2001 - competition is on life support( old news - 12:44PM Friday Dec 29 2000) tags: competition · coverage · alternatives DBC filed for chapter 11 recently.. unable, like Covad, NorthPoint and many other telco competition, to get any traction in their business plan. Perhaps this was because their business plan sucked, or perhaps because like every other CLEC their plan involves being nice to godzilla in FCC handcuffs so they can get information on, access to and provision of copper. Before giving up, DBC did manage to provide 250 DSL lines ($400 each) to schools around Boston. With this Chapter 11, and no alternative company willing to take these lines, these schools were faced with going link dead on 17th of January 2001. The government and the FCC had planned for 2001 to be well into the new era of open competition across all communications media for the customer dollar.. so how are we doing? Not good, based on this story: The schools ran to their last choice, Godzilla.. sorry, Verizon. Presumably Verizon was one of the options they decided against when they originally went for the SDSL lines from DBC. Verizon does not sell any business class SDSL lines, but does have handy dandy frame-relay (T1 and fractional T1) available, at almost twice the price, even after special educational discount.. a cost the taxpayer will end up footing one way or another. ( Here is the story about this event from the Boston Globe). As Covad shrinks its footprint, NorthPoint (with a very strong SDSL business class product) goes into a coma, JATO and others simply throw up their hands and walk away from their infrastructure, we're heading rapidly towards any-color-as-long-as-its-black ADSL for the home, and for business lines: well we have this lovely color catalog from 1985, of the various kinds of T1s you can get! we don't need to reprint it, you see, because the prices hardly change.. Where is the competition I hear you cry? ah .. yes .. that word again. ok well here is competition: you can get your bandwidth to the office next door over a 60,000 mile satellite loop, or I heard they are doing interesting things with wireless lately (if our telephone poles are not in the way, and the weather isn't too bad)! what's yer problem? Happy New Year!
Related:- Scott Cleland: Google Using 21x The Bandwidth They Pay For
- U-Verse Launching In Birmingham Tomorrow?
- Verizon's Open Development Initiative? So Far It's A Joke
- Nation's WISPs Trying To Map Coverage
- Bresnan Waiting On DOCSIS 3.0
- 5 Signs Our Broadband Plan May Already Be In Trouble
- Clearwire Launching In Chicago October 6
- What Network Neutrality Is REALLY About
|
 
DSLEver
@206.26.x.x
|  Other way bucko
quote:
As Covad shrinks its footprint, NorthPoint (with a very strong SDSL business class product) goes into a coma, JATO and others simply throw up their hands and walk away from their infrastructure, we're heading rapidly towards any-color-as-long-as-its-black ADSL for the home, and for business lines: well we have this lovely color catalog from 1985, of the various kinds of T1s you can get! we don't need to reprint it, you see, because the prices hardly change..
Business class SDSL is what keeps DSL companies afloat. It is the companies that specialize in the residential ADSL that are going ka-putz. The turn around rate for a home line is about 5-8 months longer than that of an SDSL product. The companies that provide a strong business package and say piss off to the residential customers will be here in the future. The companies that cater to the need of a saturated cable modem market(which is a better home internet option than that of DSL)will find that they can't compete with the low cost per acquisition of a cable line. In my opinion(if that matters)go cable if you can at your house, and DSL at the office. | |
|  | 
justin
Australian
join:1999-05-28
Brooklyn, NY | Re: Other way bucko The ISPs may be doing ok from business class SDSL, but the CLECS providing it are not doing ok.. if CLEC SDSL was so valuable, why would JATO walk away from its customers, and wouldn't someone have picked up NorthPoint at its bargain basement price? | |
| | 
Sam2229
join:2000-11-24
| I thought investors were an important part of keeping DSL companies afloat as well. I guess that's why the money flow is drying up (no chance of real profits whether business or residential). Going down just like the popular webhouse bucks at priceline.com did. Telcos will control the DSL market from now on. | |
| | 
AllAlone0
join:2000-10-30
Oakville, ON
clubs:
| low speed DSL is not feasible for home use, never has been, but everyone ignores it. The only possible way for a DSL company to profit off their equipment and lines is to charge for installation, and keep a customer for at least a year, usually 2 or more before a profit is shown.
From what I know, each DSL line is hooked into a router that holds so many connections, that router costs a lot of money, cable doesn't work that way, so the only cost is bandwidth, compared to bandwidth and extra equipment.
