OpTiC Premium Member join:2014-03-08 West Covina, CA |
to McBane
Re: Rumor: Verizon Selling Off FL, CA, TX Fixed line Networks?said by McBane:Century Link has no experience with FiOS. As we've seen with Frontier, the smaller the pool of TV customers you have the higher the prices you'll be forced to pay. It's better for Frontier and everyone not already on Verizon to remain together for cheaper TV rates. This gives Frontier a lot more clout in contract negotiations. True but Frontier will lower upload speeds. I know as a fact that CL will maintain the upload speed and have a option with the same plan with a lower upload speed. Unlike most isp Century Link let you pick the upload of your choice for example you can get 40/5 or 40/20. But Century Link cares about broadband unlike Frontier and CL can handle the load in the bigger cities like LA or Dallas. |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 4:09 pm · (locked) |
|
Zenit_IIfxThe system is the solution Premium Member join:2012-05-07 Purcellville, VA
1 recommendation |
There is no point to discuss CL anymore as the deal is done...CL is not getting whats left of GTE, FTR is.
It is what it is. |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 4:18 pm · (locked) |
|
to pittpete1
Some have commented that Frontier is still installing new copper lines in select areas that are brand new service areas like new developments. This makes no sense. |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 4:25 pm · (locked) |
Zenit_IIfxThe system is the solution Premium Member join:2012-05-07 Purcellville, VA ·Comcast XFINITY
|
Its down to the local management as I said earlier. Frontier is very compartmentalized so each local manager generally gets to make those decisions on his own. I assume the guy in charge of the Charles Town region in WV is old fashioned and does not believe in FTTH (which is stupid).
So in one area FTR could be run by an absolute curmudgeon, while another district could be run by someone with more common sense. |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 4:37 pm · (locked) |
|
said by Zenit_IIfx:So in one area FTR could be run by an absolute curmudgeon, while another district could be run by someone with more common sense. Sure does sound like the centralized executive manglement that are supposed to be in charge of coordinating things to streamline processes which also would reduce costs are NOT able or unwilling to do their job. |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 5:00 pm · (locked) |
Zenit_IIfxThe system is the solution Premium Member join:2012-05-07 Purcellville, VA ·Comcast XFINITY
|
I agree with you, strong central leadership with vision is critical to success. But it can also be detrimental if said leadership wants to destroy a division of the company (ahem).
FTR's structure is screwy due to the way they grew - acquisitions and mergers over the years, from rinky dink all the way up to being a giant. FTR management probably feels its best to leave local matters with local people, and while this does make a lot of sense on many levels leaving future engineering choices entirely in the hands of potentially incompetent locals is not exactly a good idea.
Contel back in the day grew in a similar manner - buying up small independent telephone companies that were failing financially on their own very quickly, the company exponentially grew in the 60's becoming the fastest growing telephone company in the USA. Only Contel enforced its own standards that were sort of like a knock-off of the Bell System Practices to ensure some standardization of plant and service.
Right now its hard to tell what FTR really "is" in terms of legacy. I doubt Rochester Telephone will have the most pull anymore after the merger goes through, the ex-GTE guys are going to have more experience with large telephone systems (that is if they even stay on board, or come back for the spectacle).
At this point I feel FTR should just change its name to GTE, I would assume the name rights to GTE transfer to FTR after this sale as VZ will have nothing GTE left, just Contel, Bell Atlantic, and NYNEX.
In my opinion General Telephone is a lot more professional of a name than Frontier - Frontier is no longer a mostly rural provider, LA is not a frontier by any means. Of course a name change means more $$$ spent and with a weak pocket book it probably wont happen. |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 6:31 pm · (locked) |
|
to ham3843
said by ham3843:Some have commented that Frontier is still installing new copper lines in select areas that are brand new service areas like new developments. This makes no sense. Why does it make no sense? If they don't have FIOS or a similar FTTH option out that particular CO, why would they run fiber, that couldn't connect to anything, or that could only do POTS? They are mandated to be able to provide POTS by law, so they have to do something. |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 6:37 pm · (locked) |
pjsutton |
to Karl Bode
And, to whomever mentioned something about all the new TV customers for Frontier FIOS - that's definitely a good thing for those (apparently few) who still have FIOS TV from Frontier, and those who have it with VZ currently. They'll isntantly have more buying power. And, I wonder if the U-Verse TV customer base could have little/any impact on that as well.
