how-to block ads
|
boogie74
join:2001-06-19
Neenah, WI
clubs:
| reply to Count Hogula$
Re: Competion?
said by Count Hogula$  :
said by Hayward :
said by BrianDamage :
I have one DSL choice, one cable choice, one satellite choice? That's too much competition?
Are you on a private or mini regional bell? If not how is it you only have one choice for DSL??? Cable I can understand that, but not DSL. Satellite you should have two.
More if you count "big" dishes. And again...telco is more than just DSL. Telco is wireless, DSL, business data services, long distance...and much much more. ALL are having fierce competition...too fierce.
I'm not sure why people here think that the only business that telco's offer is DSL. They consistently make statements about how TA1996 was all about linesharing and how UNE-P is all about DSL- and they refuse to understand that there is MUCH MUCH MORE to the picture than whether Covad can offer lineshare DSL while the ILEC sells only POTS service.
Adding insult to injury, people here have incredibly anti-ILEC attitudes that cause them to scream bloody murder when ANYTHING happens news-wise that happens to mention an ILEC.
They have complained when the news stated that SBC is lowering prices- claiming that it was anti-competitive. They have complained when the news stated that Verizon had layoffs- claiming that it was affecting DSL rollouts.
It all proves one thing only- people as a whole will read their own meaning into ANYTHING.
Boogie | |
BrianDamage
We Are The Hounds From Hell
Premium
join:2001-08-14
Rowlett, TX
clubs:
| I'm not sure why people here think that the only business that telco's offer is DSL.
Boog, I never said that TA1996 was only for DCLECs, nor did I say that all RBOCs offer is DSL. When did I ever say that?
There were other CLECs who were interested in other things (local dial-tone services, long distance, per-paid local, pre-paid long distance,etc.)
They have had the same problems with RBOCs with respect to the unbundling of facilities, so don't confuse the issue. It just so happened that the DCLECs were more gung-ho about chasing up violations of the act and seeing them through a court of law.
Others could just ride the coat-tails of the decisions, because when the DCLECs got the decisions, it would benefit all of the others too.
It's called letting someone else do the work.
They have complained when the news stated that SBC is lowering prices- claiming that it was anti-competitive. They have complained when the news stated that Verizon had layoffs- claiming that it was affecting DSL rollouts.
SBC lowered prices to an unfair level while charging CLECs so much that they could not possibly offer a service at the same price. THAT is what was anti-competitive, because it was a deliberate attempt at undercutting competitors by using unfair practices. At to "add insult to injury" as you put it, the RBOCs would sic their own sales people on those who had contacted competitors for service, telling them that "we" could offer you service cheaper than the "competitor".
SBC got sued over this very tactic.
As far the layoffs go, it was the RBOCs that claimed that competition was forcing layoffs, thereby delaying the Pronto deployment, which continues to be a hostage tactic in getting their agendas through Congress.
This idea was the basis for Tauzin-Dingell.
The CLECs decried the misinformation being disseminated by the RBOCs.
--
After ten long years they let him out of the home...(excitable boy, they all said)...and he dug up her grave and built a cage with her bones...(excitable boy, they all said)... | |
|
