Sisqo
World Champs. Babe Who?
Premium
join:2002-08-14
Methuen, MA | reply to royhandy
Re: What I find funny
LOL, dude do it I sooo curious to know. lol  |
|
royhandy
Panem et circenses
Premium
join:2000-05-23
Yesterday
clubs: 
| reply to DaSneaky1D
I am SOOOOO tempted to call Verizon to find out how much 45MB/s up/down to my home would cost.
I would like to read the wording on the original deal, too.
--
My punctuality is well known/ When the revolution takes place/ I'll be late/And I'll be shot as a traitor |
|
DaSneaky1D
one wall to block them all
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
 ·Charter Pipeline
| reply to grunteled
Your right and I completely agree with you. But going from my first post about this, I wander what the wording of the contract is/was. If they built a fiber network with customer deliverable loops available to 50% of the residential population by 1998, though it would cost the resident $20,000 a month to lease a line for it, then they fulfilled their contract.
If the wording in the contract said that, "and everyday working, residential customers must be able to purchase this service for under $100 bucks a month", then they did breach their contract. But according to the wording of that Verizon Rep, he obviously made his comment out of a loop-hole in the contract. Seems to me like they did deliver.
--
] ::my trivial ramblings:: [ |
|
grunteled
Puffy And Prickly
Premium
join:2001-06-13
Kansas City, MO
clubs:
| reply to DaSneaky1D
said by DaSneaky1D  :
While 2.1 billion is a lot of money, when it comes to offering this service to 50% of the residents, it starts to get a little thin. I seriously doubt any of that money was supposed by Bell to be used as subsidation.
I'm sorry, but who cares if it turned out to be enough money or not? They are the ones who made the damn deal. They promised to do something in exchange for an assload of public money. They did not do it. It sounds to me like the agreement said they would have it deployed, not that they could drag a line if somebody coughed up 10K to do it. How would they need public money to do that. Every teleco that wants to do business MUST be able to that. Can they with a straight face tell us that a deal was made for them to just continue doing business, and Penn would pay them 2.1B just to do that.
When I make deals with the promise to do something in exchange for money and I don't do do it, they seem to call it "breach of contract". Nobody seems to care when I give excuses about it costing to much to follow through, not having enough time, or whatever else I want to blather on about. I made the deal, I agreed to the terms, I'm liable to return the money if I can't fulfill. No matter what drug I was smoking when I thought I could do it.
Why should they be any different? |
|
DaSneaky1D
one wall to block them all
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
·Charter Pipeline
| reply to pkust
Then, where would the money be to buy the equipment, install the equipment, run the lines, buy right-of-way for land, pay for more employees to offer customer service, ect?
While 2.1 billion is a lot of money, when it comes to offering this service to 50% of the residents, it starts to get a little thin. I seriously doubt any of that money was supposed by Bell to be used as subsidation.
--
] ::my trivial ramblings:: [ |
|
