danclan join:2005-11-01 Midlothian, VA |
Given the volume of subsidiesthat they have received that it would be in their best interest to deploy where they are being begged to due to demand. It would build goodwill and be good for business. | |
|
| |
Re: Given the volume of subsidiesBut why when they aren't forced to do so nor are they held accountable when they fail?
Ask Pennsylvania where their $200 billion went? Did you see any consequences on Verizon or the politicians that gave it to them for that major failure? | |
|
| | |
skuv
Anon
2013-Mar-21 5:47 pm
Re: Given the volume of subsidiessaid by Skippy25:Ask Pennsylvania where their $200 billion went? Did you see any consequences on Verizon or the politicians that gave it to them for that major failure? I really doubt PA gave Verizon $200 Billion with a B. More like, $2 billion. | |
|
| | | |
Re: Given the volume of subsidiesMaybe you should do a little research then.
Start by searching for 200 billion broadband scandal and Bruce Kushnick | |
|
| | | | silbaco Premium Member join:2009-08-03 USA |
silbaco
Premium Member
2013-Mar-21 6:33 pm
Re: Given the volume of subsidiesApparently you should do a little more research. The $200 billlion did not come from Pennsylvania. It came from many states. | |
|
| | NormanSI gave her time to steal my mind away MVM join:2001-02-14 San Jose, CA TP-Link TD-8616 Asus RT-AC66U B1 Netgear FR114P
|
to Skippy25
said by Skippy25:Ask Pennsylvania where their $200 billion went? Did you see any consequences on Verizon or the politicians that gave it to them for that major failure? Pennsylvania never had $200 billion to spend. Pennsylvania will only spend 25% of what California will spend in 2013; and California can't find anything close to the $68 billion they will need to build their HSR from Los Angeles to San Francisco! | |
|
|
Someone should organize a lawsuitThey are violating their franchise agreement in NJ. They were supposed to deploy to all areas. Then they went and selectively deployed where they deemed fit and ignored everywhere else. | |
|
| IowaCowboyLost in the Supermarket Premium Member join:2010-10-16 Springfield, MA |
Re: Someone should organize a lawsuitA lawsuit would be good because then they can be forced through the discovery process and depositions their reasons for not upgrading certain areas.
If they were forced to disclose their "real" reason for not upgrading certain areas (like where I live in Springfield, MA), they'll probably settle with the plaintiffs, not admit any wrongdoing and upgrade the rest of their areas to FiOS.
They're probably not disclosing their reasons as it will cause irreversible damage control issues. | |
|
| | |
cableties
Premium Member
2013-Mar-21 10:31 am
Re: Someone should organize a lawsuitI hear ya but a lawsuit benefits only the lawyers.
Instead, leverage the politicians that are lobbied by Verizon's special interest groups. Or get some grassroots movement of your own that shows how companies are using federal subsidies to benefit them, not the customer.
but nothing will get done as the telco formerly known as ma-bell is constipated. | |
|
| 3 edits |
to mjmellin
said by mjmellin:They are violating their franchise agreement in NJ. They were supposed to deploy to all areas. Then they went and selectively deployed where they deemed fit and ignored everywhere else. No. The systemwide franchise agreement required Verizon to deploy to every county seat in New Jersey that it serves, plus a specific list of municipalities. If you're not on the list, then Verizon has no obligation to deploy FiOS in your area. In total, there are 565 municipalities in New Jersey. Of these, Verizon's systemwide franchise only covers 369 of them. In the other 196 that are served by a different ILEC, Verizon would have to negotiate with the municipal government for a franchise, like any other cable overbuilder. Of the 369 municipalities where Verizon is permitted to build FiOS, it is required to deploy to 70 of them, with deadlines ranging from 2012 to 2015. The other 299 may or may not get FiOS -- probably not. Note 1: These numbers are from the 2010 BPU report. » www.nj.gov/bpu/pdf/cable ··· 6910.pdf Verizon originally obtained a 316-muncipality franchise that covered only the areas where it is already the ILEC. They later got the BPU to extend it to some adjacent areas. Note 2: DSLReports keeps calling it a "statewide franchise." It's not. It's a "systemwide" franchise. | |
|
1 recommendation |
Where is the demand coming from?Is it a "techie" minority that are begging for FIOS or is it everyone? If it's a majority then Verizon is missing out on potential revenue. If it's just a loud minority, then not taking on the risk of unprofitable investments(regardless of racial, socioeconomic issues, etc) is simply Business 101. | |
|
| |
Re: Where is the demand coming from?Lets see, Verizon FiOS has nearly a 40% penetration rate, so yea, just say 40% of the people want it, its probably more overall if you include the "bouncers" | |
|
|
Build itBaltimore doesn't have to waste all the taxpayers' money on pork and fraud, some can be spared for a project even if it might turn a profit | |
|
Mellow Premium Member join:2001-11-16 Salisbury, MD |
Mellow
Premium Member
2013-Mar-21 10:03 am
LTEVerizon already serves these areas with a faster than DSL service, 4G LTE.