So, while they apparently haven't updated STBs or anything, maybe they will in the future - you really don't know. Perhaps with this sale is also a stock pile of refurbished/new VZ FIOS STBs in a warehouse somewhere - it certaintly wouldn't make sense for VZ to keep supplies in these states anymore, when they won't be doing business in them, and they don't want a surplus either. Why have tons of extra routers and STBs laying around for a large amount of customers that won't use them anymore?
I see this as a good thing for the current Frontier FIOS TV customers. |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 6:43 pm · (locked) |
|
to Zenit_IIfx
said by Zenit_IIfx:At this point I feel FTR should just change its name to GTE, I would assume the name rights to GTE transfer to FTR after this sale as VZ will have nothing GTE left, just Contel, Bell Atlantic, and NYNEX. But the name GTE means nothing to most of the public anymore. It has not been used as a brand name for years now. Even in their heyday, I don't know that GTE was that valuable of a name. Remember their ads: "Gee? No, GTE!" said by Zenit_IIfx:In my opinion General Telephone is a lot more professional of a name than Frontier - Frontier is no longer a mostly rural provider, LA is not a frontier by any means. Of course a name change means more $$$ spent and with a weak pocket book it probably wont happen. Frontier can mean the future too. It doesn't have to be Bat Masterson, it can equally be James Kirk. "Space, the Final Frontier". |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 6:56 pm · (locked) |
ILpt4U Premium Member join:2006-11-12 Saint Louis, MO ARRIS TM822 Asus RT-N66
|
to Zenit_IIfx
said by Zenit_IIfx:At this point I feel FTR should just change its name to GTE, I would assume the name rights to GTE transfer to FTR after this sale as VZ will have nothing GTE left, just Contel, Bell Atlantic, and NYNEX.
In my opinion General Telephone is a lot more professional of a name than Frontier - Frontier is no longer a mostly rural provider, LA is not a frontier by any means. Of course a name change means more $$$ spent and with a weak pocket book it probably wont happen. Also, GTE/General Telephone would not be a name shared with an Airline. Change the stock ticker symbol too (unless GTE is already taken - guess it is. I'm sure they could find something) Its almost a new company at this point, comparable to Bell Atlantic changing its name to Verizon, or SBC changing to AT&T. |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 7:34 pm · (locked) |
|
Agreed about the name changes. GTE is well known, I clearly remember the ad mentioned above. GTE is far better known than the Frontier name, which immediately reminds me of the now defunct airlines. Also agree that VZ wirelines should rename themselves Bell Atlantic, Verizon name and organization is not well liked by most customers, while at least from what I can remember the Bell Atlantic name seems to be somewhat respected.
Although at the same time you have to say that neither wireline organization should be spending money on name changes or the like, especially Frontier, they just don't have the money and using money to do so at this time is a very poor choice as they have many more pressing things to accomplish. |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 7:40 pm · (locked) |
ILpt4U Premium Member join:2006-11-12 Saint Louis, MO ARRIS TM822 Asus RT-N66
|
ILpt4U
Premium Member
2015-Feb-7 7:43 pm
Frontier Airlines is not defunct - flew them not too long ago flyfrontier.com -- but do you really want your TelCo's brand shared with a Discount Air Carrier?
