dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
447
humulu
join:2013-01-28
San Mateo, CA

humulu

Member

Monopoly?

I want to get Verizon FiOS and kept on contacting them every 6 months or so to check if service became available. Last time I was put in touch with AT&T without telling me that I am being transferred to AT&T (which I don't like). Today I called Verizon and the girl explained me that I have AT&T and therefore Verizon cannot offer me service because only one carrier with the same type of service can be in one area (maybe only one company can lease the same line). She said that leaves me with AT&T for DSL/Fiber and Comcast (cable). Is this really the case? Wouldn't that be a kind of price-fixing issue because one carrier promises not to compete with the other carrier? Or did the girl provide me wrong information and I can hope for Verizon service even if AT&T also provides service in my area?
McBane
join:2008-08-22
Wylie, TX

McBane

Member

Yes, the only way you can get Verizon FiOS is to move to Verizon FiOS territory.
humulu
join:2013-01-28
San Mateo, CA

humulu

Member

Thanks for the reply McBane. I understand I can only get FiOS if I am in a FiOS territory. My question is if the FiOS territory and AT&T territory are mutually exclusive. If so why is this? Is it for technical reasons or did Verizon and AT&T agree not to compete with each other?
humulu

humulu

Member

To add to my previous post, I can see that with DSL there might be interference if there are two providers on the same line. However, with fiber (FiOS, U-verse) I believe there should be no such issue as signals from different carriers just need to be modulated differently. Or is this not correct and if not why?
dfwguy
join:2013-10-24

1 recommendation

dfwguy to humulu

Member

to humulu
It's all history. When AT&T was broken up in the 80s, 7 regional companies were formed (plus 2 more that were only partially AT&T to begin with). 5 of the 9, plus the long-distance component of the original AT&T, make up the current AT&T. 2 others plus GTE, which was the largest non-AT&T company back in the day, are now Verizon. 1 is now part of CenturyLink, and the other is still independent. Each of those companies had exclusivity over their territory in the old days. They more or less still do. It's not anything official that might land them in legal trouble, just economics and a wink and a nod. Competition drives profits down, so why bother? It's not 100% mutually exclusive, but damn close, and only in new developments around here since both companies are active in the region (outside of those developments, no direct competition between them). San Mateo is dead in the middle of PacBell territory with nothing Verizon around until you get to the other end of the state, so there's zero chance of it happening. In fact, less than zero, because Verizon has halted expansion everywhere outside of NYC. Pray for Google Fiber or move.

More Fiber
MVM
join:2005-09-26
Cape Coral, FL

1 recommendation

More Fiber to humulu

MVM

to humulu
said by humulu:

My question is if the FiOS territory and AT&T territory are mutually exclusive. If so why is this?

Telephone companies, cable companies and utility companies, have always been granted monopoly status due to the high cost of installing the infrastructure.

Think about it. Would you want multiple gas mains running to your house, so you could choose which gas company you want to get your gas from? That has changed somewhat with deregulation. In many parts of the company, you can choose who to supplies your gas or electricy, but in your area, PG&E has the sole distribution network.

Telephone service is the same way. You can choose a Compeitive Local Exchange Carrier (CLEC) who provides dial tone, but AT&T still owns the wires running to your house.

eival
join:2008-07-09
Richland, WA

eival to humulu

Member

to humulu
ATT owns the telephone poles in your area. or someone else and is probably asking for more than FIOS thinks it can get in customer fees to overhead the pole maintinence/usage fees to use those telephones (which is also probably where the whole "digging up roads/lawns-to-the-house" thing came from)

i learned about this connundrum back during Sandy when callers were complaining to Mike Francesa every day that the Fios guys couldnt go up and fix their service because x-company owns it and vice versa, which of coarse was a main culprit in why people were without various services for weeks after the hurricane while the teleco/powercompany politics were played
humulu
join:2013-01-28
San Mateo, CA

humulu

Member

Thanks everybody for your responses. I understand the issue of cost of the lines. But the same issue exists with cellular coverage (towers, bands, etc) which is very costly and where carriers have roaming agreements. Obviously, with cellular phones there is a bigger need to cooperate but I was hoping the same would be the case with fiber. Based on eival's response it seem in some areas they might indeed do this but just not mine?
PJL
join:2008-07-24
Long Beach, CA

PJL

Member

said by humulu:

Thanks everybody for your responses. I understand the issue of cost of the lines. But the same issue exists with cellular coverage (towers, bands, etc) which is very costly and where carriers have roaming agreements. Obviously, with cellular phones there is a bigger need to cooperate but I was hoping the same would be the case with fiber. Based on eival's response it seem in some areas they might indeed do this but just not mine?

Most cell tower infrastructure is not owned by the cell companies (as the fiber and copper lines are) -- they're leased space that is often leased to multiple providers -- so you're analogy isn't totally valid. It is rare that the phone companies compete in the same area for land-line service (phone or Internet), and since FiOS is based on land-line infrastructure (central offices, etc.) and AT&T's U-verse uses their land-line infrastructure too, it's highly unlikely you'll see a second company adding the infrastructure to existing areas -- it's just too expensive. It is rare enough for new builds.

The best you might see some day is a Verizon TV service over any broadband provider (meaning true streaming TV like that recently discussed by Verizon).