| reply to ArgMeMatey
Re: Ready for the chainsaw-and-brick-wall approach yet? Long distance and business customers paid premium rates. Residential customers paid barely what it cost. If even that.
The gov't took away all the cash cows that subsidized build-outs and now wonders why no one wants to set down any more plant. |
|
Reviews:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·AT&T Midwest
 ·voip.ms
·MyPhoneCompany
| said by bogey780:Long distance and business customers paid premium rates. Residential customers paid barely what it cost. If even that. The gov't took away all the cash cows that subsidized build-outs and now wonders why no one wants to set down any more plant. OK, so the "government" should "put back" some cash cows to help ILECs continue an outmoded business model?
Turn the wire center into a bidding center. If everybody is going for wireless, just let the last mile die.
If wired can't stand on its own in a capitalist system, it needs to be nationalized or at least be subsidized additionally by public policy (althought it already gets plenty of favorable tax treatment) that encourages equal access.
--
USNG:
16TDN2870
Find your Lat-Long:
Geocoder |
|
| I like your thinking. Regulate it till it's unprofitable then nationalize it. Blame the failings on it's inability to compete in a "fair" market.
You'll be the top commissar with ideas like that. |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·AT&T Midwest
·voip.ms
·MyPhoneCompany
| said by bogey780:Regulate it till it's unprofitable then nationalize it. Blame the failings on it's inability to compete in a "fair" market. I didn't say anything about regulating it, outside of putting a wall between service providers and OSP owner-operators. Just saying that there's no way a company that's a service provider can be expected to give equal access to its competitors.
If the OSP is split off, all service providers negotiate with the OSP company for the best lease rates. Telecom OSP can operate as a private coop, a sanctioned monopoly, or in competition with other OSP providers such as HFC networks.
They charge rates that support the true costs. If they can't compete with other last-mile providers, they die.
What's wrong with that, comrade? 
--
USNG:
16TDN2870
Find your Lat-Long:
Geocoder |
|
| 'Just saying that there's no way a company that's a service provider can be expected to give equal access to its competitors.'
Saying they need to is regulating it.
"The Market" and "Evolution" are grossly misunderstood by many Americans it seems. They don't produce what is "best" in the generalized sense of the word. They sustain themselves and whatever sustains itself "wins". Right now with the current regulation, the market sustains itself best with conservative infrastructure build-outs with high recoup costs. That's why you're not seeing people rolling out fiber to every man, woman, and child. It's a matter of profitability. And despite what some economists thought during the 90s, there's no such thing as a "New Economy".
Saying we'd all have super fast broadband really cheap if we just had the right regulation in place is like saying we'd have free energy if we wished really hard. |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·AT&T Midwest
·voip.ms
·MyPhoneCompany
| said by bogey780:'Just saying that there's no way a company that's a service provider can be expected to give equal access to its competitors.' Saying they need to is regulating it. ... Saying we'd all have super fast broadband really cheap if we just had the right regulation in place is like saying we'd have free energy if we wished really hard. Fair enough. That much I can agree with. It probably does cost more than most people think, but because it's a nickel here and a dime there, we don't notice.
My point is not that anyone should be regulated out of existence, or that companies shouldn't have profits, but that it's a better system for consumers if we know what we're paying, who we're paying, and why. People who aren't willing to pay don't get to play, however.
--
USNG:
16TDN2870
Find your Lat-Long:
Geocoder |
|
|
|