Own your Brand. If they acquired the rights to assume the GTE name, use it. Heck, even if they had to use the SNET rights from the SNET purchase of CT, that beats Frontier, IMHO
Re-establish the GTE brand (quick fact: watched Die Hard 2 recently, the AirPhones are GTE branded), and come up with a Fiber branding for Internet/TV separate from the FiOS and U-Verse brands. |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 7:43 pm · (locked) |
OpTiC Premium Member join:2014-03-08 West Covina, CA |
OpTiC
Premium Member
2015-Feb-7 7:54 pm
Also if this happens it will recreate the GTE system leaving out Hawaii, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and systems Century Link has bought. |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 7:54 pm · (locked) |
|
Time marches on, people forget.... But, around these parts anyway, GTE's reputation was pretty poor. At one time they were threatened with losing franchises, so bad was their service. I exaggerate only a bit when I say that whole sections of Garland lost service when it rained. Mid-to-late 90's, things improved somewhat, but I don't remember anyone shedding a tear when that name went away, and was replaced by Verizon. |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 8:00 pm · (locked) |
|
to ILpt4U
said by ILpt4U:Frontier Airlines is not defunct - flew them not too long ago flyfrontier.com -- but do you really want your TelCo's brand shared with a Discount Air Carrier? Haa....I live outside their service area and I believe that the company was sold to another carrier. Sorry for the error. I agree about taking ownership of a brand. We had GTE in Granada Hills, CA (San Fernando Valley) back in the mid - late 70s and although I was young (early teens) I remember the service as being good. As a funny aside to me as a teen you used to be able to dial a number and have it ring your phone back then as a test for the techs...but we found out about it and quite often did it ourselves to play jokes on our friends and family. |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 8:06 pm · (locked) |
|
And anyway, as they've acquired at least a couple parts of the old Bell System, I wonder if Frontier has rights to use the Bell name and old logo in some form or fashion. IMHO that would be preferable to Gee Tee Hee.
I don't think "Frontier Bell" would work, though. They'd have to get a little more creative than that. And dump the buffalo.
Verizon's never going to go back to "Bell Atlantic". Wouldn't make sense given the nationwide nature of their wireless service. |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 8:11 pm · (locked) |
|
to claibourne
said by claibourne:Time marches on, people forget.... But, around these parts anyway, GTE's reputation was pretty poor. Indeed, I don't want to offend any GTE employees (though I have a relative who worked for GTE Sylvania ) but the GTE name was sometimes seen as a consolation prize. If you were not lucky enough to be in the Bell System, you were in GTE (or the General System). It was like "congratulations you are the first runner-up". Of course, for light bulbs or missiles, they were top-notch. Back in the old days GTE split their numbers a little differently from Bell. So instead of PEnnsylvania 6-5000 it would have been PEnnsylvania 65000. I remember one of their print advertisements had a bust of Alexander Graham Bell, and it said "He may have invented the telephone, but he didn't invent us". |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 8:13 pm · (locked) |
OpTiC Premium Member join:2014-03-08 West Covina, CA |
to claibourne
said by claibourne:Time marches on, people forget.... But, around these parts anyway, GTE's reputation was pretty poor. At one time they were threatened with losing franchises, so bad was their service. I exaggerate only a bit when I say that whole sections of Garland lost service when it rained. Mid-to-late 90's, things improved somewhat, but I don't remember anyone shedding a tear when that name went away, and was replaced by Verizon. Still remember that. That is why I used to make fun of them Generally terrible experience. But I guess Frontier is better than GTE but alot worse than Verizon. |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 8:15 pm · (locked) |
your moderator at work
hidden : Off topic
|
|
to PX Eliezer1
Re: Rumor: Verizon Selling Off FL, CA, TX Fixed line Networks?said by PX Eliezer1:Indeed, I don't want to offend any GTE employees Good point. Nor do I. One of my late Uncles worked at the Sylvania plant in Buffalo, until it closed down (like just about everything else in Buffalo at the time) in the 70's. They weren't all bad. If I'm not mistaken, didn't FiOS actually start out as a project in GTE territory in CA? |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 8:33 pm · (locked) |
