JPuppy
Java Heathen
Premium
join:2002-11-24
Honesdale, PA
clubs: | reply to oliphant
Re: Franchise agreements are needed...
In addition to consumer protection, I opposed this bill because it takes power out of the local municipalities. I have much more voice with my Mayor than my Governor.
--
Official BBR Grouch |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA | The locals can be a problem when they go beyond protecting consumers and move to fleece the provider in an extortion scheme to solve their budget problems. |
|
tsu9
join:2001-08-17
Wheeling, IL | Yeah, but you don't screw the constituents further by skipping over their former legal rights and whatnot. |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
1 edit | What screws the constituents are providers not deploying because they refuse to bow to local extortion attempts. A statewide general consumer protection platform benefits everyone who needs benefiting.
My point is only that a provider deploying shouldn't equal a payday for mismanaged municipalities. |
|
kdandaoc
join:2003-10-13
608052427
| Currently, these telcos are handpicking deployment spots. If they think they're being fleeced by the municipality, then they don't have to deploy there. This is the argument that ATT is using in Illinois. That they have the right to choose where they deploy! |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA | That's fine but screws the consumers who would benefit from the service and additional competition...all because some local gov't sees the provider as the solution to their budget problems. |
|
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
 ·Optimum Online
| reply to oliphant
said by oliphant  :A statewide general consumer protection platform benefits everyone who needs benefiting. You clearly don't live in NJ. 
--
Day dreaming days in a daydream nation |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA | A consumer protection platform would be different from a political whores taking bribes from telcos in exchage for favors platform. |
|
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
·Optimum Online
| said by oliphant :A consumer protection platform would be different from a political whores taking bribes from telcos in exchage for favors platform. You clearly don't live in NJ.
--
Day dreaming days in a daydream nation |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA | LOL. |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| reply to sporkme
said by sporkme :said by oliphant :A consumer protection platform would be different from a political whores taking bribes from telcos in exchage for favors platform. You clearly don't live in NJ. Heh... In NJ, consumer "protection" takes on an entirely different meaning
--
Tancredo 2008! |
|
kdandaoc
join:2003-10-13
608052427
| reply to oliphant
There nothing new here. Local gov't sees everything as a potential revenue base. From sin taxes (tobacco, booze, and gas) to intersection cameras that mail you a ticket and a fine for going to fast.
It is up to the telcos to negotiate the revenue that they are willing to deprive themselves of. I am in no way an advocate of the telcos, I just believe this should be either take it or leave it, or straight across the board flat tax.
This is the problem with TIFs, everyone negotiates better deals screwing their neighbor |
|
TScheisskopf
World News Trust
join:2005-02-13
Belvidere, NJ
 ·Sprint Broadband D..
| reply to oliphant
said by oliphant :The locals can be a problem when they go beyond protecting consumers and move to fleece the provider in an extortion scheme to solve their budget problems. Oh man. You have got to be kidding. When Comcast renegotiated and re-upped their franchise agreement with my town, they cam in, dictated terms, said they were non-negotiable, and told the town council that they would have no problems stripping every last bit of hardware off the polls if the council failed to rubberstamp what they wanted.
Which council did. They had no leverage at all.
I got this from one of the councilpeople, a fine and honest man,, and a municipal lawyer friend who was there. So please, enough about these poor telecoms getting victimized by those mean, nasty municipalities. You apparently haven't a clue about the realities. |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA | Sorry, your single example evidentally isn't how it goes everywhere. |
|
SD6
join:2005-03-26
| reply to TScheisskopf
"When Comcast renegotiated and re-upped their franchise agreement with my town, they cam in, dictated terms, said they were non-negotiable, and told the town council that they would have no problems stripping every last bit of hardware off the polls if the council failed to rubberstamp what they wanted.
Which council did. They had no leverage at all."
council had leverage, sounds like they didn't know it is all... |
|
FLea973
Premium
join:2001-02-27
Morristown, NJ
clubs:
| Take a look at where Belvidere, NJ (est pop 7/04= 2,761) actually is. The council really didn't have much leverage... the WHOLE town is the type of place that companies would love just to avoid - lots of cabling, not many customers. Comcast probably didn't wire it themselves either - just bought the company that did. Lose Comcast, they pull their plant.. no-one is gonna wire it.
Sadly, I don't see FIOS, let alone ANY choice other than satellite, in that area anytime soon. (given their location, I'd think even over-the-air sucks.. but I've never seen it so can't be sure) |
|
SD6
join:2005-03-26 | although there's no competition, the breaking point for these companies is their profit margin per subscriber. Unless there are unmentioned extenuating circumstance, the threat to remove the network was a negotiating tactic. |
|
