dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
12
share rss forum feed


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
reply to Nightfall

Re: A sad reality

said by Nightfall:

Open access? It exists already.
Ha. Seriously. Ha.
1. The government takes over and deploys it like they did in Japan and Korea. They also run the broadband infrastructure as well, which I am sure will bring many people to smile here (/sarcasm).
Japan and Korean Government's didn't "take over" and deploy it. Actually the Governments had been getting out of ownership of Telecom, like Nippon, which had been Government owned until 1985. What actually happened is they allowed what we call line sharing: Other companies could start up and access the existing telecommunications network to sell service to consumers.

The Governments made competition and more open access the priority, and enforced it.

2. The conglomerates like AT&T and Comcast stop worrying about the cost and just start deploying to everyone. They will of course take a huge hit financially, and the stockholders will hate them for it, but they will make it.
This is where competition would be a good thing. If the incumbents had to allow access to consumer's homes they've be driven by competition to build out better faster networks to compete. They all would. We'd get more speed, less restrictions, and price competition.
Neither of these things are likely to happen anytime soon.
Well here's where I'd have to agree. If ever, it seems.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini


Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
Reviews:
·ooma
·Comcast
·Callcentric
·Site5.com

said by KrK:

said by Nightfall:

Open access? It exists already.
Ha. Seriously. Ha.
1. The government takes over and deploys it like they did in Japan and Korea. They also run the broadband infrastructure as well, which I am sure will bring many people to smile here (/sarcasm).
Japan and Korean Government's didn't "take over" and deploy it. Actually the Governments had been getting out of ownership of Telecom, like Nippon, which had been Government owned until 1985. What actually happened is they allowed what we call line sharing: Other companies could start up and access the existing telecommunications network to sell service to consumers.

The Governments made competition and more open access the priority, and enforced it.

2. The conglomerates like AT&T and Comcast stop worrying about the cost and just start deploying to everyone. They will of course take a huge hit financially, and the stockholders will hate them for it, but they will make it.
This is where competition would be a good thing. If the incumbents had to allow access to consumer's homes they've be driven by competition to build out better faster networks to compete. They all would. We'd get more speed, less restrictions, and price competition.
Neither of these things are likely to happen anytime soon.
Well here's where I'd have to agree. If ever, it seems.
Heck, open access is available now. Let me put it this way. The days of proprietary agreements are done. Today, in most major cities, any company can come in and lay the foundation for broadband. I think that you should say "Ha! Right" to my statement of less roadblocks because if there is any problem with the system, its the roadblocks getting in. Those can take months to hurdle.

The government still started the broadband deployment in Japan and Korea. They are trying to get out now that the foundation has been laid because of various reasons. You are right about one thing though, the government made competition and open access a priority, but not before they laid the backbone.

Competition won't matter when it comes to deployment. A rural area is a rural area. No company is going to take a loss to deploy broadband to reach 10 houses in a farming community where only 2-3 will subscribe. Now in a major city I do agree that competition would be a good thing. This kind of thing is slowly becoming a reality with Uverse and FIOS. In time, there will be many competing broadband companies in major cities. The rural areas will take time to get that level of competition. Most likely, a single company will deploy to certain rural areas and get stuck with the loss.
--
My domain - Nightfall.net


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

1 recommendation

I think you and I are referring to something different when we same "open access."

When I say it, I mean like this: Access to the consumer's residence via the existing grid. (For a fair price.)
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini


sonicmerlin

join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
kudos:1
reply to Nightfall

said by Nightfall:

said by KrK:

said by Nightfall:

Open access? It exists already.
Ha. Seriously. Ha.
1. The government takes over and deploys it like they did in Japan and Korea. They also run the broadband infrastructure as well, which I am sure will bring many people to smile here (/sarcasm).
Japan and Korean Government's didn't "take over" and deploy it. Actually the Governments had been getting out of ownership of Telecom, like Nippon, which had been Government owned until 1985. What actually happened is they allowed what we call line sharing: Other companies could start up and access the existing telecommunications network to sell service to consumers.

The Governments made competition and more open access the priority, and enforced it.

2. The conglomerates like AT&T and Comcast stop worrying about the cost and just start deploying to everyone. They will of course take a huge hit financially, and the stockholders will hate them for it, but they will make it.
This is where competition would be a good thing. If the incumbents had to allow access to consumer's homes they've be driven by competition to build out better faster networks to compete. They all would. We'd get more speed, less restrictions, and price competition.
Neither of these things are likely to happen anytime soon.
Well here's where I'd have to agree. If ever, it seems.
Heck, open access is available now. Let me put it this way. The days of proprietary agreements are done. Today, in most major cities, any company can come in and lay the foundation for broadband. I think that you should say "Ha! Right" to my statement of less roadblocks because if there is any problem with the system, its the roadblocks getting in. Those can take months to hurdle.

The government still started the broadband deployment in Japan and Korea. They are trying to get out now that the foundation has been laid because of various reasons. You are right about one thing though, the government made competition and open access a priority, but not before they laid the backbone.

Competition won't matter when it comes to deployment. A rural area is a rural area. No company is going to take a loss to deploy broadband to reach 10 houses in a farming community where only 2-3 will subscribe. Now in a major city I do agree that competition would be a good thing. This kind of thing is slowly becoming a reality with Uverse and FIOS. In time, there will be many competing broadband companies in major cities. The rural areas will take time to get that level of competition. Most likely, a single company will deploy to certain rural areas and get stuck with the loss.
You don't know anything about broadband deployment in Japan. The fact that you don't even know what "open access" is just destroys your credibility. Please talk less and read more.