dslreports logo
 story category
Incumbents Keep Blocking Broadband Stimulus Effort
They like things the way they are (uncompetitive), thanks...

We've long discussed how ISPs often won't serve a community if they don't feel it provides a good return on the investment, which is certainly their right as a business. But historically they've taken things much further, using their lobbying power to pass laws preventing towns and cities from wiring themselves -- even when ISPs won't. It's been much the same story as the government tries to hand out $7.2 billion in broadband stimulus funds to smaller private, municipal, and public-private broadband entities.

While the big carriers aren't applying for the funds because they don't like conditions attached to their taxpayer money, we've showed you how they're working hard to stop others from getting and using that money either. NPR (via Techdirt) offers up this quote from Craig Settles that sums up the last six months of incumbent stimulus shenanigans rather nicely:
quote:
"They aren't leading, they aren't following, and they won't get out of the way," says Craig Settles, author of Fighting The Next Good Fight, a book about broadband business strategy. He says the nation's biggest telecom companies have generally decided not to apply for federal stimulus money. "They're not going to put proposals on the table because they don't like the rules," Settles says. "Yet they're not going to cooperate with the entities that are going after the money."
This is, of course, only the latest chapter in the nation's telecom novel written by the largest ISPs, in which they get to repeatedly eat their cake and have it too. Carriers simply don't want added competition, no matter what form it takes. They're so opposed to even the idea of competition, they've fought efforts to deploy broadband in areas they don't serve -- just in case they someday decide to. Even Fairpoint Communications, which recently failed spectacularly to deploy or even maintain broadband services in New England, has been spending their time lobbying for laws making it harder for private-public partnerships to deploy service into unwanted areas.
view:
topics flat nest 

Mark
I stand with my feet
join:2009-07-11
Canada

Mark

Member

Incumbents not cooperating?

Vote them out!
gorehound
join:2009-06-19
Portland, ME

gorehound

Member

Re: Incumbents not cooperating?

but where will the crooked politicians get their money from ????

RayW
Premium Member
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT

RayW to Mark

Premium Member

to Mark
said by Mark:

Vote them out!
Kind of hard to vote out comcast and verizon and qwest and others.
BosstonesOwn
join:2002-12-15
Wakefield, MA

1 edit

BosstonesOwn to Mark

Member

to Mark
Id like to vote out "my" government !

But exactly how do I do that ? Not a person around who cares enough to run.

And I can't run , I don't have enough money to buy a soda yet alone all the crap needed to run for even a small official.

How do we change that ? What happened to the people who ran government while working a day job ? Not a professional government official ? To me that is where the real issue is , they are pro government now not like what was originally intended.

Camaro
Question everything
Premium Member
join:2008-04-05
Westfield, MA

Camaro

Premium Member

It's called

regulation time nothing has worked to promote competition ,the gov. offers free money to help wire areas they don't want to spend there dime on, but when they see anything remotely that could be competition they stamp it out like a bug.

RayW
Premium Member
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT

RayW

Premium Member

Re: It's called

said by Camaro:

regulation time nothing has worked to promote competition ,the gov. offers free money to help wire areas they don't want to spend there dime on, but when they see anything remotely that could be competition they stamp it out like a bug.
And there are a few folks on this site who believe that the corporations have the right to buy laws to prevent the foolish local communities from wasting tax payer dollars on community projects, it is much better to waste tax payer money supporting the management of said corporations.

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

Why cooperate with competitors ?

"They're not going to put proposals on the table because they don't like the rules," Settles says. "Yet they're not going to cooperate with the entities that are going after the money."
Why should they. Businesses are not in it for the general welfare. They are in it to make money. And they do that by crushing any competitors(current or POTENTIAL) at the earliest opportunity when they are most vulnerable. I don't think Settles understands business. Business is war and is fought with as few rules as possible.
Desdinova
Premium Member
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD

3 recommendations

Desdinova

Premium Member

Re: Why cooperate with competitors ?

"Why should they. Businesses are not in it for the general welfare. "

I agree completely! So I've bought property in your neighborhood where my chemical company can dump our toxic waste in your water supply. My friend owns a meatpacking company and he's going to start supplying your local restaurants with lower grade cuts of meat that haven't been refrigerated properly (refrigeration and storage costs money, ya know). When it's time to re-insulate your house or apartment, my brother-in-law's contracting company is going to use asbestos.

