site Search:


 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery






how-to block ads


 
Search Topic:
Uniqs:
263
Share Topic
Post a:
Post a:
AuthorAll Replies

phoneman5711
Premium
join:2003-09-30

Congratulations Jim

I agree with Jim Pickrell.

Let any competitors pay a reasonable access charge and then let the games begin. Maybe it will put a dent in the arrogance of the cable companies and help consumers.

At the time that the cable franchises were put in, they were exclusives with the local government. In the very, very early years of cable, maybe there was some risk that the technology would not be accepted. Very soon after that, it was obvious that these exclusive franchises were worth big money per household. The only exception was in rural areas where the cost of the plant was too great for the small number of customers.

The cable companies have had plenty of time to enjoy their monopoly. Now they can get a return for their facilities and maybe, just maybe, become a little bit more concerned about customers.


Chief Sparky
52 Still On Patrol
Premium
join:2001-04-25
Thibodaux, LA

My only problem with this statement is that I have never, ever, not even once experienced "arrogance" with any sort of provider I have ever had. Cluelessness on occasion, but not arrogance. It's all a matter of how you approach them. Act like an arrogant ass to them, and they probably will do it in return. It's human nature to respond in kind.

Cable companies have had a monopoly for the same reason that ATT did for so long. Only a few companies have the time and deep pockets to invest in infrastructure over the long term. Yes, the lines were paid for with a majority of tax dollars, but the investment of the original companies still ran into the billions (trillions?) nationwide.

Competition implies a separate, competing product, hence cable vs. dsl. I am aware that some areas only have a couple options, or, in some cases, one. If a company wants to compete, let them put up their own system, not piggyback of the work of others. Cable, DSL, satellite, dialup. Four competing services. Works for me.
--
Life is too short to drive slow cars



MiguelS

@kcnet.com

Let's be sure to understand what we're talking about when we talk about investments....

True, cable co's (or ILEC's) have spent BILLIONS and TRILLIONS of dollars on their networks. But, let's be very clear that this money didn't just come out of their pockets up front. They made the investments because they were promised monopolies in their service areas in exchange for the buildout of infrastructure. Therefore, they could charge more and reinvest more money into the infrastructure while still making profits comparable to not building out the infrastructure and charging a bit less.

In the case of the ILEC's, Congress realized that they were NOT in fact pouring most of the money back into the infrastructue but were instead lining their pockets and their investor's pockets with the sky-high rates. Thus, along with other circumstances involving the Bells wanting to get into Long Distance, the TA of '96 was passed. Since then, choice for consumers has increased drastically, and long distance rates have settled into very affordable lows. And guess what? The infrastructure is still maintained, and the Bells get their money for this maintenance in the forms of Tariffs from CLECs and others who lease UNE-P. (Unbundled Network Elements). The only money Bell has to put out is their share of the cost of upkeep for THEIR customers. CLECs pay their share...

Now, finally, Cable is going to get caught playing the same game. Believe me, this will be a revolution for consumers, as innovation will now flourish as independent ISP's can build off the phone OR cable networks and beat the stodgy monopolies at their own game.



WOWed

@kcnet.com

reply to Chief Sparky
"Cable, DSL, satellite, dialup. Four competing services."

That is absolutely incorrect. Look at dialup as competition. There are numerous local and nationwide dialup providers. You can cancel your dialup service and sign up with another in minutes. Can you with DSL or Cable, no. In both you are looking at a week to 2 week migration, from DSL to DSL its even longer, you have to turn one of before the other. In DSL unless you are both a Voice and data provider, you can only sell DSL to ILEC voice customers, if they chose a CLEC for service, you can't compete on bell and that one clec can.

Lets look at who can get DSL, only people within roughly 15000 feet of their CO... How bought satellite, only people with southerly unobstructed views, cable only people that are in areas served by cable TV.

There is no competition here, just the perception of competition. Competition is two people offering the same service to the same people.



THZNDUP
Deorum Offensa Diis Curae
Premium
join:2003-09-18
Lard
kudos:2

I'm kinda amazed that you picked WOWed as your unregistered handle. Are you aware that there is a cable company called WOW (Wide Open West) and what it is that they are up to?
--
one should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything



Air WAV

join:2000-09-16
Saint Louis, MO

reply to WOWed

said by WOWed:
"Cable, DSL, satellite, dialup. Four competing services."


This is exactly why I got out of DSL. When a company by the name of PBI (Pacific Bell Internet) first surfaced it brought an entire boat load of CLECs and ISPs down, I was one. I owned a company by the name of SunFAST DSL and got to witness just what unfair competition was.

I want to provide broadband, and today I do, but I do it without wires (that could be WOW, too)

I choose not to be dependent on the Cable or ILEC for my last mile.

Jim, I salute you in your battle. I am very familiar with your company and know you have been around for years and and wish you continued success and luck.
--
»www.AWirelessGateway.com

Monday, 04-Jun 19:23:23 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.
Most commented news this week
Hot Topics