4 edits | Why not wait for gov't to pay them or use gov't fiber? The mgt at Verizon would be financially negligent to their stockholders if they continued to pour billions in to expanding fiber infrastructure if it looks like the gov't is going to do 1 of 2 things anyway.
One is GIVE the company billions to finish the buildout and all funded by an increase in the USF and a redirection of USF funds to broadband, which is already in the FCC Broadband Plan.
Two is the gov't(federal & state/local) may initiate fiber buildout on its own hook and expense and then lease access to the fiber to any and all ISPs.
In either of those possible/probable scenarios, Verizon can gain high speed access to customers without borrowing money or getting it from shareholders. The Board of Directors and the shareholders should promptly fire any CEO not taking advantage of these probable gov't handouts.
So, in the meantime, Verizon pauses to see what the feds are going to do with the Broadband Plan. What it will implement and what it won't. If the feds want private companies to invest in fiber, then they need to make it clear very soon that they will not be doing either of the 2 scenarios I listed above and that the cable & telcos are on their own.
--
NCAA® March Madness on Demand® |
|
 en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | I suspect that they're calling corporate poverty, and wanting some of that federal stimulus money... but without strings.
I kind of suspected that something like this might happen on FiOS if the funding dried up. Uverse is a cheaper to deploy (quickly) technology (faster returns for Wall Street), but will need continuous upgrades, while FiOS wouldn't. Too bad for FiOS.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
1 edit | reply to fAcEtIOUs
Why should any company attempt to reinvest in their future when they can just wait for some kind of "bailout".
The government should not be giving any of these duopoly or monopoly companies a dime. What they should be doing is giving them a drop dead date until they forfeit the networks to someone that can and will invest in the infrastructure. |
|
|
|
2 edits | Like I already said above:
If the feds want private companies to invest in fiber, then they need to make it clear very soon that they will not be doing either of the 2 scenarios I listed above and that the cable & telcos are on their own. --
NCAA® March Madness on Demand® |
|
 EGeezerSummertimePremium
join:2002-08-04
Midwest
kudos:7
 ·Callcentric
1 edit | reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:The mgt at Verizon would be financially negligent to their stockholders if they continued to pour billions in to expanding fiber infrastructure if it looks like the gov't is going to do 1 of 2 things ... One is GIVE the company billions to finish the buildout and all funded by an increase in the USF and a redirection of USF funds to broadband ... Two is the gov't(federal & state/local) may initiate fiber buildout on its own hook and expense and then lease access to the fiber to any and all ISPs. I like #2. We've already given "Universal Service" Funds to these dolts and they are clearly failing to implement Universal Service.
However Verizon and others will fight tooth an nail to prevent local governments from building out their own infrastructure with their own private and public money. They want the government handouts and monopoly power in small markets, even if they don't intend to service them.
--
The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding. -- Justice Louis D. Brandeis |
|
