Verizon Denies Fiber Going Only to Affluent

A quote from the movie History of the World: Part I "F the poor"

Yeah, the poor are dying for Verizon video service.

I thought the problem was that they were dying for lack of Verizon video....

calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies!

I know, I know...

To make sure Verizon isn't flushing money down the toilet wiring poor neighborhoods for FIOS, the Government should pay for their access. Those poor, poor people.... how will they survive without 15Mbps/2Mbps Internet service.

Keller's "poor" areas do have FiOS -- come see.
--
Lord protect me from your followers

Yeah but when if Verizon going to wire oakcliff, and Un-Pleasant Grove.
ALl those meth heads could use a faster connection.

Flushls

Uhhh...isn't S. Dallas SBC land?

Basically just the city of Dallas and most of Dallas County (which is a huge swath of land) is SBC territory. Most of the burbs are Verizon. There are a couple tiny spots where SBC is actually a CLEC in Verizon territory (Austin Ranch for example) and viceaversa.

And if you're in the burbs and don't have FIOS, you're screwed. B/c all the Verizon territory here used to be GTE. Verizon has been steadily upgrading the crap that GTE left them holding, but there are still quite a few COs that have no DSL and many that have DSL are still doing DSL over frame relay instead of ATM. For those who never dealt with DSL over frame relay in GTE territory... the normal package is 768x128. And you could pay the big money and get 1.5x256. Only the COs that have been upgraded to ATM can get Verizon's current specials and decent speed.

Aside from the fact that Keller is in Verizon HQ's backyard, one of the major reasons they were the first test install for FIOS was that what GTE had left there was mostly installed during the recession of the 80's and was pure crap. Putting FIOS there not only made sense demographically and made them look pretty, it also got them out of maintaining a big copper mess forever.

- Davoice

The average home in the united states of america goes for $200,000+ If you live in a 145,000$ home (ahem, trailerpark quality or ultra LOOW income hud/free construction labor) verizon is not interested in you.. sorry to say.. Redlining aside, most people make this into a racial issue but its really the poor white people (still the majority) that would be screwed by redlining of poor communities-- otherwise what your really talking about it racial profiling, a more illegal action prosecuteable by state attorney's general($)....

Well, we now know why alot of people are not home owers. Most people can not afford it.

There's a reason why Verizon is deploying FIOS within a county named "Bucks." :: ducking ::

Regards,
Kory

Average price of home sold in Bucks county from April 04 - April 05 = $580,000

Average price of homes sold in other parts of Pennsylvania in the same period that may never see Fios due to them not "redlining" = $145,000

Sounds fishy to me...

Source: Morning Call - Lehigh Valley Newspaper

Why don't you show how fair minded you are and post the current broadband subscriber rate for Bucks county vs the rest of the HSI capable areas in Pa. Wait - don't, that might prove that Verizon is installing Fiber in areas where it will actually sell.

I live in Bucks County, and I still haven't received eligibility for Fios yet . I saw a ton of verizon trucks on the roads near where I live and a bunch of guys in cherry pickers, so maybe they'll have it running in my neighborhood within the next few weeks.

Seriously, if verizon deployed in poor areas, how many people do you think would purchase the service any way? It's simple business. Yeah, some people are gonna get screwed, but it's either provide it to the people who cant afford it or dint care about it last, or give it to them right away and end up spend so much money without gaining any customers or returns.

obviously youve never been to hummelstown. aint no money there except for pill hill and the entire town is being FIOS readied as i type this.

Verizon does have a point regarding video. Why should they have to service an entire town, when that town (very likely) already has access to cable and satelite. Does it really matter if half the town has Verizon video and half does not, so long as there is another option?

Note - this post in no way refers to FTTH. That is a seperate subject.

Yes, bring it to me FIRST! I will indeed order and pay for it! My family members in the hood still use dial up and won't pay for it.

GIVE IT TO ME NOW!

quote:

---

Verizon chief Ivan Seidenberg today insisted his company would not be "redlining" (offering next-gen services to only the affluent), and that such charges were simply political tools of the cable industry

---

Once I see them running fiber in the boonies, such as Yale and Avoca, MI, or even Almont, MI, then I'll believe him. I'm sure in 20 years those spots will get the service, but you can be sure that all the affluent areas will get it first and Verizon will drag their feet as long as they can to get those other spots wired up.

There is a difference between providing services to non affluent areas and providing them to people in BFE...

Almont is fairly dense, but again, I'll believe when I see it.