And if you don't like it, well, we really don't care. Business is a war after all and if you can't muster the arms to defend your position, we're just going to take you out.

Have a nice day!

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

Re: Why cooperate with competitors ?

said by Desdinova:

My friend owns a meatpacking company and he's going to start supplying your local restaurants with lower grade cuts of meat that haven't been refrigerated properly (refrigeration and storage costs money, ya know). When it's time to re-insulate your house or apartment, my brother-in-law's contracting company is going to use asbestos.
Then those companies will go out of business because they won't have any customers.
sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH

1 recommendation

sonicmerlin

Member

Re: Why cooperate with competitors ?

said by FFH5:

said by Desdinova:

My friend owns a meatpacking company and he's going to start supplying your local restaurants with lower grade cuts of meat that haven't been refrigerated properly (refrigeration and storage costs money, ya know). When it's time to re-insulate your house or apartment, my brother-in-law's contracting company is going to use asbestos.
Then those companies will go out of business because they won't have any customers.
Yes they will. Because they gave me, mayor of your city, plenty of money for my future campaign. I've thus engaged in some backhanded deals making it extremely hard for competitors to move in. You have no choice but to submit to their whims.

Have a nice day!
jkeelsnc
join:2008-08-22
Greensboro, NC

1 recommendation

jkeelsnc to FFH5

Member

to FFH5
Yes, except now me Dishonest Meatpacking Company, Inc. is now paying off the mayor to prevent competitors from entering business locally. That $10,000 is cheaper than losing money to a competitor. And, of course your buddy the judge in the local courthouse gets a shove of money under the table. He sure enjoyed that trip to Europe and the Bahamas ever year. And he will always rule in your favor so that anyone gets sick or dies from your S&*^%& meat cannot sue in court. Of course local congressmen, etc won't bother you. Because, you have threatened to reveal their dishonest relations outside their marriage in the local media if they ever happen to mount an investigation or react to someone gets sick or dies from your crap.

What bliss! Its nice to operate a company that walks all over people and for a small price ensures that you are all locked up with a fat wallet every month. Nothing wrong with a fat wallet because who cares if someone gets a parasite and dies. That's not my problem and not even the USDA inspectors care because I pay them extra under the table and have an armed guard waiting as they enter the building during inspection. The guard never really would use his weapon (its not loaded). But, he is there to ensure an atmosphere of intimidation so that the inspectors will ignore any sanitation or other violations.
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

patcat88 to FFH5

Member

to FFH5
said by FFH5:

said by Desdinova:

My friend owns a meatpacking company and he's going to start supplying your local restaurants with lower grade cuts of meat that haven't been refrigerated properly (refrigeration and storage costs money, ya know). When it's time to re-insulate your house or apartment, my brother-in-law's contracting company is going to use asbestos.
Then those companies will go out of business because they won't have any customers.
Not if the customer is too stupid to know/doesn't know/doesn't make the connection, or if the business will change their name/be out of town by nightfall.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium Member
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

KrK to FFH5

Premium Member

to FFH5
Not when they don't have any or enough competition, they won't.
openbox9
Premium Member
join:2004-01-26
71144

openbox9 to Desdinova

Premium Member

to Desdinova
Laws and regulations exist to prevent all of your examples. So are you suggesting that we put Ma Bell back together again and regulate them as they were in the old days? My IRA is looking forward to the guaranteed profits.
Desdinova
Premium Member
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD

Desdinova

Premium Member

Re: Why cooperate with competitors ?

"Laws and regulations exist to prevent all of your examples."

You're absolutely right. And they were put in place because so many businesses were doing those things because it was profitable.

I'm all about capitalism, competition and running a successful business but unfortunately, there are many times when the wants of the business conflict with the well-being and needs of the community around it. If the business acts responsibly, then there's no issue as they won't be hurting the good of the community (whatever the boundaries of that community may be...either online or an actual neighborhood) and no regulation is needed. But when the company's wants tilt so far out of alignment with the community that the business actively begins to unfavorably manipulate the checks and balances of the majority around it, then I feel regulation is needed. There are too many past and current examples of an irresponsible minority doing great damage to an innocent majority.

