XBL2009
------
join:2001-01-03
Chicago, IL
 ·AT&T Midwest
| said by TKJunkMail :said by XBL2009 :When will we get real broadband at prices we can afford? I want to wake up one morning and read that at&t and Comcast have gone bankrupt. And exactly how will that get you broadband you can afford? If there was a real competitor to cable and telephone neither at&t or Comcast could get away with the price that they charge. Those fat profits that they are hording now would disappear.
Imagine 100mbps for $25 instead of $155!!!!
--
Capitalism is competition, if you don't have competition then you don't have capitalism.
Rush Limbaugh is the cliff clavin of the republican party.
|
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| said by XBL2009 :said by TKJunkMail :said by XBL2009 :When will we get real broadband at prices we can afford? I want to wake up one morning and read that at&t and Comcast have gone bankrupt. And exactly how will that get you broadband you can afford? If there was a real competitor to cable and telephone neither at&t or Comcast could get away with the price that they charge. Those fat profits that they are hording now would disappear. Imagine 100mbps for $25 instead of $155!!!! But that doesn't answer the question on how AT&T & Comcast going bankrupt will bring more competition.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL
·Comcast
| reply to XBL2009
said by XBL2009 :I want to wake up one morning and read that at&t and Comcast have gone bankrupt. That will only exacerbate current problems. However, since a significant number of the megacarriers have proven that they neglect forecasts about growth, maybe it's time to regulate broadband as a utility which would serve several purposes.
1) the neccesity for raises in rates could be verified through an independant PUC type of body. At a time when the delivery of broadband is dropping, carriers could even be doing upgrades with prices remaining stagnant.
2) define the implementation or size of a cap as cost to also be verified through the regulatory body.
Smaller ISPs could even get help via the gov to bring them to par if the gov were to set the bar too high.
Now, I'm not a big fan of gov jamming regulations down businesses throats. But alot of these companies left on their own gouge worse than any oil company could ever imagine. And if nobody tolerates oil companies gouging, then why is TW gouging acceptable?
These are ideas that alot of you won't like, so if you've got better I'm all ears.
--
BF69~~~Please stop suffocating gerbils! |
|
winsyrstrife
River City Bounce
Premium
join:2002-04-30
Brooklyn, NY
clubs:
| reply to TKJunkMail
It might for a short time. Some local competitors which have been strongarmed by AT&T / Comcast may be able to provide profitable services once those entities are gone.
More likely than not, however, they would also begin raising prices at an abnormal rate, once they've settled into their role as the primary game in town.
Meet the new boss. 
--
"Suddenly everything is fainting, falling from a broken ladder's rung. There's a jolt exhilarating from the phone I'm holding...I hear the words of what I'll become, how eager the hands that reach for love." - Blind Melon - New Life |
|
markofmayhem
join:2004-04-08
Pittsburgh, PA
| reply to S_engineer
I have always, always been against government intervention of commodities. I still see broadband as a commodity, but my view on its delivery has changed very much over the last decade. I actually agree that information deliery should be a utility. I am quickly agreeing that the government should pay for, instal, and maintain a FTTH network that private corporations can sell products "on". I agreed with the notion in the '40's and '50's that public funds should promote and up-keep a national road system for the flow of goods to promote capitalism. I believe the "internet" should be our generation's Eisenhower Interstate. |
|
XBL2009
------
join:2001-01-03
Chicago, IL | reply to XBL2009
Going bankrupt doesn't always mean you go out of business.
It just means you don't get to roll around in obscene profits while refusing to upgrade your lousy over priced service. |
|
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL
·Comcast
| reply to markofmayhem
said by markofmayhem :I have always, always been against government intervention of commodities. I still see broadband as a commodity, but my view on its delivery has changed very much over the last decade. I actually agree that information deliery should be a utility. I am quickly agreeing that the government should pay for, instal, and maintain a FTTH network that private corporations can sell products "on". I agreed with the notion in the '40's and '50's that public funds should promote and up-keep a national road system for the flow of goods to promote capitalism. I believe the "internet" should be our generation's Eisenhower Interstate. Eisenhowers interstate was'nt built for the convienence of drivers though. That capitol development had a dual purpose. It was a way to move troops throughout the US in case of Soviet attack. You have to remember the paranoia of the 50's was a staple in gov before the MAD mentality took hold.
Currently, your idea could be viewed as an investment in the future of our economy, which is equally important.
--
BF69~~~Please stop suffocating gerbils! |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | reply to markofmayhem
Could you elaborate on that more? Like do you mean comcast verizon and tw could all offer tv over said FTTH and the costumer could choose which one has the best package(s) for them, same with ISPs and VoIP companies? |
|
major marco
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA
clubs:
1 edit | reply to XBL2009
said by XBL2009 :I want to wake up one morning and read that at&t and Comcast have gone bankrupt. Actually, I'd like to see the kind of competition there was among ISPs back during the dial up days -remember when anyone with half a brain could become an ISP- Those were the days when there was true competition. So much so that it forced providers such as AOhell to modify its screw-you-by-the-minute business model to flat rate pricing. Now (assuming you live in a duopoly market) it comes down to a choice between cable providers such as Comcrap that are out to screw over consumers by hook or by crook, and telcos like the Death Star that cry poverty while surrendering your private data to Big Brother.
--
The Toll
Tracking Lord Stanley
|
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | It would be nice to have that kinda competition again. |
|
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL
·Comcast
| reply to me1212
I don't know if he meant FTTH, or the idea of splitting the nations telecom infrastructure in 2 that some one suggested yesterday in here. One would be a physical plant possibly owned by gov which would in turn lease the lines to competitors giving everyone the same footing.
There are numerous conflicting laws and practices that would have to be addressed as well laws intervening into private property. However, I think it's becoming apparent to many that the status quo is rapidly becoming unacceptable.
Any dialogue in this respect is good because now it seems these stories are becomming mainstream, not just here at BBR
--
BF69~~~Please stop suffocating gerbils! |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | He said: "I am quickly agreeing that the government should pay for, instal, and maintain a FTTH network" |
|
bn1221
join:2009-04-29
Cortland, NY
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to S_engineer
Eisenhowers interstate:
Also had the purpose of Air Force bomber landing runways. One mile in every 5 had to be perfectly straight. Essentially they made 5 mile chunks of straight and the other 20 (of a 25 mile segment) were allowed to be more curvy. 5 mile runway will handle a B52 |
|