Verizon isn't going to rush out and do communities that have a few hundred households serving a few thousand people. Several neighborhoods already done in my city are bigger (in popluation and number of houses then what Yale or Almont. They are going to hit the larger communities first.
--
"What gives them the right to come in and do this?" she said. - Lady complaining that she was getting FIOS in her backyard.

No, they are targeting the affluent areas first, then hit the larger communities, then if they feel like it or get around to it the other communities.

According to Census data, yeah.
Almont: 1058 houses, 2803 people
Yale: 805 houses, 2063 people

The one specific neighborhood I pass on a daily basis is nearly a mile by 3/4 of a mile in area and has 945 lots according to my town's GIS server. While I can't give you an exact census count, if you presume between 2-3 per house, it puts you in the same general ball park as what both towns are. This is just one neighborhood in my city. There are active deployments in over a dozen neighborhoods within throwing distance of my own, plus at least 4 other large areas around my area that have concentrations of active installations underway, basically in the 4 corners of my city.
No, they are targeting the affluent areas first, then hit the larger communities, then if they feel like it or get around to it the other communities.

said by "imrf":

---

I'm sure in 20 years those spots will get the service, but you can be sure that all the affluent areas will get it first and Verizon will drag their feet as long as they can to get those other spots wired up.

---

Here's a neat question - if normal monopoly telcos are bound to support "universal service" (meaning, voice over POTS) - is that obligation bound to the physical copper plant, legally-speaking? Or the service offered (voice telephony)? When Verizon rolls out FIOS, if they physically remove the copper to that location at the same time.. shouldn't that imply, at least in spirit, they they should still have an obligation for "universal service", at least minimally, in terms of voice service over that fiber, to those locations? I read that Verizon promised the continual availability of "affordable voice services" over that fiber, for whomever moves in to that location, but... Verizon has made lots of public promises to the press before, that mostly turned out to be nothing but hot air. ("Naked DSL IS available", anyone?) Couldn't this effectively legally require them to build-out nearly everywhere that they provide service to?

I think it is a population issue and not a redlining or racial profiling issue. This is because when a CO is scheduled for fiber, the whole loop is overlaid with the fiber. The rebuild is scheduled in the areas with the greatest concentration of DSL customers.....Only makes sense?

Trust me - they just finished running the FIOS in certain parts of Ontario California (aka da ghetto).
There ain't NO affluent peeps in THAT neighborhood!

I'm affluent, and they have NO plans for my neighborhood!

--
Click HERE to see my FAKEz

I've noticed that in Southern CA.

They're laying fiber in lots of places in the IE, which definitely isn't considered "affluent".

But, CA home prices (even in non-"affluent" areas) are way more expensive than other places around the country.
--
Xfire
Folding Monitor

But even with the IE's rising hope prices where $500K isn't uncommon, especially for western RCo, a lot of people bought when prices were still "cheap". Anyone who bought say before 1995 didn't pay 50 zillion bucks for their joint...even in Huntington.
--
Life is good without the headache of Comcrap HSI

Yah, that's what happened to us here in Seal Beach..we bought in around 1997 for fairly cheap, now we could never afford to buy this house again.
--
Xfire
Folding Monitor

Thank goodness for Prop 13.

Amen brother. Amen.

No doubt! I bought in 1998, and my home price has gone up 265%. Doubling - almost tripling my property tax bill would be a serious chunk of change! I'm NOT moving.

-- Rob
--
\\ROB - a part of the SCB local network

hopefully the bubble will burst and your house will only be worth about double. those people that have sold and retired to neighboring states where the cost of living is so much less are smart.
--
no sig

Heck Yeah, Not long ago I was looking on www.realtor.com and found a Newly built home for sale near where I live in Yermo for $210,000.00, So sure CA isn't affluent, But then It's not effluent either.
--
Firefox forever!
»zoom314.blogspot.com/
»mysite.verizon.net/zoom314/

They have to start somewhere, and it just MAKES SENSE to start in more affluent areas that will actually PAY FOR THE SERVICE.

Beaumont, Murrietta, Chino, Riverside, Ontario...all have their good and bad parts, but in every case I would hardly call them 'affluent'...at least how the critics are portraying this. By their whining you would think only Newport and Bel Air are seeing FIOS deployment which nothing could be farther form the truth.
--
Life is good without the headache of Comcrap HSI

What's the point of putting fiber in the ghetto when the people there don't even subscribe to DSL or cable? Or even have computers half of them for that matter.