Only problems are, it is: A. Overpriced B. Expensive overages
Right now most people on DSL plans are paying around $35/month for 3mbit/768.
Switching to LTE would get you 4 gigs for around that same amount, and if you go over your hit with Data overages of $15 per 1 GB of data if you go over your plan allowance. OUCH!
So you would be better off switching to Comcast for $50/month with 250 gig "caps", which is what Verizon REALLY wants you to do.
Maybe someday Verizon will come back with special LTE rates to lure the Comcast customers back.
So don't expect FiOS in your area anytime soon, they think they already have you covered. | |
|
| silbaco Premium Member join:2009-08-03 USA |
silbaco
Premium Member
2013-Mar-21 10:19 am
Re: LTENo, they don't. It is impossible to serve a community like Baltimore with LTE as a broadband replacement option. Absolutely no way they have the network capacity. That's just some rumor started on this website assuming Verizon is incompetent which they have proven not to be. | |
|
| | xNPCAs Usual, Have Nice Day Premium Member join:2000-11-08 Errington, BC |
xNPC
Premium Member
2013-Mar-22 3:48 am
Re: LTEwrong again. | |
|
| | | silbaco Premium Member join:2009-08-03 USA |
silbaco
Premium Member
2013-Mar-24 7:37 pm
Re: LTEAm I? How so? | |
|
| | | | xNPCAs Usual, Have Nice Day Premium Member join:2000-11-08 Errington, BC |
xNPC
Premium Member
2013-Mar-25 12:43 am
Re: LTEyou have no idea of our network capacity, all youre doing is posting your ridiculous conclusions. which are wrong. you need to learn to brain | |
|
| FFH5 Premium Member join:2002-03-03 Tavistock NJ |
FFH5 to Mellow
Premium Member
2013-Mar-21 11:02 am
to Mellow
Verizon isn't interested in landlines anymore, except for servicing large businesses in their terrirtory. Wireless is their future and where all their investment money is going and where it will continue to go in the future. Residences will get wireless or they will get nothing from Verizon.
Want a landline? Better hope the cable companies stick around. | |
|
| | chip89 Premium Member join:2012-07-05 Columbia Station, OH |
chip89
Premium Member
2013-Mar-21 2:58 pm
Re: LTEThat's how it is here Thir is no verzion wireline That I know of in the state it is all wireless here. | |
|
| | jjeffeoryjjeffeory join:2002-12-04 Bloomington, IN |
to FFH5
I thought there were two companies: Verizon and Verizon Wireless. | |
|
| | | xNPCAs Usual, Have Nice Day Premium Member join:2000-11-08 Errington, BC |
xNPC
Premium Member
2013-Mar-22 3:50 am
Re: LTEverizon and vodafone jointly but not equally , own vzw. soon vz will own all of or most of vzw, then watch the prices go even higher. | |
|
| |
AnonMe to Mellow
Anon
2013-Mar-21 11:45 am
to Mellow
said by Mellow:Only problems are, it is: A. Overpriced B. Expensive overages Don't forget: C. Wireless consistency and reliability is nothing like cable modem or FIOS. People seem to think bandwidth is all that counts. That's just one or many considerations. Wireless might work for some people, but it is far from an apple to apples replacement for many of us! | |
|
| jjeffeoryjjeffeory join:2002-12-04 Bloomington, IN |
to Mellow
Verizon LTE doesn't work well in all areas. | |
|
| xNPCAs Usual, Have Nice Day Premium Member join:2000-11-08 Errington, BC |
to Mellow
you are CORRECT! mostly (to mellow) | |
|
R4M0NBrazilian Soccer Ownz Joo join:2000-10-04 Glen Allen, VA
1 recommendation |
R4M0N
Member
2013-Mar-21 10:07 am
Someone always has to play the race cardEven for FIOS deployment... | |
|
| axus join:2001-06-18 Washington, DC |
axus
Member
2013-Mar-21 2:36 pm
Re: Someone always has to play the race cardYep. They aren't picking based on race, why would they? They are picking and choosing where they can make "obscene" profit, as opposed to "some" profit. | |
|
| | Zen6 join:2011-06-04 Saratoga Springs, NY |
Zen6
Member
2013-Mar-21 7:33 pm
Re: Someone always has to play the race card True. | |
|
| | xNPCAs Usual, Have Nice Day Premium Member join:2000-11-08 Errington, BC |
xNPC to axus
Premium Member
2013-Mar-22 3:47 am
to axus
you aint seen nuthin yet. | |
|
| | |
to axus
said by axus:Yep. They aren't picking based on race, why would they? They are picking and choosing where they can make "obscene" profit, as opposed to "some" profit. So, is there other providers in these areas or is it like Walmart. VZ comes in, runs everyone else out of town, then leaves the masses hanging with sub par service or non at all? Seems to me that these cities didn't know what they were doing when they contracted with big red and now they realized they screwed themselves out of what the rest of the country (or the places VZ cherry picked) is enjoying? Is that about right? Maybe they should be talking to Google. I'm sure that will get Verizons attention. | |
|
| | elray join:2000-12-16 Santa Monica, CA |
to axus
