Re: Hmm..... in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r22593441 en Tue, 09 Feb 2010 14:13:02 EDT Tue, 09 Feb 2010 14:13:02 EDT Re: Hmm..... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22604757 anon : This guy is a paid corporate shill. He says what the company wants him to say regardless of whether there's actually any truth to the words coming out of his mouth. He knows it does nothing to prevent competition but his employer has been trying to kill this project (and, ironically, competition) through the court system. Now that they've lost they want to make it look like they were fighting for the "consumers" of Minnesota, not to protect their own profit. This is what lesser corporations do when faced with competition. Instead of making a better product they choose to eliminate the reason to do so.

I can't imagine many jobs that are worse than being a spokesperson. You have to totally disregard your own soul, conscience and integrity while reciting other people's BS to earn your paycheck. Like a wise man once said: "You feel that sting, big boy, huh? That's pride F***IN' with you!"]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22604757 Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:47:42 EDT Re: Hmm..... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22597338 mskittykat : How right you are. It was laughable to read the rep's commentary stating in essence that service with lower costs / addequate service was a bad idea. Maybe for them, considering there's no other competition around.

This is a practice I'd love to see go nationwide as well. In some areas these servies among others; i.e. gas, electric, etc. tend to be all tide up by one provider and they pretty much do as they feel....at the very least push the envelope.
--
"Smart is knowing your ABC's. Intelligent is knowing how to use them."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22597338 Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:03:42 EDT Re: Hmm..... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22593608 espaeth :
said by RARPSL See Profile :

What is being talked about is having the "Last Mile" separate from the Cable Company/ISP itself. The Cable Company/ISP peers at the central point where all the Last Mile runs end up (This is the equivalent of the Central Office/CO for Phones service/Dry Copper runs).
It's not really the same thing because it's a common bus transmission media. The transport media isn't able to be segmented in blocks smaller than the neighborhood level.

If there were tons of open frequency space on the cable lines, maybe this would work, but the MSOs currently have several projects underway to reclaim their own space because they're already bumping up against capacity limitations with the growth of HD, voice, and data services.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22593608 Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:43:24 EDT Re: Hmm..... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22593586 RARPSL :
said by espaeth See Profile :

said by me1212 See Profile :

Competition is what we need, and you are right is IS sad. I say we do local loop undundling, it worked in France and Japan why not here too.
Local loop unbundling only works for private loops like that of the telco infrastructure built out on sub-Cat1 grade cabling.

Unbundling is generally only feasible at the major COs, but that limits the footprint of any data-based service to technologies that can operate with the distance of the CO. As of yet, it is still prohibitively expensive to unbundle remote terminals due to limited / non-existent cabinet space. Companies don't have the money to pour their own pad and get their own utility power to feed a remote terminal to only acquire a handful of customers from the incumbent LEC.

Competition only works if the companies can actually make a profit at the end of the day.
What is being talked about is having the "Last Mile" separate from the Cable Company/ISP itself. The Cable Company/ISP peers at the central point where all the Last Mile runs end up (This is the equivalent of the Central Office/CO for Phones service/Dry Copper runs).]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22593586 Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:38:51 EDT Re: Hmm..... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22593490 openbox9 :
said by insomniac84 See Profile :

said by espaeth See Profile :

Competition only works if the companies can actually make a profit at the end of the day.
Oh they easily make profits.
I believe espaeth See Profile was referring to the CLECs making a profit, which is much more challenging if they actually have to provide a portion of the facilities to include remote terminals and the power to feed them.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22593490 Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:19:35 EDT Re: Hmm..... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22593441 insomniac84 :
said by espaeth See Profile :

Competition only works if the companies can actually make a profit at the end of the day.
Oh they easily make profits. The problem is they want unlimited growth of profits. So once an area is saturated, the only way to grow is to price gouge the customer you have. In duopolies where your competition has the same philosophy, you can raise your prices and they will match you. It's easy to collude when the competition shares your same wants and philosophies. Muni-broadband puts a cap on that really fast. As the goal is steady long term profits and not unlimited profit growth.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22593441 Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:09:31 EDT Re: Hmm..... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22593377 espaeth :
said by me1212 See Profile :

Competition is what we need, and you are right is IS sad. I say we do local loop undundling, it worked in France and Japan why not here too.
Local loop unbundling only works for private loops like that of the telco infrastructure built out on sub-Cat1 grade cabling.

Unbundling is generally only feasible at the major COs, but that limits the footprint of any data-based service to technologies that can operate with the distance of the CO. As of yet, it is still prohibitively expensive to unbundle remote terminals due to limited / non-existent cabinet space. Companies don't have the money to pour their own pad and get their own utility power to feed a remote terminal to only acquire a handful of customers from the incumbent LEC.

Competition only works if the companies can actually make a profit at the end of the day.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22593377 Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:51:00 EDT Re: Hmm..... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22593338 me1212 : That makes it even better.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22593338 Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:43:07 EDT Re: Hmm..... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22593247 RARPSL :
said by me1212 See Profile :

I know they would be going up against the Gov but still.
Since this is funded by private investment not government obligations, they are NOT competing with the government but a private group that the government has asked to do the work. This is the same as when the telco was given exclusive rights to service the town. In my opinion, failure to install fiber when requested makes the telco an non-interested party and makes them ineligible to oppose it in court (ie: When they tried to block it, they should have been ruled as someone who had no right to bring the suit in the first place).]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22593247 Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:22:59 EDT Re: Hmm..... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22593185 me1212 : Competition is what we need, and you are right is IS sad. I say we do local loop undundling, it worked in France and Japan why not here too.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22593185 Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:10:20 EDT Re: Hmm..... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22593076 insomniac84 : They already have a huge advantage. They build a network that sells phone service and cable service. Then sell internet over it without having to pay for a new network.

They will of course be in Minnesota and will compete. It's just sad you have to invest in muni-broadband to force the big players to offer fair prices.

They really need to force these nation wide companies to offer standard prices statewide, or nation wide.

It's absurd that they can offer cheaper prices in areas with competition while somehow justifying the higher price in areas without competition.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22593076 Mon, 22 Jun 2009 18:47:51 EDT Re: Hmm..... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22593009 fatness :
said by me1212 See Profile :

'"The lack of judicial action on the part of the Supreme Court will likely discourage other private enterprises from doing or expanding their business in Minnesota," said Drew Peterson'

Why would it discourage others from expanding there?
I guess he's saying that businesses will avoid having fiber connections, and will purposely seek out areas with less, slower, and/or more costly internet service. ;)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22593009 Mon, 22 Jun 2009 18:32:10 EDT Re: Hmm..... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22592820 Metatron2008 : By 'private enterprises', he means ISPs only, and by 'doing or expanding their business', he means go to where a monopoly is to get easy money.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22592820 Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:55:02 EDT Hmm..... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22592796 me1212 : '"The lack of judicial action on the part of the Supreme Court will likely discourage other private enterprises from doing or expanding their business in Minnesota," said Drew Peterson'

Why would it discourage others from expanding there? I know they would be going up against the Gov but still. All they have to do is offer a better product maybe even lower prices, but it can be done.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22592796 Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:45:46 EDT