dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1097
share rss forum feed

telcotech6

join:2002-02-02
at&t

1 recommendation

To: Dane Jasper, President of both the California

To Diane Jasper who is quoted on saying:

quote:
.......particularly those who have the most to lose from the continued success of the baby bells. According to Dane Jasper, President of both the California ISP Association and DSL provider Sonic.net.....
First, if it wasn't for the baby bells, you would not be in business. The bell system built the infrastructure needed to allow communication between cities and countries, it connected the world. They continue to maintain the infrastructure, at a great expense.

CLEC's hurt not only the bell's but everyone, including you. Regardless of who you pay for services, you are still connected through your ILEC, you are on their cable, their switch, their poles, their fiber, you are serviced by their technicians, with their equipment. When was the last time you saw a technician from a CLEC come out to your house or business and install a circuit for you? More so, when was the last ime a CLEC technician went on a cll out at 3AM in 20 below weather to restore service on a cable cut? You will never see a CLEC technician, CLEC's don't have any technicians, they simply purchase circuits and dialtone from the Bell's at a discount and resell the services to the end user. CLEC's are nothing more than a billing agent. They are only there because some uneducated legislators thought they knew everything about communications and decided to give the Bell's competition. Real competition is where someone would hire their own techs, put their own cable in the ground, build their own C.O.'s and provide the same services that the Bell's do to their customers. Not this type of regulatory competition where regulatory commissions, made up of people who's knowledge of daltone is nothing more than picking up the phone and hearing dialtone, make decisions that require ILEC's to give huge discounts to CLEC's, some upwards of 75%, and require ILEC's to provide services for these CLEC leeches over their infrastructure, while loosing money.

One day when an ILEC has had enough, and are no longer a profitable business, they will shut dialtone down. It will only take a small ILEC to do this, at that point, there will be an awakening and people will realize the importance of supporting the ILEC's.

The bottom line is, you only have dialtone and digital data services because the bell's are here, if no one supported them, you would not have the services that they maintain, you would have no communication other than mail and word of mouth, you would have nothing and technology would mean nothing.

Look around you, you pick up the phone and call someone, you have a pager, a cell phone (yes, cell towers are connected through data circuits provided by your ILEC, without them, you would not be able to use your cell phone), a DSL circuit, the internet .... all of these made possible and brought to you everyday of the year and maintained by your local ILEC, 24/7/365 .... regardless of who bills you for the service (CLEC) .... where would you be without the Bells?

Support the Bell's ...... without them .... you would not have telecommunications ..... there is no one else who could fill their place in 100 years or more .....

For those new to this, here are a few definitions:

ILEC => Incumbent Local Exchange Carrier, the people who actually provide you with your telecommunication services. The Baby Bell which owns and maintains the telecommunication infrastructure in you local area.

CLEC => Competitive Local Exchange Carrier, a company who leeches off the ILEC, they are allowed by government regulations to purchase services offered by the ILEC's at a discount which is determined by the government's regulators. There are small CLEC's and large CLEC's, most stay in business off the fines which ILEC's are required to pay to them for various service related issues. They do not maintain your dialtone, they only markup and resell the dialtone they purchased from the ILEC. The ILEC's maintain the dialtone they sell to the CLEC.
russotto

join:2000-10-05
West Orange, NJ

Re: To: Dane Jasper, President of both the California

What, this isn't slashdot? I can't rate this -1, Troll?

The regulatory environment in most of the US -- in part created by the ILECs, and in part by their cousins at the cable companies -- doesn't allow for new local infrastructure-based networks. So if the ILECs find themselves stuck leasing wires to the CLECs, it's their own damn fault. If it weren't for the CLECs, the ILECs wouldn't provide DSL at all -- they'd still be trying to charge 0.02/minute to everyone with a modem, or at least to ISPs.

KBoyKool

@telocity.com
You sound like one of those SBC-Ameritech commercials on TV!!!!!!! The reason for regulatory intervention is that without competition, the bells can (and do) gouge customers on price, lack of services, and--here in Indiana Bell/Ameritech/SBC land have extremely slow response times for installation and service requests (even in non-hostile conditions). The latter became such a problem that Ameritech was forced to refund its customers over a several month period. As for the use of bell-own lines, it would be absurd to have such redundancy of lines that every company owned their own facilities. Additionally, there is already a problem for utilities to obtain public and private easements, particularly in urban areas. This would only create an even greater problem. However, I DO realize that the bells should be allowed to remain competitive within the framework of the industry, just not allowed to price the competition out of the game by exorbitant lease rates. I understand that because they do installations and maintenance there will be costs. They brought the need for regulation and competition on themselves when they decided to jam their customers--just because they were a monopoly.

telcotech6

join:2002-02-02
at&t

KBoyKool

I agree, there should be no monopoly and the pricing should be regulated and fair to all consumers and businesses.