And no, I have no desire to see ma Bell resurrected. But I WOULD like to see the splinters behaving a bit more responsibly...
sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH

sonicmerlin to openbox9

Member

to openbox9
said by openbox9:

Laws and regulations exist to prevent all of your examples. So are you suggesting that we put Ma Bell back together again and regulate them as they were in the old days? My IRA is looking forward to the guaranteed profits.
Don't make me laugh. You endlessly denigrate the idea of regulating these giant infrastructure duopolies while at the same time defending the likes of AT&T and Verizon, giants who have corrupted the political system to satisfy their whims.
openbox9
Premium Member
join:2004-01-26
71144

1 recommendation

openbox9

Premium Member

Re: Why cooperate with competitors ?

said by sonicmerlin:

You endlessly denigrate the idea of regulating these giant infrastructure duopolies while at the same time defending the likes of AT&T and Verizon, giants who have corrupted the political system to satisfy their whims.
I do? I have no problem regulating a monopolistic environment if the monopoly, and it's shareholders and creditors, are sufficiently compensated. Unfortunately, that's usually not what's argued for around here. I do have serious doubts that a fairly regulated monopoly will bring about lower costs for consumers than what we currently enjoy in most markets. Nevertheless, I would enjoy the earnings of a regulated nationwide telecom monopoly in my retirement portfolio.

As for the political corruption, blame the game that allows it, not the players that seize its advantage.
sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH

sonicmerlin

Member

Re: Why cooperate with competitors ?

said by openbox9:

said by sonicmerlin:

You endlessly denigrate the idea of regulating these giant infrastructure duopolies while at the same time defending the likes of AT&T and Verizon, giants who have corrupted the political system to satisfy their whims.
I do? I have no problem regulating a monopolistic environment if the monopoly, and it's shareholders and creditors, are sufficiently compensated. Unfortunately, that's usually not what's argued for around here. I do have serious doubts that a fairly regulated monopoly will bring about lower costs for consumers than what we currently enjoy in most markets. Nevertheless, I would enjoy the earnings of a regulated nationwide telecom monopoly in my retirement portfolio.

As for the political corruption, blame the game that allows it, not the players that seize its advantage.
What besides regulation of monopolies/oligopolies and encouragement of competition is argued for around here? Biological warfare against the CEOs?

What the heck does "sufficient compensation" even mean? Infrastructure companies should all be regulated to begin with. Any shareholder attempting to hold stock in an infrastructure company should already understand the danger of regulation for a company fielding infrastructure services.

As for political corruption, the game that allows it is in large part caused by the players themselves, who altered the rules of the game with their pouring of their massive financial resources into lobbying efforts. Of course this was much less a problem when Ma Bell was first broken up into many smaller companies, but over the years they remerged (bribing regulators along the way to let them do it), and funded corporate nazist Republican campaigns to lie to the public about the benefits of enhancing the profits of giant corporations.
openbox9
Premium Member
join:2004-01-26
71144

1 recommendation

openbox9

Premium Member

Re: Why cooperate with competitors ?

said by sonicmerlin:

What besides regulation of monopolies/oligopolies and encouragement of competition is argued for around here?
"Sufficient compensation". A majority of the viewpoints around here seem to be that infrastructure companies should exist solely for the benefit of the consumer regardless of the costs to build, operate, and sustain the infrastructure. While that may be fine and dandy for a nationalized utility (I definitely don't advocate that), it doesn't work for the investors that actually enable the company to exist.
said by sonicmerlin:

What the heck does "sufficient compensation" even mean?
You seriously need to ask that question? Do you want me to tie a percentage to the ROI? How about 12%?
said by sonicmerlin:

Infrastructure companies should all be regulated to begin with. Any shareholder attempting to hold stock in an infrastructure company should already understand the danger of regulation for a company fielding infrastructure services.
Serious investors understand the cost of regulation when they willingly put money into a company. However, if the regulation changes after the fact, investors tend to not like the change if it doesn't benefit them.
said by sonicmerlin:

As for political corruption, the game that allows it is in large part caused by the players themselves, who altered the rules of the game with their pouring of their massive financial resources into lobbying efforts.
You just talked in a circle. It's the game the allowed the influence of the players to take hold.