--
Roller Coaster Tycoon SSs
»doublec.50megs.com/RCT.html
Klingon Academy SSs
»www7.50megs.com/allalone0/KA.html | |
| | 
rchandra
Stargate S G-1 And Atlantis Fan
Premium
join:2000-11-09
14225-2105
clubs:
| That's just it; that just your opinion. Due to the "bus" nature of cable, you couldn't get me on it unless you offered it as a $5/month or less addition to my TV service. Some (if not most) DSL providers make them direct lines (with the others doing it in bridged fashion). It's simply none of my neighbors' damn business where I'm going on the Internet, let alone the traffic to and from those sites (which I believe they can do without a whole lot of trouble if they are so inclined, and I consider it way more complicated to tap my DSL loop). So for those who value some semblance of their privacy, and don't want their connections to sag during prime time when their neighbors are pounding the same data pipe too, cable to their homes is simply not an option.
That's why there are these separate product offerings. As the cable TV infrastructure gets more and more filled up, I think DSL will get more and more popular due to presumably better capacity planning. | |
| | | 
djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
 ·PHONE POWER
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T CallVantage
·Time Warner VOIP
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Other way bucko Clearly you don't know much about cablemodems. Without some sort of serious hardware hacking, you can't "sniff" your neighbor's traffic with DOCSIS cable modems, because the modem establishes a secure encrypted link with the headedend. You're not just stuck on a standard ethernet LAN with your block. And even if they could sniff it, do you really think your DSL connection is any more secure? Reality check: It's much easier for that malicious neighbor to rummage through your trash for your personal information than it is to monitor your DSL or cable connection for that one packet out of hundreds of thousands (which is probably also SSL encrypted) that might happen to contain something useful like a credit card number.
Us cable modem users have been enjoying fast speeds for a long time now. DSLReports' own speed test result archive is pretty telling. Cable technology works. Look at Optimum Online's average throughput. Face it, the internet is a shared medium. Your DSL is also shared at the CO and can be prone to traffic slowdowns in much the same manner. In order to extend reach, SBC (and others I assume) are moving towards using remote gateways powered by shared fiber links. If you want a real dedicated connection, you're going to be spending far more than $40-$100 per month.
Personally, I'm not surprised in the least that residential CLEC DSL is tanking now that tech stocks have depleted. There's too many parties that want peices of the pie. $40/month can only be split up so many ways. And it's not even good for the consumer, look at all the finger pointing that happens when there are problems. I'll stick with my cablemodem. If it's broke, the cable company comes out and fixes it, end of story, because there's no one else to blame! | |
| | | |
Mr Vengance
@dreamscape.com
|  Re: Other way bucko
| |
| 
yoodeok
join:2000-02-24
Berkeley, CA
| Oh, d'oh! | |
| | 
Wolf7
join:2000-11-20
Griffin, GA
clubs:
| Re: Oh, d'oh! This will continue to happen, until one of two things take place.
1. The industry consolidates by absorbing the weaker players and gains more clout with which to deal with the telcos. And or
2. The FCC finally gets of its collective butts and forces the telcos to abide by the open competition part of the communications act.
--
Regards from the Southland
Wolf | |
| spectro
join:2000-07-20
Fort Worth, TX
|  dumping?
Do you really believe they are making money by selling ADSL for less than $50/mo?... they will probably in the next couple of years when Covad, Northpoint, Telocity, etc go Chapter 11, Telcos buy their lines and start charging the BIG BUCKS for them (read cost * alot)
Do you actually believe Verizon changed its mind about Northpoint?... I think they planned it from the very beginning using an old Microsoft trick... sent some engineers to learn their technology, dump the merger and deploy their own SDSL.
I don't understand what are Covad/Northpoint/etc waiting to go complaint at the FTC for Telcos' dumping.
--
Hablemos de Chile: »www.machaqueso.cl | |
| | 
dru
join:2000-09-14
Corona, CA
| Of dumping and windmills said by spectro:
Everybody knows why this is happening: Telcos are using dumping (selling below cost) to get CLEC's out of the market.
I don't understand what are Covad/Northpoint/etc waiting to go complaint at the FTC for Telcos' dumping.
Ever see those fields of power-generating windmills in the windy California passes and mountaintops? Most of them still turning are long disconnected and simply run unmaintained 'till the bearings seize, because nearly all of the speculators or holding companies formed for their operation during the "energy crisis" of the 70's and 80's are bankrupt and out of business. Cheap, below-cost electric rates from conventional sources killed them by making their operation unprofitable, and other alternate sources, such as solar also got killed. Now rates are mushrooming and there's not enough power to meet demand. The big power companies are grinning because competition from alternative sources has disappeared, and who takes it in the shorts - the consumers.