said by axus:Yep. They aren't picking based on race, why would they? They are picking and choosing where they can make "obscene" profit, as opposed to "some" profit. Would you please tell us, what constitutes an "obscene" profit? Do you even know what Verizon's profit margins have been for the past three years? | |
|
stevek1949We're not in Kansas anymore Premium Member join:2002-11-13 Virginia Beach, VA |
I want Google Fiber![sarchasm] I can't get Google Fiber because they are picking and choosing! Where is the outrage! We need a lawsuit! [/sarchasm] | |
|
|
Surrounding areas have FiOSSome surrounding areas around Baltimore have FiOS. It's like they want us out of the city! | |
|
kingdome74Let's Go Orange Premium Member join:2002-03-27 Syracuse, NY
1 recommendation |
TeaseEveryone knows you always tease a girl along while your dating someone else just in case you need her in an emergency. | |
|
silbaco Premium Member join:2009-08-03 USA |
silbaco
Premium Member
2013-Mar-21 10:20 am
FiOSBaltimore would be profitable. Verizon will no doubt deploy there once they finish up their current franchise agreements and LTE network. | |
|
| ••••••• |
88615298 (banned) join:2004-07-28 West Tenness |
88615298 (banned)
Member
2013-Mar-21 10:39 am
Exactly who is begging for15 meg internet that cost $75 a month? | |
|
| |
Re: Exactly who is begging forsaid by 88615298:15 meg internet that cost $75 a month? People who get reamed by Comcast for 16/2 at over $100 a month. | |
|
|
Don't understand VerizonI don't get it why they have stopped FIOS expansion. There are entire cities that are practically BEGGING them for it and want to throw money at the company yet it ignores them. If I were a stockholder in Verizon I would want to know why the company isn't doing everything it can to increase it's profits. It has a great product, prices are getting a little out of wack but they are the only ones that really have done fiber to the home and they just stop. So weird. | |
|
| ••••••• |
skeechanAi Otsukaholic Premium Member join:2012-01-26 AA169|170 1 edit |
skeechan
Premium Member
2013-Mar-21 12:38 pm
Maybe if these localities weren't into extortion......VZ would be more willing to deploy. But when they do, we see time and time again, municipalities with their hands out looking for (er, demanding) freebees.
If it were lucrative for VZ to deploy in these areas they would do it. | |
|
|
Copy ChattanoogaWhen the private sector fails to provide what the citizens want, then they should petition the government, in this case for municipal broadband. It has done quite well in Chattanooga and I'm sure it would work in Baltimore, too. | |
|
antdudeMatrix Ant Premium Member join:2001-03-25 US |
antdude
Premium Member
2013-Mar-21 1:43 pm
What about my cities in So. CA?They are available in some neighborhoods, but not mine? Arghh! | |
|
| jjeffeoryjjeffeory join:2002-12-04 Bloomington, IN
1 recommendation |
Re: What about my cities in So. CA?In some SoCal cities, half the city has FiOS and the other half doesn't. Taken Yucaipa for instance. The CO that is for Calimesa and Yucaipa has FiOS, the other CO doesn't have it. There's some wackiness going on right there.... | |
|
newviewEx .. Ex .. Exactly Premium Member join:2001-10-01 Parsonsburg, MD |
newview
Premium Member
2013-Mar-21 2:43 pm
Time to contact Google ...If Baltimore would contact Google with their sob story, and an attractive offer to entice them to deploy fiber ther, they *might* consider it. Baltimore would be a PERFECT place for Google to get right in the thick of the mid-atlantic market. | |
|
| moonpuppy (banned) join:2000-08-21 Glen Burnie, MD |
moonpuppy (banned)
Member
2013-Mar-22 2:28 pm
Re: Time to contact Google ...said by newview:If Baltimore would contact Google with their sob story, and an attractive offer to entice them to deploy fiber ther, they *might* consider it. Baltimore would be a PERFECT place for Google to get right in the thick of the mid-atlantic market. Not a chance in hell. Baltimore City is so rife with corruption that even Oprah Winfrey complained about the schools here. » hocomd.wordpress.com/200 ··· schools/Google would come in and Baltimore would start charging extra fees AFTER a signed contract. | |
|
|
Baltimore isn't the only town...A lot of us in New Jersey, Toms River and it's surrounding towns ALSO want FiOS if not for the service but for the competition to get Comcast to lower prices and quicken innovation because quite frankly Comcast moves as slow as the senior citizens in Holiday City when it comes to rolling out any new features and updates and their prices are as high as their ages. What sucks is that they started rolling out FiOS in certain parts of Toms River years ago because of some obligation they had made in those sections 10 years prior, then immediately went no further to new areas. I find it ironic that the Verizon Wireless store is setup for FiOS as a selling point but no other businesses around it is. It's too bad the FCC or Federal Trade Commission or someone can't strong arm Verizon to actually roll out the FiOS everywhere. | |
