Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | reply to Karl Bode
Re: Customers, not just investors have problems with higher cost said by Karl Bode:.and it's not like FTTH upgrades don't allow for carriers to offer slower value tiers. And offering lower price plans don't lower the costs of upgrading to fiber - all that does is lower income to cover the costs. |
|
| There's a million ways to make money in this market, from value added services to DNS redirection ads, And it's not like prices are SO DAMN LOW RIGHT NOW that companies can't afford to upgrade. I still don't see your point. |
|
| said by Karl Bode:There's a million ways to make money in this market, from value added services to DNS redirection ads, And it's not like prices are SO DAMN LOW RIGHT NOW that companies can't afford to upgrade. I still don't see your point. What we need are regulations that increase the cost of providing copper based broadband solutions to push incumbents towards building out fiber. If the plan had put major taxes on copper and offset those taxes with subsidies for fiber, you might see AT&T and Verizon announcing new plans for fiber expansion to their customers. |
|
| Hey, that's a good idea! Of course, you will get flack from those who will call it 'social engineering/socialism', but most of those types are heavily invested in the status quo, so those opinions are worthless. Not to mention the 'any taxes are bad' crowd, most of who's leaders fall under the previous category. |
|
| reply to sonicmerlin
Sounds like a great idea (in theory)! However, I'm sure Verizon and AT&T would be thrilled to build their fiber networks on the backs of the customers of already struggling companies like Qwest, Frontier, and Fairpoint. A plan like that would be sure to speed up their demise and give the cable companies a monopoly in those areas.... Furthermore, you'd have tons of people on this site crying foul over AT&T and Verizon getting even more tax breaks. The government should be finding ways to encourage competition, not picking winners and losers.  |
|
| I don't like the idea of giving Verizon and AT&T any more money, but in this age of centrist Democrats and wing-nut Republicans, it's a compromise to speed up FTTH adoption. Once the fiber's been built out you can start worrying about regulating the monopolies. |
|
|
|
| reply to lakerfan82
said by lakerfan82:Sounds like a great idea (in theory)! However, I'm sure Verizon and AT&T would be thrilled to build their fiber networks on the backs of the customers of already struggling companies like Qwest, Frontier, and Fairpoint. A plan like that would be sure to speed up their demise and give the cable companies a monopoly in those areas.... Furthermore, you'd have tons of people on this site crying foul over AT&T and Verizon getting even more tax breaks. The government should be finding ways to encourage competition, not picking winners and losers. Just to nit pick a little, Qwest would probably be included with Verizon and at&t in this area, as they are still the 3rd largest pots provider, still an RBOC, and a very large isp. It is also no longer seen as struggling (check out the share price and history). As for encouraging competition, I sure would like to hear your ideas. |
|
| reply to sonicmerlin
I disagree, if you take care of the competition problem, the speed problem will take care of itself. Why? Well, if there's enough competition, companies that don't keep up will get left behind. Right now, there isn't much competition, so these companies don't really have to keep up with anybody! We can probably debate all the live long day on how to encourage competition, but in reality this would create better speeds. |
|
| reply to viperlmw
said by viperlmw:Just to nit pick a little, Qwest would probably be included with Verizon and at&t in this area, as they are still the 3rd largest pots provider, still an RBOC, and a very large isp. It is also no longer seen as struggling (check out the share price and history). As for encouraging competition, I sure would like to hear your ideas. I guess that would depend on whether or not a massive tax is levied on their entire network. Qwest's biggest problem is, they don't have a wireless network to help offset their dying landline business. As far as encouraging competition, I won't dare suggest that I am any sort of expert in this industry. I think while most of the damage has already been done, not allowing additional ISP mergers would be a great start. Some have suggested breaking up last mile ISPs from backbone providers, so you don't have a situation where a company like Time Warner or a new entrant is dependent on internet backbones from an incumbent competitor like Verizon or AT&T...Whats the biggest reason for the lack of competition? Cost to start up a new network is huge, so we've got to find ways to lower this cost in order to create competition... |
|
| reply to lakerfan82
said by lakerfan82:Well, if there's enough competition, companies that don't keep up will get left behind. What keeps you from getting to a point where only two companies haven't been left behind? |
|
| Maybe you should ask car makers, cell phone makers, computer makers, or any body else in an industry that has healthy competition! Its not truly healthy competition if its so easy to get to a point where there are only 1 or 2 companies... |
|