Camaro
Question everything
Premium Member
join:2008-04-05
Westfield, MA

Camaro

Premium Member

Re: Why cooperate with competitors ?

I say tough shit,nobody likes change,whether it's business or life but i don't think it's fair that i have to change with life's new situations but because they have money means they get to keep there statuesque.
Camaro

Camaro to FFH5

Premium Member

to FFH5
There is a difference between killing the competition,and a legal monopoly in areas of this country, I am no business/law expert but the last times I checked monopoly's are illegal.

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

Re: Why cooperate with competitors ?

said by Camaro:

There is a difference between killing the competition,and a legal monopoly in areas of this country, I am no business/law expert but the last times I checked monopoly's are illegal.
Actually monopolies are NOT illegal. Only certain clearly proscribed monopolistic practices are illegal.
8744675
join:2000-10-10
Decatur, GA

8744675 to FFH5

Member

to FFH5
Business used to and should be about making a profit by offering a good product or service at a fair and reasonable cost, in an honest and responsible manner.

Competition is about innovating, improving or adding value to products or services offered by your competitors, at a comparable or lower cost.

It's not about not killing them off or blocking their entry to the market so you can maintain or charge higher prices without having to innovate and improve, or denying market access to services that you don't or won't offer, but your competitors do. There's nothing honest or responsible about that.

I work for a company in a highly competetive industry and we never consider "taking out" the competition as part of any plan to grow our business. We continuously look for and develop the next "must have" product or service that can add value and differentiate us from our competitors, and improve our efficiency and increase productivity so we can remain price competetive.

That's how the world advances, otherwise I'd still be chiseling this message on a stone tablet.
flbas1
join:2010-02-03
Fort Lauderdale, FL

flbas1

Member

Re: Why cooperate with competitors ?

said by 8744675:

I work for a company in a highly competetive industry and we never consider "taking out" the competition as part of any plan to grow our business. We continuously look for and develop the next "must have" product or service that can add value and differentiate us from our competitors, and improve our efficiency and increase productivity so we can remain price competetive.

That's how the world advances, otherwise I'd still be chiseling this message on a stone tablet.
google voice (and its predecessor) have done more for residential telephone customers than the bells have. you can record conversations easily, transcribe emails, set calling limits, etc. (tried to be prevented last summer by the telcos for blocking access to nuns)

Skype revolutionized VOIP calling (blocked by Apple/ATT until recently)

not being harsh - maybe your company isn't competitive enough? or isn't in a competitive field?

because - if it weren't for services like Vonage (who got sued by the telcos for not having a nice -enough 911 service, and a too-nice callerid service) - we wouldn't have diversification in our local markets - and a quasi monopoly.
jkeelsnc
join:2008-08-22
Greensboro, NC

1 edit

jkeelsnc to FFH5

Member

to FFH5
So I assume then that you would be the one running the meatpacking company and cutting corners on sanitation, etc because business is war and your only responsibility is to make as much money as you can and the fact that someone might get sick or die on your crap is no worry of yours. Uh huh. This is exactly the mentality that created the problems recently with derivatives on wall street (among others). Take your behind and move away or disappear or something. You give hard working, honest americans a bad name and you are not a real american or you'd be interested in someone other than yourself. You are not a patriot or you'd be concerned with your community and those around you.
jkeelsnc

jkeelsnc

Member

Re: Why cooperate with competitors ?

This is also why "nanny state" regulations are necessary. If corporations were actually responsible and operated honestly there wouldn't be all the need for government intervention and regulation. Think about that. So yes, someone has to kick companies in the behind now and then when they are S&*%^&*& everyone else in the behind.
brianw1957
join:2006-01-24
West Jordan, UT

brianw1957

Member

Google Broadband

Then it's time to get Google to step up with their broadband plan, they want to spend the money, if only they will cover the smaller markets, that would show them. Of course I'm not holding my breath on that one...
openbox9
Premium Member
join:2004-01-26
71144

openbox9

Premium Member

Re: Google Broadband

Don't hold your breath. I still don't believe Google is interested in becoming a residential ISP. Google is no more interested in being a residential ISP than they were in bidding on spectrum during the FCC's last auction.
33358088 (banned)
join:2008-09-23

33358088 (banned)

Member

Change ...