The government has no idea what it takes to maintain the infrastructure or provide telecommunication services, they decide the discounts an ILEC must give to a CLEC, without this knowledge and it hurts every consumer. I think all CLEC's should pay their fair share. CLEC's make the same amount of profit or more than the ILEC's do on each customer they have, yet the ILEC's have to maintain the services at their own expenses, that is not fair.

I deal with the condition of the infrastructure every day, anywhere you go you see that there are things that need to be done to provide better services, it all costs money and the way the industry is currently regulated the money is not there and the customer is the one that it affects.

The regulators allow CLEC's to bundle long distance with local service, the CLEC makes a profit on both, long distance and the local loop, the calls all go over the ILEC's infrastructure and through the ILEC's switches, the CLEC's simply bill the customer, maintain nothing and make more money than the ILEC. The CLEC has a competitive advantage over the ILEC, they can bundle services and make it look as if the customer is getting a deal, thus taking the customer away from the ILEC.

The playing field needs to be evened out.

quote:
As for the use of bell-own lines, it would be absurd to have such redundancy of lines that every company owned their own facilities.
Have you ever seen a CLEC put 2 miles of cable in the ground or in the air for a new customer that just built 2 miles from the end of an ILEC's cable, no, and you will not see it, they don't need to, the ILEC will put the cable in the ground and the CLEC will offer him a better deal after he has service. Why don't the regulators make the CLEC's pay an infrastructure improvement assessment in every area they want to compete in, more cable would get into the ground faster and it would help ease the financial burden of building the infrastructure off the ILEC's.

My point is, everything needs to be played fair and to deliberatly hurt an ILEC is stupid, if they were not there in the past, are not there in the future or just freeze at the point they are at right now, the CLEC's would not take over their roll and telecommunications as a whole would deteriorate and the consumers would ultimately be the ones to suffer the most.

RMAntala01

join:2002-02-14
Merrillville, IN

Hey, Telcotech...

Since you live in Crown Point, I assume you work for SBC/Ameritech, right? I live just north of you in Merrillville on the east side of Broadway. Since everyone on this side of town is to far from SBC's Merrillville C.O. (I personally am 21,500 feet away), we can't get DSL service at all. And AT&T Cable doesn't have cable internet service out here either.

How about telling someone you work for to get off their butts and get some remote terminals installed in this part of town so we can get DSL service. I can't even offer an opinion on the ILEC / CLEC issue, since my ILEC won't even bother to put up any RTs out here to give me a chance to even try DSL for myself.

If SBC would get off their a$$e$ and put in a few more RTs in areas that are too far from their C.O.'s to get service; maybe then they will have an opportunity to collect more income from the areas they are currently ignoring.

I've tried to have DSL service installed back in February of this year, before I found out I was to far away to get it. After the SBC tech left my house, I was paid a follow up visit by a customer service rep a few minutes later. She explained the she just had a few question to ask about my service call earlier. A she was leaving I told her about my problems with getting DSL service at my house. She told me that SBC was currently in the process of installing an RT in the east side of Merrillville, so I should be able to get DSl sometime in the 2nd half of this year. She said the current hold up was in getting the cable run between the C.O. and the RT because the ground was too frozen (remember this was back in February) to bury the line. I told her I was tired of calling the same number at SBC every few weeks to check on DSL availability & being told to call back again in a few weeks because they didn't know when it would be available. I asked her for a telephone number for someone higher up that I could talk to who wasn't just a sales rep answering calls for availability of service. She took down my number & said she'd call me later that afternoon to give me the info I requested.

I'm still waiting to hear back from her... I should have known better and gotten her name & called one of her superiors.

So, tell me... Why should I support my ILEC, when they won't get of their a$$e$ to even offer me service???

Should I just stand outside and wave my CAT-5 cable in the air and hope it eventually snags me a broadband provider???

Or will SBC quit whining, get off their a$$e$, and finally install an RT out here???

I'd be willing to give my business to SBC, if they would offer to give me DSL service at my home. I also know of a lot of residents & businesses in my part of town that also want service but can't get it because it's not offered.

Nothing pisses me off more than a company that moans and complains about competition hurting them, when they turn around and ignore a huge customer base just waiting to sign on for service with them. They're only hurting themselves by ignoring us.

If they continue to do nothing, maybe we should change the definition of I.L.E.C. to IGNORANT (to customer's needs) LOCAL EXCHANGE CARRIER.
[text was edited by author 2002-12-20 18:45:25]

telcotech6

join:2002-02-02
at&t

Re: Hey, Telcotech

I would assume you live just North of Rte 30 East of Broadway between 77th and 80th Place.