They have avoided doing so because of the negative publicity. John Q. Public wants and supports $29.95 and $39.95 DSL. Go after the telcos for dumping, and the public will scream about pending higher prices, and in turn, tarnish their corporate image and product. The CLECs will be the ones seen as greedy, the ILEC's PR firms will paint the picture that they are the victims, all they want to do is provide the cheapest DSL possible to customers. Of course, what they really want to do is lock consumers into using them for voice services, the ILEC's worst nightmare is that cable companies, along with cheap internet, will capture your voice business. Cheap digital services scare them, even though it remains to be seen if the current cable models are profitable either (they are simply better financed than the DSL CLECs in my humble opinion) So the pricing is usually targeted to undercut or compete with Cable based internet, they use their money and muscle to support their own ISP who loses money selling DSL bandwidth for less than a buck, and, hey, if a few independent ISPs and CLECs go bankrupt along the way, fine by them!
The issue goes far beyond just dumping - the telcos and their incestuous wholly owned / corporate backed subsidiary ISPs have violated numerous anti-competitive laws. They even flaunt their violations, for example, the promotion where you get $5 off a tariffed/regulated voice line only if you get DSL through their ISP is stunningly illegal. Just about every ISP has documented cases where Verizon or Pac Bell's own ISP had access to customer records including all independent DSL sales.
The real solution is simple - don't regulate DSL pricing, but enjoin every ILEC from having any more than a small (like 10%) ownership of an ISP. Everyone would have to use an independent like AOL or Earthlink who would in turn buy wholesale circuits from the ILECs. This way, the conflicts of interest would be solved.
Of course, this will never happen, and before you know it the country will face the same thing we have with power companies. While it has been "deregulated" powerful interests have killed any competition and you have once source (ILEC) which will one day run to the PUC or FCC and crank up their rates 2-3 times in one month because of "high supplier costs" and there will be no competition to turn to. | |
| 
LowJack
join:2000-07-19
Seattle, WA
| I pay $89 a month for RADSL I would *think* that would help the CLECs out...
--
If you found my advice/comment useful, remember to click on the vote button. I need clicks! CLICKS!!!
--
If you found my advice/comment useful, remember to click on the vote button. I need clicks! CLICKS!!!
[text was edited by author 2000-12-29 16:55:57] | |
| | 
Archvile2
join:2000-10-22
Natick, MA
| I found out why my DSL installation is so delayed. | |
|
unemployed
@dreamscape.com
| Why did Digital Broadband go under??? I KNOW why.
1.Verizon burearacy- they made it very difficult for us to do business. They would blow off appointments to tag lines, return orders to our ops center and claim there is no such address or number, wire COs incorrectly (yes, I kid you not...on more than one occasion), seldom would return phone calls without an all out air assault, you get the idea. They (Verizon) are the biggest group of baffoons I've ever had to deal with. I have switched my phone service away from them as have many members of my family because of how they do business specifically in relation to DSl and CLECs. They were constantly ignoring the Tel Comm Act and it's a matter of time until some CLEC hauls their *&% to court and sues them for mega bucks...or the government will fine them for ignoring the TelComm Act.
2. The second factor is the market. We realize it's a matter of not having enough capital to continue. It's a shame, the ones who will suffer are the businesses. The failure of DBC has set DSL technology back about 2 years.
I hold no grudge against anyone but Verizon. I did not compete with cable, so that is not even an issue. We did our best and unforunately, Verizon came out on top. It will be a cold day in hell before they ever get another penny of business from me as a result. | |
| | | Anon | Re: Why did Digital Broadband go under??? I KNOW why. I think you are giving your former employer more credit than they deserve when you say that the demise of DBC has set DSL technology back about two years. It has nothing to do with technology. It was all about the dough. Cash is king. | |
| | |
still unemployed
@dreamscape.com
| Re: Why did Digital Broadband go under??? I KNOW why. said by axcess:
I think you are giving your former employer more credit than they deserve when you say that the demise of DBC has set DSL technology back about two years. It has nothing to do with technology. It was all about the dough. Cash is king.
true, but it's the cash that feed the pigs, i.e., fuel the technology. The cash has dried up and so will the technology if there are no CLECs around to depoly it. Do you look forward to a future where there are no alternatives to Verizon or Bell South?? I won't touch cable so the only alternative seems to be wireless. Then youre at the mercy of the weather and line of sight. | |
| | | |
|
|
·