It's about money. Well maybe if we're lucky 99% money, 1% advancing our civilization.
--
"...I must become greater...He must become less..."

said by "spazmoto":

---

What's the point of putting fiber in the ghetto when the people there don't even subscribe to DSL or cable? Or even have computers half of them for that matter.

---

Porn. It's what drove the initial broadband industry. With FIOS's superior upload speed, plenty of new "producers" will spring up in these areas, creating business sevices, that will further spur adoption of the service by new Verizon subscribers. You think I'm joking, well, we'll see.

Services should not only be made to affluent communities.
We are not two societies, where people living in a particular area are discriminated against. Not in my back yard. I thought we were all better than that.

It's understandable that Verizon may not be able to service areas with apartments rather than homes, but to discriminate which homes is wrong. At least promise to bump its dsl customers to 6MB/sec. Phone companies should say a customer is a customer, as long as there willing to pay for the service. Its wrong to segregate communities. Maybe poor communities shouldn't have schools and libraries either or hospitals (Sarcastically speaking). Offering services everywhere is a big part of the United States of America.

If you allow Phone companies to operate on a unfair playing field, then what will happen is that that area will grow, and cable will loose, eventually what will happen is that phone companies will own all, and then watch the prices spike.

Phone and cable companies need to be on a fair playing field with video service, that's what America is all about.

Much as I dislike big business, it is after all their fiber. Shouldn't they be allowed to put it where it will make money.

IUf Verizon doesn't have to sign franchise agreement neither do the cablecos simple as that.

Verizon: put your fiber where you want. My broadband -- and other services work fine as is. Knock yourselves out!
--
"I've learned that depression is merely anger without enthusiasm."

The subtitle of this article is misleading.

Verizon is NOT pushing for franchise agreement elimination.
Verizon IS pushing for franchise agreement reform.

What an absolute pathetic waste of time. Of course Verizon is going to target areas where they think their product is more likely to sell.

You don't see Ferrari dealerships between two low income housing projects.

You don't see too many commercials for Nintendo during Desperate housewives.

Some people on this forum are so out of touch with reality it is almost unbelievable. So far out anti-business that they expect a company to spend millions deploying a new Internet service to areas where most people don't even own a computer, or to areas where people aren't even subscribing to cable HSI. I GUARANTEE YOU that if Verizon were to follow the business practices encouraged by many on this board, that they would be out of business... and who do you think they would blame for the job losses?

Fiber should only go to Affluent. If most people in the area can't afford it then there is no reason why verizon should deploy it. It will just come to much money and not a smart business decision

You weren't stupid enough to believe they were going to deploy this system to all of it's customers. At best,it will get deployed in "Choice" areas. For those of you,like myself,who live in the slums, don't stand a snowballs chance in hell of getting FIOS! The stupid looking hummer wouldn't last a day in by town because it would probably get stripped or swiped!

But heh,What do I know! If Verizon says so it must be true.....Just like the 80% DSL deployment they promised us!

Got news for you, it's not always the "rich" neighborhoods that spend the most dollar per home. If Verizon doesn't understand this already, then they aren't doing their research.

Besides statistics, my route takes me to a "rich" subburb daily. I find that most people spend less than do those in the "slums" or less "rich" areas of town. Lower income usually loads up on pay channels, internet, expensive phone services, etc. (And I am only talking about wireline service, not cellular or wireless)

I dont want to drag politics into this debate.I feel like I must make an exception here.Politicially,all
people have become defined by three types of classes.The rich,The middle class ,The poor(class warefare at it's best). Just listen closely to all politicial speaches.From the right, the left, the middle, Doesn't matter Rebuplician,Democrat.Independant,Conservative,Liberal..It's all the same speach dressed up into different sound bites.Now we apply that to fiber and Verizon.
Here is where it ties into Verizons deployment of fiber,Along with some knuckleheads statement that ,fios should just go to the affleunt.Sure enough the deployment or cherry picking.Through VZ's eyes
are my,look at all those ripe (affluent)cherries just waiting to be plucked.We must not forget our good friends the politicians.Hell we can afford to supply them with free service.Because we may need them to roll a vote in our favor.Any company that's been in business for a while can do that.

While making those costs up in another area.Lets call our new service (FTTR) fiber to the rich.They can easily afford it.The question then becomes will they really want to
part with their money on,what appears to be a non-essential
luxury.? So we get to the middle class along with the unshakeable stigmatism of being called that.

