  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 |  Good ruling that slows blackmail by local gov't
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
|
 |  DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
4 edits | Re: Good ruling that slows blackmail by local gov't
Would stopping this be | 
Or a 13' pit in your front yard? | |
These companies aren't known for being customer friendly and have a long history of abuse which is why we needed local franchise rules in the first place.
My definition of "reasonable" is quite different from the cable/telco's definition. They would obviously argue the above reasonable when it is clearly not. | |
|
| | Reviews:
 ·WOW Internet and..
| Re: Good ruling that slows blackmail by local gov't It's already doing that. ATT is the only one dropping Refrigerator sized boxes in yards or "redoing" them for their boxes to sit flat. Cable just uses a small green box a 1/4 the size of ATT. They don't block views they don't look that bad and in some areas cable companies will work with the owner about planting small shrubs and flowers along them as long as they can get into service them.
ATT won't do that. And for redlining ATT and VZ already do that. | |
|
| | |  cdruGo ColtsPremium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:5
 ·Frontier FiOS
| Re: Good ruling that slows blackmail by local gov't said by hottboiinnc:And for redlining ATT and VZ already do that. Care to point to any verifiable evidence to recent (as in the past several years) redlining by either company that is from an independent source and NOT from some party with an agenda, a politician sound byte, or anything from a competing cableco? | |
|
| | | | Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
| Re: Good ruling that slows blackmail by local gov't Don't have to. Just go check to see which neighborhoods can get U-Verse by the ones who can't. AT&T will tell you what neighborhoods just by entering in your street address. Service by AT&T is subject if they want to give it to you or not. Not that they'll wire the entire town. Everyone on here knows that. and FiOS does the same thing. | |
|
| | | | | cdruGo ColtsPremium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:5 Reviews:
·Frontier FiOS
| Re: Good ruling that slows blackmail by local gov't Like I said, you can't point to one independent source of evidence. I can't speak for AT&T as the closest franchisee is quite a ways away, but I do have FiOS. Their were the same claims of redlining when it was deployed here. And Verizon did start deploying in some of the better middle class suburbs. But over the months it eventually spread across the entire area servicing everyone within the Verizon footprint of Fort Wayne and New Haven, IN. | |
|
| | | Reviews:
·Insight Communic..
| I wouldent call it redlining as much as deploying to areas shown to pay their bills
I've talked to several linemen at at&t that are working on this project, and some of the reasons they arnt going into the "poorer" neighborhoods has nothing to do with redlining. Some have lines so old, that are still lead lined that the electrical resistance involved in sending that much data over the copper would literaly melt the lines. Also back in the DSL deployment days, the guys could rember going into some areas "poorer" that one month they was hooking it up, and the next month or 2 disconnecging bc they dident pay their bills, so at&t isent going to be rushing to roll this out there yet, but they will. | |
|
| | | | Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
| Re: Good ruling that slows blackmail by local gov't the same thing is redlining. It's still in areas only they believe to make money.
And at$t is too cheap to update those lines in older neighborhoods. And just because someone lives in one of those neighborhoods at$t thinks that they can't pay their bills they should think again. many have cable, internet and generally at least 1 cell phone.
HA! someone from at$t will tell you anything their company tells them to especially when their working. Believe anything you want from them. all a bunch of union assholes that are redlining. you don't see cable doing it. | |
|
| | | | |
| | | |  marigoldsGainfully employed, finallyPremium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1 | said by OSUGoose:I wouldent call it redlining as much as deploying to areas shown to pay their bills That's exactly what redlining is.
Excluding whole neighborhoods based on a credit profile of the neighborhood rather than the credit profile of individuals in the neighborhood. | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: Good ruling that slows blackmail by local gov't For most people here, redlining is defined as "They don't offer it in my neighborhood, so clearly they must be doing something nefarious."
--
It's a trick. Get an axe. - Ash | |
|
| | | |  dnoyeBFerrous Phallus
join:2000-10-09
Southfield, MI | I dont buy it. At least for the North. In the North poor neighborhoods developed where the jobs were. The inner city. Where the jobs were is also where the good infrastructure is.
In my experience this is reflected in DSL CO distances in the city vs suburbs. also, poor people watch cable tv too. cablecos have lots of advanced tech to stop theft in poorer hoods first.
I dont buy that underdeveloped infrastructure argument in Northern cities.