|
| |
Re: Baltimore isn't the only town...said by Mike Wolf:What sucks is that they started rolling out FiOS in certain parts of Toms River years ago because of some obligation they had made in those sections 10 years prior, then immediately went no further to new areas. How much of Tom's River is covered at present? If Verizon has covered 50% (by customer count, I think), then it has fulfilled the present conditions of the statewide franchise. The other 50% is not required to be covered until October 2013. As you might expect, Verizon will focus on areas that have an earlier deadline. Beechwood is not on the required build-out list for Verizon's systemwide franchise. Toms River is, because it's the county seat. | |
|
| | |
Re: Baltimore isn't the only town...Not sure about anything at this point, especially the saturation percentage of FiOS in Toms River, but when they installed FiOS in certain parts of Toms River in 2007 I was told then that they were only fulfilling an agreement they had made 10 years prior. Of course it was in the rich part of the town with the fancy houses. Kinda feels like Verizon just wants to roll out their FiOS in high income areas where they have a better chance of residents signing up (Nothing new there ) I remember being told by a Verizon technician in 2012 that they didn't want to do anymore in Ocean County because of the requirements they have to fulfill with towns in order for them to get permission to do work. One example he gave me in an adult community in Toms River (age 55 and over) was that they had to do the municipal buildings and public buildings before they were allowed to offer it to the residents, but not enough people signed up for it either due to the cost or inconvenience of installation or both or something else, so Verizon ended up losing money. This happened too many times and I guess they just decided to abandon it for a while. He also told me that Verizon has been taking money out of copper line maintenance to put towards recovering costs of FiOS, but I can't confirm how true that would be. Brick, which is right above Toms River and is also serviced by Comcast, has FiOS. | |
|
|
speak with your PROPERTY TAX DOLLARSMOVE!!!
Let vast swaths of the geography become ghost towns with tumble weeds and maybe the municipalities will wake up. | |
|
xNPCAs Usual, Have Nice Day Premium Member join:2000-11-08 Errington, BC ·Shaw ARRIS TG3482
4 edits |
xNPC
Premium Member
2013-Mar-22 3:37 am
helloooo?it is simply because they plan to offer fixed LTE in those areas. they will get MORE money. after they grab up the rest of vzw from vodafone, and with the backroom deals made with comcast and other cable providers for all that spectrum... they will make a TON more money offering fixed LTE. no one here has figured that out already? really? if you just read carefully and look at it from a business pov it starts to make sense now right? of course it does. youre welcome. have nice day.
/thread | |
|
| ••• |
moonpuppy (banned) join:2000-08-21 Glen Burnie, MD |
moonpuppy (banned)
Member
2013-Mar-22 7:28 am
Guys, there are reasons...Take it from someone who lived there. Here is a bit of a history lesson.
I moved to Baltimore City in 1980. There was NO cable TV in the city but there was in the surrounding counties. In fact, northern Anne Arundel County had 2 cable companies serving the area. Baltimore City had nothing.
The reason they had nothing was because the City Council kept making outrageous demands of any cable suitor that came in (free cable for all public schools, 10 public access channels, etc.) The only demand they had that made any sense was that 100% of the city had to be wired for service. FINALLY, in 1984, they had United Cable come in and start and it took 4 years to wire everyone up (and even that took some cajoling.)
After a while, there were a lot of issues with non-payment of services and a LOT of boxes (since all channels were scrambled) being stolen. There was even a month that no one could sign up for service because there were no boxes left. Many were never turned in or simply thrown away when people moved or were evicted (a common sight in the city.)
Even some of the cable employees were committing scams on the population by taking money for service that was never hooked up through door to door solicitations.
United Cable because United Artists Cable and then TCI and finally Comcast. Even when Comcast took over, it took years before they offered cable modem service. I left in 2001 and it still wasn't available.
Baltimore City is simply a money pit. Too many ways to lose money along with a City Council that begs for money on a daily basis. FIOS will not pay off in the entire city but would work in the more affluent areas like Federal Hill but the city would never allow red-lining like that. | |
|
| ••••••
|
|
|