Verizon balks.Why? They see no quick ROI.Yet this is going to be the gold mine area.Thats has the greatestROI.Because
1st.The middle class wants something only available to the well off(FTTR).For the simple reason they envision all the upper class has.Therefore the middle class will take to this faster so they can keep up with the Jones. Also If the middle class think the rich are buying certain designer clothes,they want to have them also.Why? pretty much so they can watch shows on the tube about the affluent sailing yachts to private villas they will never see in this lifetime.
A Lot of future tech geeks grow up in this class.Not everyone was born with a silver spoon in his or her mouth.The middle class usually put themselves into debt for years.As to not look like they are middle class.

That leaves us with the poor class(the unblossemed cherry buds on the tree).Where most people are qick to point and say.Why roll fiber out to them.they can't afford it.They don't deserve it.How the Fook do you know that to be true.?

They have homes,cars,tv,computers.Maybe not the latest whiz bang gizmo gadget on the market,or top of the line anything.
You call that a reason why they shouldn't have fios.?They are some of the hardest working motherf'ers out there.

Watch discovery channel sometime to see what poor really means.
Fios will bring in the largest ROI in the two lower classes combined than the affluent,by itself.Why the affluent want everything for almost nothing.They will pinch a penny till it squeals.I have seen the affluent shop for clothes at the Salvation Army,come Christmas time,placing a few dollars in the collection cans.They daresnt boother to stoop so low.

I have seen afluent people dressed down in shabby clothes
park their cadilliacs a block away from soup kitchens.Just to go in and get a free meal.Now VZ is going to glue the companies lips onto the asses of people like this.
hahahaha I hope they wait till lips are planted before they shit on them.

50 % of the state of Pennsylvania was to have fiber. Rolling it out in Bucks County does not constitute 50%. Granted, this is the same bill of goods Bell Atlantic/Verizon sold the states of New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Maryland in that same time period.

In regards to installing it in areas where people are willing to pay for it, there are plenty of us spending up $ 30 to $ 60 a month for broadband that are not on Verizon's priority list. My Adelphia bill was $ 160 a month with internet and television. Obviously, we are willing to pay for the services.

In the state of Pennsylvania, I am curious where Verizon started rolling out DSL in the state of Pennsylvania?

I do not live in the ghetto, nor in the rural country. I do know that I will see more fiber in a glass of Metamucil then what Verizon will offer myself and the people of the Wilkes Barre Scranton area. I believe 2014 is not that far away.

As far as any more subsidies, tax incentives, or deregulation in regards to Verizon, I am firmly against it. I and every household in this state has contributed a little over $ 1,100 to Verizon for FIOS. If they can not meet the past obligations, they surely do not need more incentives to install and implement television with out franchise fees.

Feel free to chime in FireTeam Char.

It is pretty clear in Rockland County NY, that Verizon is rolling out FIOS to affluent communities first.

We can barely get phone service in West Haverstraw. I have logged a dozen service visits from VZ since last year. Customer Service cannot even get the Rockland County forman to return my calls or address my issues.

The techs say just wait for FIOS then your phone/DSL service will not be out of service as often. But it does not help me when they have not even laid fiber in my neighborhood. What is odd is we are only a few block from the main CO in North Rockland. Meanwhile I see them running fiber and lighting it up in rural affluent less populated areas of the county instead.

I got it and it RoX !!!!

The Point is that within an area you can not target wealthy customers only. That is also foolish enterprise on Verizons part. ROI is important however since the demand for cheaper faster service is universal targeting upper class only is a form of economic racism. It would be wrong to say that everyone shouldn't be able to have a telephone service. Let me say this would be unprecidented in the cable era. Satalite is available to everyone , cable is available to everyone. Why not Fiber. Since you are using a broadcast medium and using the airwaves which is regulated Everyone is entitled to have the opportunity within a franchise area. If a franchise is a city or a state, there must be a comittment to the entire franchise area.
This is not to say that Verizon will not do that, but they are trying to circumvent the word or concept of "Franchise". If cable is regulated by franchise agreements so should Telephone companies for video service.
If you want to deregulate the franchise agreements with cable companies you can. The reason for franchise agreements is to guarentee standards of service within a community which is to your benefit, which is why if you have a complaint with your telephone or cable company you can contact the public service commission.
Since Verizon and other companies work on a contract basis is many cases, if Verizon was to not be able to give you service for whatever reason, you would need intervention through the public service commission in your state. This guarentees quality of service. If verizon agreed not to have contracts then competition of services could be left on there own, and the service with the better quality or value would win.

However just remember that if Verizon was to trample the cable industry then there prices would be raised and you could have $80.00 internet. So be warned. What looks like a bargin now, may not be in 5 years.