Sonic.Net CEO: Caps & Limits 'Artificial and Contrived' → Hypocrisy?

So once again, DSLR celebrates the "small businessman" who speaks out against the large cap broadband industry.

How convenient is it that the gentleman can rail against (mostly unenforced) caps, while he finds it perfectly acceptable to force bundling on his customers and adding a not-very-optional modem rental fee, citing industry standard practices.

Meanwhile, he is also celebrated for $70 Fiber that isn't available to anyone, but all other firms are denounced for "Fiber to the press release".

Where is this internet video that he speaks of, that will compete directly with the cable industry he's assailing? After all, he doesn't impose caps to protect it, so where is it? Why is he only offering bogus Directv bundles that require monthly rebate compliance?

When will DSLR and their anti-corporate allies in the press ever hold Sonic to the same standard they apply to the rest of the industry?

I think it would be more interesting for you to to explain why you defend the large corporations so regularly and consistently? Why you attack the consumer and customer's side, and go after a company when they do something that is consumer friendly? Attack DSLR and the press for daring to oppose big telecom? All very interesting what the background really is.

Well I hate to poke you in the eye, especially after KrK did, but the fact that a "small businessman" can say it is not warranted and speed does not have any relation to cost is pretty much a kick in the virtual cookies of the big guys.

Before you attempt to argue their size makes it not so I will simply say that whether you have 100 or 100,000 subscribers you are scaling your network the same way. So yes in actual dollars it cost more, but in relation to the cost per user it is probably actually less because of the economies of scale.

Didn't you make the very same post in one of the other threads that celebrated Sonic.net?

And didn't someone already correct you back there that the modem fee is, in fact, optional?

So true. The sonic.net web site is full of posts complaining about "where is the much promised fiber?". Sonic just resells telco DSL for the most part.

I won't defend any firm, large or small, if they do something wrong. But here they are routinely assailed for doing ... business, and offering up goods that consumers covet.

I support DSLR and its minions when they expose that which is actually evil - or questionable and eligible for meaningful discussion and debate, but far too often we see only wishful headlining and opinion in lieu of factual reporting.

I'm a Sonic customer, have been for a long time, and continue to recommend them where it makes sense, but they get way too much credit for making noise, rather than actually delivering a competitive product.

As a private company, they have no obligation to divulge the number of fiber subscribers, but if you look at the published map, it isn't hard to count the maximum potential number. There is no "there" there.

It is optional for those who can so determine, after the fact, but you won't find Dane disclosing that, nor his sales people, nor on the application page.

I do celebrate Sonic, for what it is, not what it isn't.

A... the privilege of a business owner manager who is free to run his business as he (and his investors) see fit.

Just as Comcast, Verizon, google, at&t and every other business tries to do.
Sonic has and keeps find it's niches some fiber and some DSL, but we have yet to see them roll out a really large city/county edge to edge the way that comcast and other cablecos usually do.
So It may be fine service, IF you happen to live in the few areas they choose to selectively cover.

What works for him in those markets may not apply on the mega scale.

Right.... Keep trying to minimize it because you have no other option and can't counter the argument.

and DSLR should also mention that DSLX is one of the "small businesses" that add BELOW the line fees in forms of USF as they claim they're charged that by AT&T when in fact not being true.

and with Sonic's fiber network- one could argue they do in fact cherry pick as it is only in very select neighbors but uses the ROW and not private rights.

Isn't this the network they took over vs one they built from the ground up?

and that would be relevant why? keep digging .

Ah yes, the no true Scotsman argument. Given that Comcast, Verizon, and l the other major telcos have all been extremely profitable for the past decade and longer, *and* their capex has been dropping for years, would you please explain why sonic.net's small scale operations don't apply to these giants?

If you don't have to pay to build it your costs are much lower which in turn allows you to offer your product at a much lower price.

Uh, source?

But the fiber is their own. They're able to profitably offer their current speeds and pricing on their own fiber network.

For one sonic probably does not have to support 250,000 employees world wide. Sonic is much leaner which gives them the advantage. If Sonic grew to Comcast or AT&T's size they would have similar problems.

Growth can be a blessing and a curse for a company.

As I said Sonic as an overbuilder can/has been VERY selective with their offerings, even more so with fiber, where the giant's/incumbents with area wide franchises have no such luxury once they agree to build they are on the clock to cover every street with HFC only generally paying premium pole fees, row fees, franchise fees, sometime providing "free" service to cities and schools, even building/operating public access TV studios and channels for many locations.
Has Sonic done that ANYWHERE? Not that I am aware of.
Be profitable is what companies are supposed to do.
extremely is a subjective matter, perhaps Sonic is an under performing company?
As I said, different companies, different markets, different management approaches.
Your affection for one doesn't make the other wrong.

Indeed. The $2.88 "SSR" fee is absolutely shameful and should be denounced.

DSLX's first-year pricing, for VZ dry loop where/if you can get it, is quite decent. Can't say the same for the company, their customer service, tech support or billing.

To their credit, DSLX doesn't impose a modem fee, just a one-time charge.

Sonic is promising to upgrade their DSLAMs to VDSL2, which will make Fusion somewhat competitive for those in the first mile of copper, but who knows how many years that will take, and one wonders whether the upgrade will extend to DSLX circuits.

Growing that big gives you massive advantages. You get huge discounts on hardware purchases, labor costs, department redundancies, etc.