Reviews:
 ·Comcast
 ·AT&T Southeast
| reply to morbo
Re: Verizon's shame is Fairpoint said by morbo:said by tschmidt:Fail to see how this is Verizon's fault. They took advantage of tax law to reduce cost of the sale. Have no idea if they were instrumental in making a Reverse Morris Trust legal on not. Maybe you should re-read my post. What Verizon did was technically legal. However, despite all indications otherwise, everyone (except somehow Verizon, Fairpoint, and the relevant regulators) knew this was a terrible idea that would end badly. The regulators are the ones that were told over and over it wouldn't end well and they were in control of the process. They were well within their rights to block things but did not, they are solely to blame for this... rest of it was a business transaction. |
|
bac522
join:2003-08-04
Manchester, NH | Bingo...neither Verizon or Fairpoint's fault, but the PUC's of all three states. At the end of the day the land-line business is still a regulated monopoly and the PUC's could have squashed this deal...but I'm sure Verizon pulled some back-room handshakes with PUC members and thus the deal was approved. Why none of the legislators in the 3 states have called for hearings into the members of each state's PUC's is baffling to say the least! |
|
 tschmidtPremium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
kudos:5
·Fairpoint Commun..
 ·Hollis Hosting
| said by bac522:Bingo...neither Verizon or Fairpoint's fault, but the PUC's of all three states. The issue was never the landline business it was expanding broadband services. It was clear Verizon had no interest in doing that. FairPoint argued, as a smaller Telco with a rural background, it was willing to accept lower profit margin.
What exactly do you think regulators should have done?
/tom |
|
Reviews:
·Comcast
·AT&T Southeast
| said by tschmidt:said by bac522:Bingo...neither Verizon or Fairpoint's fault, but the PUC's of all three states. The issue was never the landline business it was expanding broadband services. It was clear Verizon had no interest in doing that. FairPoint argued, as a smaller Telco with a rural background, it was willing to accept lower profit margin. What exactly do you think regulators should have done? /tom At the very least added the stipulation to use Verizon's software instead of having India develop new software. They also should have looked at the fact FP was a incredibly small entity with no track record to say they could handle this kind of load and imagine that... they can't handle it. |
|
 tim_kButtons, Bows, Beamer, Shadow, KaseyPremium,VIP
join:2002-02-02
Stewartstown, PA
kudos:13 | reply to tschmidt
said by tschmidt:What exactly do you think regulators should have done? /tom In recent years government regulators aren't any better than the fox guarding the hen house. They are so much in bed with the industries they are suppose to be keeping an eye on that the corruption is blatant. Yet you'll never see any prosecutions of government or business officials.
--
RIP my babies Buttons 1/15/94-2/9/07, Beamer 7/24/08, & Bows 12/17/94-10/11/09 |
|