If so, you are right, the loop is about 21K, you also have a bridge tap.

One of two things will happen in that area, either the cable will be rerouted to an existing RT, that needs to be upgraded, or a new RT will be placed, either option will cost about the same and take about the same amount of time. I would give an educated guess that you will have to wait 12-18 months.

Your area has dialtone and is fully built up. There are other areas that are just now building up, that do not have dialtone at this point, these areas have a first priority, and since they are putting everything in new, they are installing the state of the art equipment, just as they did when they built your subdivision 30 or so years ago. They upgrade areas as needed, primarily based on the condition of the cable, and due to the proximity of your area to the CO, the existing RT and businesses, you stand a much better chance of having the necessary upgrades done sooner.

RMAntala01

join:2002-02-14
Merrillville, IN

Re: Hey, Telcotech

12-18 months, huh? That's the same message I've been getting from SBC for over the last 2 years.

I've given up waiting for a new RT after reading the following article in the Times Newspaper this past Sunday:

»www.nwitimes.com/articles/2002/1···dc92.txt

Here's a brief message from that article:

******
SBC Communications Inc. will open four new central switching stations this weekend that will "light up" most of Gary. Despite weak penetration of personal computers in the market, Ameritech said it was moving forward with a plan available to more than 23,700 businesses and residents.

SBC of Indiana President George Fleetwood said broadband is the "communications tool of the future." The company connects customers to the Internet through a digital subscriber line that runs on the same equipment as regular phone service.

With a 2.7-mile radius for each switching station, most of Gary should have access, Fleetwood said. Government regulations that require former Bell companies to share their networks create a disincentive for the company to expand service across the region, he said.

"Outlying remote terminals could extend our DSL range," Fleetwood said. "But when we build terminals, we have to make them big enough to house our competitors' equipment. So our response is, 'Screw it.' "
******

So I can give up on a new RT in my part of town because the President of SBC Indiana's opinion is "Screw it."

Those are his words not mine. So basically a large viable potential customer base in my part of town will be ignored because he basically said we're screwed because if he can't be the ONLY one to offer us DSL, no one will be able to.

So he is saying that if SBC can't be a DSL monopoly they'll just continue to force users like me to pay for a second phone line or use my existing line so that he can keep collecting my money to support his phone monopoly.

I'll be sending out a nasty letter full of complaints the the state regulatory commission and few local governments along with a copy of that newspaper article with his comments highlighted. I won't be happy now until one of those agencies serves his head up on a platter to us forgotten customers who desire broadband access.

P.S. Isn't it nice to know that you work for a company whose own president has the opinion of "Screw it." when it comes to providing DSL access to customers in the state of Indiana who don't live close enough to their C.O.
[text was edited by author 2002-12-21 03:48:09]
jmr50

join:2000-05-14
New York, NY
We're supposed to thank the ILEC for bungling every communications technology they've tried to launch since voice? Let's count 'em ... Touch-Tone saved them money and allowed more modern switches but was held back decades because Bell was greedy. ISDN is too painful to even talk about in the US. DSL is a 15 year old technology that was squandered by Corporate stupidity and greed. Only government intervention got us modern phones like the rest of the world had (Carterphone decision), and we'd still be paying 50 cents a minutes for long distance if not for a nice lawsuit. "We don't care, we don't have to care. We're the Phone Company." They won't get their sh#t together until the people who own the lines become pure wholesalers, and the traditonal ILECs are a seperate company with seperate, equal access, much the way AT&T got equal access with MCI to dial 1+ service. Of course, to see real innovation in the central office, you'd need to see them run by forward thinking administrators who are interested in more than their pension or union work rules.
luvjones

join:2002-12-20
Oakland, CA
It sounds like you believe that there should be a monopoly and that there shouldn't be any competition. Perhaps I misunderstand your point. Yes the baby bells have been the only ones for so long that they feel that they don't need any competition. It's because of competition that they have even started treating their customers like they would like to keep them. Before it was "we don't care, we're don't have to because we're the only choice you have". That is no longer the case and I for one am very happy about that.

DaneJasper
Sonic.Net
Premium,VIP
join:2001-08-20
Santa Rosa, CA
kudos:9
So because they built the copper structure, they can do no wrong?

The phone company is abusing it's monopoly power to take over last-mile Internet access - do you think that's okay?

Should the phone company offer high frequency DSL services to it's own affiliated sister company at a lower price than it offers it to others for resale? Either way, it would seem that they'd collect the same amount, unless their intention was to monopolize the market via the sister Internet access firm.

-Dane