| reply to SlickEnW
Re: Bell Monopoly Real nice. Forget the fact that the Bells had a completely unrestricted monopoly for over 100 years to build those wires. The Bells had plenty of time to profit from those lines and did so to the fullest. Those days are over and the Bells knew exactly what they were doing when they AGREED to share their resources back in 1996. Just because they don't like the competition now doesn't mean they can go back on their word. |
|
|
|
| Monopoly - A business no one wanted to invest in until that business got really big and made a lot of money.
Rip off - I build a really big business and spend a lot of money on infrastructure. Then you come along a hundred years later and expect me to "give" you what I built when no one else wanted to build it.
I live in an apartment. I want your garage. You have a 3 car garage. I don't care that you spent the last 30 years paying off the house or that you paid for the materials to build it in the first place. Gimme "my" parking spot in your garage, you parking place monopoly. |
|
| Nice way to over simplify the scenario. Let me repeat. The Bells AGREED to sharing their lines. In other words they worked out a deal with the U.S. government to lease their lines to competitors so they can get better deals on offering long distance services. Nobody twisted their arm. Nobody coerced them. Nobody forced them to take the deal.
The Bells didn't get their monopoly because nobody else wanted to build it. They got it because the government wanted a standardized form of communication. If you check your history you will find out there were plenty of other telcos that ended up getting absorbed by Ma Bell because of this. The Bells have been riding a gravy train and then they screwed up by getting too greedy. That's why they have to share their lines. |
|
