Re: Lawsuit Name one company that meets those requirements of "has the cash and is willing to upgrade"
Santa Monica, CA
Re: Lawsuit There are half a dozen companies that have the cash.
The "willingness to upgrade" is the problem.
Where Fios is already deployed, it isn't profitable.
In the places Verizon passed up, density and local muckrakers and bureaucrats made deployment prospect even less desirable.
Eight+ years into Fios, add the prospect of lower-cost wireless competition, the looming potential to restore line-sharing, and improved cable broadband to the general reluctance of the majority public to buy the premium product -- and you're dead-on-arrival.
Only companies with deep pockets and an agenda would take the chance, and even then, it would have to have the potential of profitability in the long run.
| |IowaCowboyWant to go back to IowaPremiumReviews:
said by Skippy25:But like I said they should have to pass those affected by equivalent or better wireline service as a condition of shutting down legacy service.
I have said before that they should be allowed to shut down legacy pots/DSL and certainly would not argue with that.
No matter what you will have your naysayers trying to slow down or resist progress and those people should not get a choice after they have been given X amount of time to figure it out.
I will agree that a pots sunset should be allowed to happen, but then who is going to pay to upgrade equipment that relies on phone lines like fax machines or alarm systems.
My alarm company wants $500 to install an AES radio box if I want to ditch the landline. But I get monitoring for only $25 a month with the landline or the radio box.
Plus with the landline I get true E911 but I'm not going to beat a dead horse again on how this state has failed to upgrade its 911 infrastructure, but I have been advised by disability services (Stavros Ctr for Independent Living) to keep the landline.
I've experienced ImOn (when they were McLeod USA), Mediacom, Comcast, and Time Warner and I currently have DirecTV. They are much better than broadcast TV.
I have not and will not cut the cord.
Re: Have FIOS, but no television Please. Verizon hasnt gotten a new franchise agreement in any town of any state in like 3 years. So, the hundreds of towns/cities still waiting, the towns are the problem ? Lets be real here. Port Jefferson Village is one of many towns wired for voice-data, but not video.
Re: Then Sure, don't subscribe. Ditch your cell and once they see #'s go down they will adjust accordingly.
Its more than you think ... or.... that they want you to know.
Besides the fact that a LTE rollout for data (think cells of smaller antennas on local poles) would save them more than fiber, the (five letter word) costs Verizon in overhead and pensions.
You see, they want you to complain. They want it so bad. That way, the Fed can start "appropriating" funds to build out. But we know that money will just get misappropriated to other "telco hemorrhages".
Verizon did the studies. Along with costs for subsidies, sub-contracting, licensing (media), re-distribution, IP support (all that switch gear is far more expensive than voice), splicers (sorry, I like some of the union guys but Verizon doesn't like pensioners), and more I can speculate on without hard copy.
Its all a game to them. Cherry picking is so true.
I'm looking for a home. It's location, location, location, Broadband (prefer FiOS but...).
Good luck, NJ.