not in your pocket
BUT HIS

realitybitez
@verizon.net

1 recommendation

realitybitez

Anon

corruption much?

telecom's evolution isn't even the angel dancing on the head of a pin on that iceberg that is corruption at it's grandest scale...

federal, state and local governments are corrupt to their core especially the talking heads you see on television day in and day out.. democrat, republican and those in the background positions.

sure, you can get rid of incumbents all you like but there isn't much thats willing to take their place who will be any better. if you really want to take out some trash this november.. vote out every incubment US senator from BOTH PARTIES and let that be a warning shot across the bow from The American People. oh yeah.. that won't happen because voters are greedy for all that pork shoveld into every state's budget year in and year out keeping corrupt people in power 6 years at a cliip.. think of how much damage's been done and continues due to shortsightedness?
sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH

sonicmerlin

Member

Re: corruption much?

said by realitybitez :

telecom's evolution isn't even the angel dancing on the head of a pin on that iceberg that is corruption at it's grandest scale...

federal, state and local governments are corrupt to their core especially the talking heads you see on television day in and day out.. democrat, republican and those in the background positions.

sure, you can get rid of incumbents all you like but there isn't much thats willing to take their place who will be any better. if you really want to take out some trash this november.. vote out every incubment US senator from BOTH PARTIES and let that be a warning shot across the bow from The American People. oh yeah.. that won't happen because voters are greedy for all that pork shoveld into every state's budget year in and year out keeping corrupt people in power 6 years at a cliip.. think of how much damage's been done and continues due to shortsightedness?
You have no idea what you're talking about. It's an endless talking point by Republicans that both parties are equally corrupt. And yet Republicans are opposed to what Democrats do at every turn. The vast majority of Democratic policies are aimed at helping the majority of the populace, while Republican policies are aimed at lowering taxes for the rich while driving up debt, in a sense taxing the rest of the country's future generations.

There are many, many examples of Democrats who receive funding from corporations, but turn around and fiercely pursue policies against those same corporations. There are next to no examples of Republicans doing the same.

Almost all of our national infrastructure in the 20th century was built under Democratic-led bills and policies. Social policies that have increased the standard of living for all but the top 1% were also spearheaded by progressive Democrats.

Your inane criticisms are simply a fallacy of logic meant to help you avoid pointing fingers where blame is justly due.

BovExcrement

Anon

Re: corruption much?

Oh I luv the democrats. They are sooo benevolent. They care sooo much for the people!

What a complete load of bullshit.

It's partisan hacks like you that are the problem with this country. If you can't see the hypocrisy in both parties you probably never will.

JunjiHiroma
Live Free Or Die
join:2008-03-18
Renfrew, ON

JunjiHiroma

Member

Seems like the telco&cableco's in North America don't like..

competition just like bellus and robbers in canada don't like competition either.The Net Situation in North America is gonna get worse(Due to the dinosaur thinking telco & cablco's).

Bill Neilson
Premium Member
join:2009-07-08
Alexandria, VA

1 recommendation

Bill Neilson

Premium Member

Out of all the things that this site has reported

nothing quite outrages me as much as reading about the laws (which I really didnt know about until seeing them here) that restrict competition so harshly in many cities

It's unbelievable to me really....I knew there were roadblocks but I didn't know how FAR some coorporations go to really restrict ANYONE else from competing against them

It's absolutely insulting to our country, imo
qworster
join:2001-11-25
Bryn Mawr, PA

3 edits

1 recommendation

qworster

Member

An example of a corrupt corporation:

Anthem Blue Cross-they gave MILLION$ in bribes and otherwise to stop healthcare reform-and now have announced that their individual premiums are going up in California an average of 24 percent and for many as much as 39 percent! How much did they make in profits last year (during a recession that saw most companies lose money)?

TWO BILLION DOLLARS!!!

Healthcare, Oil and banking/investment were the only segments making BIG BUCKS last year-and now Anthem Blue Cross is using it's de facto monopoly in Orange County to drive up rates like this!!!???

I guess TWO BILLION in profts during a major recession aren't enough profits-they want MORE!

And thanks to the republican scum out there blocking health care reform-they will get more!

And so many of you corporate shills out there support this-that's what's so pathetic!

