PeterCollins
join:2005-05-23
Geneva, IL
| Statewide Franchises I guess one of the biggest problems I see with this type of push would be the ability of the Cities to actually get the franchise fees from the State.
I can just see a Governor deciding to seize franchise fees to help balance a state budget or something similar.
I also think that having to deal with each city may keep them (cable & phone cos) a little more honest. They can't just buy off the state house and senate, as they've tried to do with the anti-muni and dereg bills. | |
|
 
DaveNJ
No Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
 ·Comcast
·Patriot Media
| Re: Statewide Franchises We waited this long, why rush in and loose a something as benefical as franchise agreements. I would rather a service agreement, then not. Plus i dont want them cherrypicking areas, if they cant compete with cable, maybe they should just admit it.
--
Liberalism weakening The USA everyday... | |
|
 | GhostDoggy
join:2005-05-11
Duluth, GA | Re: Statewide Franchises Yeah, and when cable entered the telephony market without restraints that were placed on the phone companies you had no problems with that unfair advantage. | |
|
| | 
imrf
Premium
join:2002-06-06
Utica, MI
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
| Re: Statewide Franchises That's the governments fault, they labeled cable as an information service, not a telecommunications service.
I am glad that they so far haven't been give state-wide franchise agreement. It won't be any slower getting local agreements vs. a state-wide one, since they only has service active in a handful of cities. They just need to get off their butts and send out their proposals. | |
|
| | | GhostDoggy
join:2005-05-11
Duluth, GA
| Re: Statewide Franchises I agree, its is all about paperwork. But that is only the initial process. What happens when those small townships start asking for unconventional conditions--which has been illustrated before on DSLR before as example is extreme requests.
A simplification of the process would benefit everyone, not just phone companies diversifying. | |
|
| | | |
imrf
Premium
join:2002-06-06
Utica, MI
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
| Re: Statewide Franchises said by GhostDoggy  :I agree, its is all about paperwork. But that is only the initial process. What happens when those small townships start asking for unconventional conditions--which has been illustrated before on DSLR before as example is extreme requests. That's part of the game in getting cable tv franchises. If Verizon and SBC can't play the game properly, then don't play at all.
A simplification of the process would benefit everyone, not just phone companies diversifying. Sure, but then the state would also have to give the cable companies the same opportunity. | |
|
| | 
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX | Regulations that the Bells have to adhere to are the ones they AGREED to have. Not only agreed, but even pushed for it (albeit for ulterior motives). At least the ones they complain so much about. | |
|
|
|
|
