pb2k
join:2005-05-30
Calgary, AB
kudos:1 | Networks cost money to build... I don't know how things are setup in the east, but in telus land, (as far as I can tell) the competitive ISPs have to lay out cash for little more than a regional POP and then everything else (edge router, aggregator, fiber, dslam, local loop) all belong to telus. I can certainly see why the large ISPs are irritated about spending tens of billions to build a network only to have some tiny company come along and expect to use it for a pittance. |
|
| Correction the Canadian taxpayers paid for Bell's network and infrastructure. |
|
| said by Chuck Carlso :
Correction the Canadian taxpayers paid for Bell's network and infrastructure. Taxpayers subsidized the ubiquitous and affordable phone service for all as a mandated essential service long before the IP protocol's inception. Very little of the infrastructure from those days would be usable to deliver xDSL; nearly everything had to be rebuilt over the past 15 years specifically for that and completely off Bell's own dime. |
|
| said by InvalidError:said by Chuck Carlso :
Correction the Canadian taxpayers paid for Bell's network and infrastructure. Taxpayers subsidized the ubiquitous and affordable phone service for all as a mandated essential service long before the IP protocol's inception. Very little of the infrastructure from those days would be usable to deliver xDSL; nearly everything had to be rebuilt over the past 15 years specifically for that and completely off Bell's own dime. However, Bell's dime was generated using infrastructure that was subsidized by our pennies. Without our pennis, Bell might only have a nickel at this point. |
|
| said by Chynkinese:However, Bell's dime was generated using infrastructure that was subsidized by our pennies. Without our pennis, Bell might only have a nickel at this point. And half of Canada would not have affordable phone service or would have gotten it several decades later, much like how many remote areas are paying 2-5X the price for 2-10X slower and much less reliable broadband service than urban areas today... some do not even have any viable broadband options at all.
The POTS subsidies came with the obligation to serve rural/remote areas with the same or similar phone service and pricing available in urban areas. Urban areas were always profitable so that part of the telcos' network never needed subsidizing. |
|