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium Member
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

KrK

Premium Member

Re: An example of a corrupt corporation:

Heathcare reform is a major necessity. Anyone can see that spiralling Medicare costs alone could bankrupt the Government if nothing is done.

Maineiac
@myfairpoint.net

Maineiac

Anon

How can private sector companies compete with the government

How can any private sector company compete with the government?

In the state of Maine stimulus money was granted to a partnership between The University of Maine and Great Works Internet to build a redundant middle mile... A REDUNDANT MIDDLE MILE WITH NO LAST MILE PROVISIONS in the project, except for using the last mile facilities of the ILEC and the few direct connections to money making cherry picked locations ....

The University of Maine is a state funded college allowed special privaliges by the Public Utilities Commission to use conduit runs and pole attachments for NOTHING. Again, this is a redundant middle mile to the one the ILEC already has in the proposed area. Once this project is completed the plan is to hand it over to the newly formed Maine Fiber Company, a privately held company to run and own.

Built by the University of Maine with special privaliges using taxpayer funded stimulus money to be run by a private sector company !!!! How wrong does that sound .....

If unregulated companies are allowed to continue to cherry pick the business districts and densely populated areas for regulated voice and unregulated broadband services... where will we go from here??? broadband is the bread and butter for any future communications company.

Business districts and densely populated areas is where the real money is made to make a healthy company that can build out and support Universal Services to the most expensive rural areas of any state. ILECS by law are forced to provide service to these most expensive rural areas. Do you see any CLEC building physical plant and running to provide these expensive rural last mile connections? Who will build and maintain the most critical last mile connection to the home when the ILEC can no longer turn a profit because of the cherry picking? the taxpayer...

If a company wants to be a provider of services... broadband or voice, they should pay the real costs of doing business, not be allowed to cherry pick and not be allowed to ride the back of another company.... I support broadband regulations that apply evenly to all that want to provide.
SuperWISP
join:2007-04-17
Laramie, WY

SuperWISP

Member

Why not simply provide the money on reasonable terms?

The reason ISPs are not applying for the Federal grant money is because it comes with absurd strings attached -- in particular, "network neutrality" rules inserted into the recovery legislation by lobbyists for Google. (The Obama Administration has hired on several Google lobbyists, including Susan Crawford and Andrew McLaughlin -- probably as payback for the nearly $1 million that Google contributed to the Obama campaign. This hiring violated Obama's pledge not to hire lobbyists, but apparently Google was such a good "friend" of the Administration that it was willing to violate its own pledge to do so.) The constraints inserted by Google would make ANY effort to which they were applied economically unsustainable.

ISPs should be, and are, asking government to do the right thing: removing those ridiculous constraints so that competent private businesses can create jobs by doing what they know how to do best: buid networks. Funding unsustainable municipal projects that would be a waste of public money and ultimately would harm taxpayers.

SimbaSeven
I Void Warranties
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT
·StarLink

SimbaSeven

Member

Re: Why not simply provide the money on reasonable terms?

Define reasonable terms.

Most telecom companies want the money, yet want to do NOTHING to their infrastructure. If we're stuck on Coax/Copper Pair until it falls apart, they're fine with that.

Unsustainable Municipal Projects? What kind of bullshit are you trying to feed us? You should look at several locally run projects that are doing quite well.

I think they should grow the fsck up. I'm sick of listening to most of the ISPs bitch and moan because things aren't just perfect for them. If they'd update the fsckin' network, there wouldn't be any issues and people wouldn't complain.

But.. No.. Let's waste millions of dollars on bullshit (lobbying) instead of upgrading the infrastructure and cure the issue at hand.

I swear, my 3 year old is more mature then most ISPs.

JunjiHiroma
Live Free Or Die
join:2008-03-18
Renfrew, ON

JunjiHiroma

Member

Re: Why not simply provide the money on reasonable terms?

said by SimbaSeven:

Define reasonable terms.
If we're stuck on Coax/Copper Pair until it falls apart, they're fine with that.
jfmezei said something simular to that about bell.Ma bell and the telco's and cableco's just put VDSL up and say Fibre when it really ISN'T fibre just coax/copper.They like to mod a old car and say "see,this is a brand new car." when technically the car isn't.They should grow a pair and maybe lead for once instead of falling being and dying ioff like dinosaurs