dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
6
share rss forum feed


septcasey

join:2006-09-07
United State
reply to dingo4

Re: [Availability] 10 years later, still no DSL from AT&T availa

said by dingo4:

If the company upgrades the facilities at their expense, what guarantee is there you and your neighbors won't switch to a reseller/unbundler leaving AT&T with the investment but little return? None, and that's why you'll not see it any time soon. Ain't gonna happen because there is no probable return on a substantial investment. Not unfair at all, the cost of the upgrades will be passed on to the rest of AT&T's customers if they get no return there. I am not interested in subsidizing anyone's facility upgrades. Many people switch Internet providers at the drop of a hat to save some $$$. Don't expect companies to be any more loyal than their customers are to them.

Ok this is just conjured complication to a simple cause. The idea of growth and opportunity to the vacant areas of America is the first thing that should be considered. First things first in DSL in these areas is that it does not exist. So first, you have to get it there. If AT&T is worried someone will come along and take their customers then that is just nonsense. Any new DSL providers will know that everyone in the area is with AT&T, which is an extremely large and well known business. Thinking that a smaller entity can so easily come along and take customers to their service is pessimistic in this situation.

dingo4
Premium
join:2009-02-08
kudos:1

said by septcasey:

said by dingo4:

If the company upgrades the facilities at their expense, what guarantee is there you and your neighbors won't switch to a reseller/unbundler leaving AT&T with the investment but little return? None, and that's why you'll not see it any time soon. Ain't gonna happen because there is no probable return on a substantial investment. Not unfair at all, the cost of the upgrades will be passed on to the rest of AT&T's customers if they get no return there. I am not interested in subsidizing anyone's facility upgrades. Many people switch Internet providers at the drop of a hat to save some $$$. Don't expect companies to be any more loyal than their customers are to them.

Ok this is just conjured complication to a simple cause. The idea of growth and opportunity to the vacant areas of America is the first thing that should be considered. First things first in DSL in these areas is that it does not exist. So first, you have to get it there. If AT&T is worried someone will come along and take their customers then that is just nonsense. Any new DSL providers will know that everyone in the area is with AT&T, which is an extremely large and well known business. Thinking that a smaller entity can so easily come along and take customers to their service is pessimistic in this situation.

I am sympathetic to your plight, but.....

It's not pessimistic, it's reality. It costs many thousands of dollars in plant and labor to upgrade facilities. Permits, contractors, engineers,techs, cable in some cases and equipment.
Resellers/Unbundlers move in and under cut price (because they have zero $$ invested in the facility upgrade and lease the loop at a cut rate, but AT&T still has to maintain it) and folks switch. I am not being pessimistic-you are being naive. It happens. I see it every day-every day.
Why not call some CLECS and see if they'll run some fiber out by you. Or you could pay to have the necessary upgrades done. No, you want the benifits of living in a rural area without the drawbacks.
Don't compare thge power grid to DSL. One is a necessity, one is not. AT&T has hundreds of thousands of customers like you who can not get DSL. When the market warrants an upgrade, it will get done. Until then, there's always satellite.
--

If people realized what was really important, there would be a shortage of fishing poles.