dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
FCC Set to Approve Verizon Cable Deal
Though DOJ is More Worried About Competitive Impact
by Karl Bode 10:56AM Wednesday Jul 11 2012
Anonymous sources tell Reuters that the FCC is likely to approve Verizon's $3.8 billion spectrum and co-marketing arrangement with the cable industry, despite consumer advocate worries that the deal will reduce the incentive for Verizon to compete with cable operators on the landline front. Sprint has also expressed concern that the deal could grow to reduce incentives to compete in the backhaul market. The Department of Justice appears to be less of a pushover for the cable industry and Verizon, sources telling Reuters that the DOJ is much more concerned about the potential anti-competitive ramifications of the deal. From the report:
quote:
The Justice Department is skeptical about the marketing deals since they would mean collaboration between Verizon, the largest wireless company, and Comcast, the biggest cable company, according to one of the sources. The fear is that there will be less head-to-head competition which could mean higher Internet and wireless plan prices. The hope had been that Verizon would use its FiOS service to more aggressively push into Internet and cable, and that Comcast and other companies would compete more heavily in wireless products. "They're a problem," said the source, who was not authorized to speak publicly, about the marketing agreements.
The companies have pushed forward with the "quadruple play" co-marketing arrangement despite not yet having regulatory approval. As it stands, cable and phone companies already only barely compete seriously on price. Even before the deal, there had been a noted reduction in aggressive promotional deals between Verizon and cable operators like Cablevision, with Verizon just recently raising most of their FiOS prices. The new marketing arrangement could spell particular trouble for rural telcos, who already struggle to battle cable operators -- and would now be facing the combined marketing and lobbying muscle of both the cable industry and Verizon.

view:
topics flat nest 
tmc8080

join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY
Reviews:
·ooma
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS

1 edit

1 recommendation

telecom with attitude, not in the good sense

reminds me of the clay quip.. sorry I only carry hundreds......
that is to say Verizon is only interested in triple digit revenue from each customer, otherwise.. beat it, ya poor bums..

»www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgD-UK_zn3k
Mr Matt

join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Millenicom
·Embarq Now Centu..
·Comcast
·CenturyLink

1 recommendation

Broadband ISP's need a good dose of competition!

See my post under, Wireless Duopoly Pricing Collusion Is Just Good Fun.

If there was competition in the broadband internet access market the cost of a 50Mbps connection would probably be about $20.00 to $25.00 per month. Unfortunately the ISP's have learned how to manipulate lawmakers at the federal level so there is little hope for reasonable pricing for internet access.

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

Joy...

My guess is that this is getting rubber-stamped simply because there was no vocal opposition to it like there was with the AT&T-T-Mobile deal.

What could possibly go wrong? /s
--
Romney 2012 - Put an adult in charge.

ITALIAN926

join:2003-08-16
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

Re: Joy...

Under no circumstances should Verizon be allowed to sell cable Wired Services within Verizons own WIRED footprint. Its Ludacris. This deal cant possibly go through without restrictions.

Verizon FiOS products / DSL / landlines compete with Cable co products. My oh my. It wont be lack of competition, it will be total abandonment !

tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Comcast

Re: Joy...

Not sure what the plans are within their wireline area. but the primary value is putting them back in the markets they abandoned and in those they didn't already have a presence in.
sure it's cellular but with strand mounted mico cells EVERYWHERE cable runs It fits the telco model, and the wifi model for light phone, tablet, and notebook mobility with cable providing video and big pipe services to the homes.

It's all the services everybody wants, wrapped in a single bill like everbody wanted, but NOW you don't like the combined Provider.
openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2
VZ hasn't yet, has it? Why would VZ sell CATV in its FiOS markets? That would be a silly business proposition.

Andy from CA
Premium
join:2008-09-05
Anaheim, CA

Re: Joy...

Color me silly cause I've always thought there isn't much difference between Verizon FiOS TV & Cable TV especially since my brother in NJ has Comcast fed by fiber optic cable. WHAT?
openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2

Re: Joy...