--
dnoyeB
"Then said I, Wisdom [is] better than strength: nevertheless the poor man's wisdom [is] despised, and his words are not heard. " Ecclesiastes 9:16
| |
|
| | | | | Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
| Re: Good ruling that slows blackmail by local gov't I don't either. It's just that ATT doesnt want to offer service beyond what they want to in the areas that the customers do not meet what ATT wants as a customer or credit rating. I have VARDs all around where i live in my area but go down the street a few miles they stop. Why? The neighborhoods do NOT meet what ATT thinks they should as income. But i bet 70% of them have cable since ATT won't deploy DSL to those customers. | |
|
| |  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | well all can say is that in my area Charter is and has been the only cable company for the last 8 years. Now you can't tell me that's just because no other cable companies aren't interested in our area. It's because the local franchise authority gives Charter a monopoly. | |
|
| | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: Good ruling that slows blackmail by local gov't You're right. No other cable company is interested. With the initial capital investment needed, it's not attractive for a second provider to come into MANY places and over build another.
I'm not sure where Camden TV is, but unless it's a Chicago sized city where there is a large population, I doubt you're going to see any desire to spend that much money only to get a small return.
It's cheaper and easier to buy someone out than to over build. All a second provider will do is take a portion of customer from the other company, not really scrape up new ones. | |
|
| | | Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
| Cities do not usually keep other providers out. It's the cost like Fiberguy said. Who wants to pay that cost? Nobody!
The city i lived in (fremont, Ohio) found out the hard way. TWC once offered to over build along with Buckeye Cable but that was years ago when HSI and digital cable started to come out. the City voted they didnt need anyone else but the local company. and in return they ended up selling out to TWC because they wouldnt upgrade anything. Now they're trying like hell still to get someone else in to overbuild but Buckeye told them "NOPE!, we have a fiber line in the city but thats only for backhaul from Sandusky to Toledo and that's it!" So now they're stuck with TWC. | |
|
| | | | dnoyeBFerrous Phallus
join:2000-10-09
Southfield, MI | Re: Good ruling that slows blackmail by local gov't that cost is tied to the cable authority. if they force 100% coverage in x years. or do they allow neighborhood cherry picking. companies prefer cherry picking. | |
|
| | | | | FYI, I just check to see if Charter would be available in our area and they said no and they would not be because the (Charter) signed an agreement with Comcast that they would not! We're tired of no options, no other choices, constant increased pricing and changes! Please allow the consumer the option of choice. I thought monopolies were not allowed, haha. | |
|
| | marigoldsGainfully employed, finallyPremium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1 | Oh wow, that top picture is the Bloom County house where Berke Breathed first started writing Bloom County (I used to live across the street from it).
That's sad that one of those boxes got planted in front of it like that. | |
|
| | | You Bogey'd that one TK Your ability to post your opinion here without retribution (except mine)is the same as Public Access, which is a cablecast forum for the first amendment. Pols are not allowed to use it for campaigning. If your NJ Pols are giving jobs to slacker relatives, what the hell difference is this ruling going to make? Cable wants a level playing field, but Telcos have written their own legislation with an unfair advantage to scrape away your rights so you can have "competition" and lower prices. Well, check the the records because Texas, which has had a State wide franchise for over a year, now has no free speech TV in some areas and the price of either provider has gone up, not down. Bang up job there FCC! | |
|
| | Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
| Re: You Bogey'd that one TK I have read the Agreement ATT wrote with Ohio. It is not in favor of cable companies. They can only get a state wide agreement if 1- their agreements with the cities expire or 2 if someone else overbuilds. Other wise their Shit out of Luck!
Cable companies got the shitty end of the stick. | |
|
| | Every time Martin uses the phrase "pro-consumer".... I know we are about to get screwed more. | |
|
| | | Re: Every time Martin uses the phrase "pro-consumer".... hahahaha
your glass is half empty
you should enjoy getting screwed, that's what its all about 
paying to get screwed ! FUN ! | |
|
| | did it get rid of this? so is this supposed to get rid of the "franchise fee" that a company pays to a city, just to have it show up as a hidden cost/fee on my bill, or more blatantly printed out like charter did for mine back when i lived in SC? | |
|
| Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
| Re: did it get rid of this? It won't. You'll still have that fee either the State is in charge of Franchise fees or the Cities/towns/county/ twp or who ever. Companies actually show this as an itemized charged. I've never seen it not shown. Although we have no clue what the Telco's charge for in their "fees and taxes".
But it's not suppose to get rid of the fee. It's suppose to "help" get rid of the extortion that cities what Telco's to pay in order to provide video. It won't affect cable companies any since the new rules only apply to "new" video providers. | |
|
|
|