guppy_fish Premium Member join:2003-12-09 Palm Harbor, FL |
to ILpt4U
said by ILpt4U:Change the stock ticker symbol too (unless GTE is already taken - guess it is. I'm sure they could find something) Yup, looks like in 2005 was reassigned to Gran Tierra Energy, Inc. (GTE) |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 8:38 pm · (locked) |
Zenit_IIfxThe system is the solution Premium Member join:2012-05-07 Purcellville, VA ·Comcast XFINITY
|
to PX Eliezer1
said by PX Eliezer1:If you were not lucky enough to be in the Bell System, you were in GTE (or the General System). Unfortunately its true. They were always second fiddle in nearly everything. Automatic Electric gear was generally worse than Western Electric gear (except for rotary dials, the AE dial was smooth as hell and mechanically simple, Bell engineers took some ideas from it), GTE had a kludgey plant of varying quality while Bell was consistent and frequently replaced/upgraded it, GTE lacked a huge research arm while Bell was leading the way with research. Not to mention the absolute mess GTE plant was in CA, took them a long time to fix that, if they ever really did. People would move to PacTel territory to avoid it. said by claibourne:Verizon's never going to go back to "Bell Atlantic". Wouldn't make sense given the nationwide nature of their wireless service. I could see the BA name coming back if VZ spins off the remaining ILEC footprint into a new holding company, VZW becomes independent. I see this as the likely scenario in the next 4 years, McAdam wants nothing to do with anything involving a wire, glass or copper. My grand prediction for the next 5-10 years? The wireless industry is going to become fiercely competitive as T-Mobile and Sprint improve their networks and expand coverage thanks to the deployment of more low-band spectrum. AT&T will grudgingly continue lowering prices and put more focus on FTTP U-Verse. Verizon's focus on short term profit will come back to bite the company in the end - with no Wireline to fall back on VZW ends up with less returns and investors become bored of their toy - it remains a strong Wireless carrier but without the massive profits of today. (This scenario totally hinges on McAdam getting rid of all of the ILEC properties) Yeah, your right. They just need to ditch Frank the Buffalo and use a more modern typeface for their logo. said by claibourne:didn't FiOS actually start out as a project in GTE territory in CA? Close! It started as a GTE project in TX, by 2003 the first build out happened in TX. Bell Atlantic started with FTTP in 1999 in eastern Loudoun County (C&P Telephone) but it was some oddball custom thing not built on any standards. I have little info about it beyond a PR release with a photo of BA workers with Bell hard hats putting in the fiber. It is known that BA and GTE engineers after the merger fought over how to implement FTTP, GTE's won over and that's what we have today. said by OpTiC :Generally terrible experience Good one! Plenty of names for GTE, GeeHeeHee is a good one too... |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 9:20 pm · (locked) |
|
said by Zenit_IIfx:I could see the BA name coming back if VZ spins off the remaining ILEC footprint Quite possible, but I'd guess they'd want somebody to buy it, rather than spinning it off. And that would be ok, as the newly independent Bell Atlantic could join Frontier Bell and Cincinnati Bell in my "Rebuild the Bell System" fantasy. said by Zenit_IIfx:Close! It started as a GTE project in TX I knew it was first deployed in Keller, but for some reason I thought there were tests or trials of some sort in CA first. I'm probably wrong about that. |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 9:30 pm · (locked) |
|
said by claibourne:Quite possible, but I'd guess they'd want somebody to buy it, rather than spinning it off. And that would be ok, as the newly independent Bell Atlantic could join Frontier Bell and Cincinnati Bell in my "Rebuild the Bell System" fantasy. We can only hope for this, the real issue would be that to have that fantasy become a reality it also requires significant regulation that would mirror what was done during the original Ma Bell System days. I again want to think Zenit for his incredible knowledge about telecom history in the USA, I had NO idea that FiOS started out as a GTE project, fascinating. I would love to see someone write a book about this kind of history in detail. Zenit could definitely do the job, I'd certainly buy that book! |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 10:21 pm · (locked) |
OpTiC Premium Member join:2014-03-08 West Covina, CA |