Of course there isn't much difference between FiOS TV and Cable TV and that wasn't my point. Rather, I was suggesting that there's no business motive for VZ to resell cable TV services in its FiOS markets that TV franchise agreements exist.

ITALIAN926

join:2003-08-16
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

Re: Joy...

So, Verizon should sell their own products within their footprint, including DSL and landlines. Why? Because thats profitable, and sensible. Since we've established that, its also sensible for them to expand FiOS further into other towns/cities within their footprint? Why? Because thats profitable, and sensible.

So if you dont believe they wont sell Cable within their own footprint, then I guess when the DOJ attaches that restriction, Comcast, BH. TW, Verizon, wont fight it. We'll see.
openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2

Re: Joy...

said by ITALIAN926:

So, Verizon should sell their own products within their footprint, including DSL and landlines. Why?

Yes, because VZ will likely realize larger margins selling its products versus reselling those of other companies.
said by ITALIAN926:

Since we've established that, its also sensible for them to expand FiOS further into other towns/cities within their footprint? Why?

As I continue to suggest, I believe VZ will refocus efforts on its wireline services after ubiquitously deploying LTE infrastructure.
said by ITALIAN926:

So if you dont believe they wont sell Cable within their own footprint

I don't, and I haven't heard an argument yet the presents a legitimate business motive for VZ to resell a competitors services in its FiOS markets.
etaadmin

join:2002-01-17
Dallas, TX
kudos:1
I'm for this deal, I see nothing wrong with two companies that have failed in one area get together and offer bundled services and prices.

Verizon failed in making FiOS ubiquitous to all their customers and the cableco failed in providing wireless services (triple play) to their subscribers so why not join forces?

AT&T's T-Mobile deal was a different thing they tried to swallow and destroy a smaller direct competitor the Verizon/cable deal is different as they complement each other.

This deal is similar to what AT&T did with DishNetwork and then DirecTV. If you want to bundle internet with DirecTV they will offer you AT&T internet services.
bdnhsv

join:2012-01-20
Huntsville, AL

2 recommendations

Collusion

This is becoming a major problem. The cable companies are providing cellular backhaul for Verizon and now they are making this deal which will likely stop VZ from continuing any FIOS build out. So VZ will have cellular voice and data in shared markets and will also market the triple play of the MSO's. The MSO's will have their own triple play and will also market the cellular products of VZ. They might as well all be one big company and we'd be back to the 70's with Ma Bell.
flycuban

join:2005-04-25
Homestead, FL

Re: Collusion

Bingo! This sucks big time... Comizon should be the new name....

Steve Mehs
Gun Control Is Using A Steady Hand
Premium
join:2005-07-16
kudos:1

Here146;s what should have happened133;


The big three cable companies, Comcast, Time Warner and Cox, should have come together and purchased either Sprint or T-Mobile with each cable company owning a one-third steak. This way the cable industry would have a real quad play option and really come up with some innovative integration. I love bundling, but I think it’s retarded when you bundle services from more than one company.
--
For the future of our nation, we must unite and vote out the terrorist known as Hussein Obama. Come November 6 2012 we must remove the socialist pig out of office and get our country back on the RIGHT track.
etaadmin

join:2002-01-17
Dallas, TX
kudos:1

Re: Here146;s what should have happened133;

said by Steve Mehs:

The big three cable companies, Comcast, Time Warner and Cox, should have come together and purchased either Sprint or T-Mobile with each cable company owning a one-third steak. This way the cable industry would have a real quad play option and really come up with some innovative integration. I love bundling, but I think it’s retarded when you bundle services from more than one company.

IMHO That would have been an excellent approach, unfortunately that didn't happen and perhaps it will never happen.

Hamburger

@rr.com

How is this not a conflict?

So I can order Verizon copper Dialtone if available instead of Comcast VOIP service when getting this quadruple play? How is this not anti competitive?
old_wiz_60

join:2005-06-03
Bedford, MA

just wondering...

how much did Verizon have to pay to the FCC to get the deal approved??