to Zenit_IIfx
said by Zenit_IIfx:said by PX Eliezer1:If you were not lucky enough to be in the Bell System, you were in GTE (or the General System). Unfortunately its true. They were always second fiddle in nearly everything. Automatic Electric gear was generally worse than Western Electric gear (except for rotary dials, the AE dial was smooth as hell and mechanically simple, Bell engineers took some ideas from it), GTE had a kludgey plant of varying quality while Bell was consistent and frequently replaced/upgraded it, GTE lacked a huge research arm while Bell was leading the way with research. Not to mention the absolute mess GTE plant was in CA, took them a long time to fix that, if they ever really did. People would move to PacTel territory to avoid it. said by claibourne:Verizon's never going to go back to "Bell Atlantic". Wouldn't make sense given the nationwide nature of their wireless service. I could see the BA name coming back if VZ spins off the remaining ILEC footprint into a new holding company, VZW becomes independent. I see this as the likely scenario in the next 4 years, McAdam wants nothing to do with anything involving a wire, glass or copper. My grand prediction for the next 5-10 years? The wireless industry is going to become fiercely competitive as T-Mobile and Sprint improve their networks and expand coverage thanks to the deployment of more low-band spectrum. AT&T will grudgingly continue lowering prices and put more focus on FTTP U-Verse. Verizon's focus on short term profit will come back to bite the company in the end - with no Wireline to fall back on VZW ends up with less returns and investors become bored of their toy - it remains a strong Wireless carrier but without the massive profits of today. (This scenario totally hinges on McAdam getting rid of all of the ILEC properties) Yeah, your right. They just need to ditch Frank the Buffalo and use a more modern typeface for their logo. said by claibourne:didn't FiOS actually start out as a project in GTE territory in CA? Close! It started as a GTE project in TX, by 2003 the first build out happened in TX. Bell Atlantic started with FTTP in 1999 in eastern Loudoun County (C&P Telephone) but it was some oddball custom thing not built on any standards. I have little info about it beyond a PR release with a photo of BA workers with Bell hard hats putting in the fiber. It is known that BA and GTE engineers after the merger fought over how to implement FTTP, GTE's won over and that's what we have today. said by OpTiC :Generally terrible experience Good one! Plenty of names for GTE, GeeHeeHee is a good one too... I am still really confused why didn't Verizon sell it to another buyer. I wouldn't finance this deal in the first place if I were the banks. This deal is shit for Fios customers but better for dsl users. As I said I still want CL buy their properties like all CA, all FL, and all of TX 1-5 years after this deal. |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 10:39 pm · (locked) |
|
It won't happen so just drop the whole Century Link thing! If you want CL so badly, move into their territory! Why would Frontier spend $10 billion just to turn around and sell it in a few years? |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 10:43 pm · (locked) |
OpTiC Premium Member join:2014-03-08 West Covina, CA |
OpTiC
Premium Member
2015-Feb-7 10:47 pm
I actually want AT&T or Century Link really badly because Frontier is a shit company that don't care about Fios. |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 10:47 pm · (locked) |
ILpt4U Premium Member join:2006-11-12 Saint Louis, MO ARRIS TM822 Asus RT-N66
|
to pjsutton
said by pjsutton:Why would Frontier spend $10 billion just to turn around and sell it in a few years? See SBC/AT&T buying, then selling SNET Or Bell Atlantic/Verizon buying, then selling GTE Or AT&T Corp buying, then selling TCI & MediaOne CableCos Not that uncommon to buy, then sell later |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 10:51 pm · (locked) |
OpTiC Premium Member join:2014-03-08 West Covina, CA |
OpTiC
Premium Member
2015-Feb-7 10:53 pm
and Why is Frontier buying AT&T CT 4 months ago? Then buying Verizon CA,TX, and FL. They are already in debt. |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 10:53 pm · (locked) |
|
said by OpTiC :and Why is Frontier buying AT&T CT 4 months ago? Then buying Verizon CA,TX, and FL. They are already in debt. What is interesting about AT&T wireline selling CT is that the state has one of the highest average personal income rates of any state in the union. Seems like that is exactly what you would want to keep. Anyone have a clue? |
actions · 2015-Feb-7 10:59 pm · (locked) |