1 edit | ignore sorry posted to wrong article | |
|
 spamdPremium
join:2001-04-22
Cherry Valley, IL | Why the need for exclusivity? Wouldn't it be great if Starbucks had more than one carrier's access point. Wouldn't it be a "win, win" for all if you had a choice from AT&T, T-mobile, Verizon, ect. to choose from?
But seriously who am I to think any competition is a good thing. Once again let the monopolies reign on.
--
When everything is coming your way, you are in the wrong lane. | |
|
 | | | Re: Why the need for exclusivity? said by spamd:But seriously who am I to think any competition is a good thing. Once again let the monopolies reign on. I think it has come to the point were we have competing monopolies, but they're all in collusion with each other. Thats a bad thing. There are no price incentives to consumers, and no monopolies are held accountable for their arrogance against the consumer with regards to services, billing, or hidden fees.
Go to panera...its free anyway. | |
|
| |  jester121Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
 ·voip.ms
| Re: Why the need for exclusivity? said by S_engineer:I think it has come to the point were we have competing monopolies, .... Quote of the year, and a good example of why the internet is a waste of time.  | |
|
| | | | its free as long as you keep buying stuff. After your finished eating or what ever and dont buy after a certain amount of time they ask you to leave. | |
|
| Reviews:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| said by spamd:Wouldn't it be great if Starbucks had more than one carrier's access point. Wouldn't it be a "win, win" for all if you had a choice from AT&T, T-mobile, Verizon, ect. to choose from? But seriously who am I to think any competition is a good thing. Once again let the monopolies reign on. Seems to me this is the opposite of a monopoly. There are competing Wi-Fi providers. Starbucks chose one, then switched to another because it was better for their business. This is competition, not monopolistic behavior.
As a consumer, you get to vote with your dollars whether you spend money at Starbucks or at a different coffee shop. Maybe you choose because you like the other coffee shops' wireless provider better. This is also non-monopolistic -- you have a choice. | |
|
| Reviews:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| Unless I am mistaken, Starbucks is paying AT&T/T-mobile/Verizon to provide service for the WiFi. What would the price of an already overpriced cup of Starbucks be if they were paying for T-1's from AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon so that there could be "competition"? | |
|
| |  joakoPremium
join:2000-09-07
/dev/null
kudos:5
·Comcast
| Re: Why the need for exclusivity? said by Austinloop:Unless I am mistaken, Starbucks is paying AT&T/T-mobile/Verizon to provide service for the WiFi. What would the price of an already overpriced cup of Starbucks be if they were paying for T-1's from AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon so that there could be "competition"? I doubt Starbucks is paying for the T1's. If anything they are getting paid to have their access points located at their stores.
--
09:F9:11:02:9D:74:E3:5B:D8:41:56:C5:63:56:88:C0 | |
|
| | Kick the Bums Out! [humorous commentary]Seriously folks, how much would the country suffer if it were illegal to offer wireless at these establishments? The Loafing Underemployed Ragamuffins of America would (gasp) have to get a job or pay for their own damn access at home. I've personally witnessed the same losers day in and day out spending their whole day in the coffee shop. Get a job already! Your PhD in Ancient Flemish Lesbian Non Fiction Toadstool Writing isn't going to equate to big bucks anytime soon!
All of Western civilization is going down the toilet, and an entire segment of society is glued to some ratty couch, festering in caffeinated sweat and YouTube videos, buying a $1 hot tea and foistering themselves on the general public with their grandiose, empty-headed, devoid-of-reality shysterdom of how they're some "great artist" on the cusp of being "disocvered". Bleeeeechhh!
[\humorous commentary] | |
|
|  tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3
·Comcast
| Re: Kick the Bums Out! said by satellite68: [humorous commentary].......... I've personally witnessed the same losers day in and day out spending their whole day in the coffee shop. Get a job already! [\humorous commentary] [humorous reply]
and YOUR excuse for hanging out at the coffee shop all day watching losers is????
[/humorous reply] | |
|
| | | | Re: Kick the Bums Out! said by tshirt:said by satellite68: [humorous commentary].......... I've personally witnessed the same losers day in and day out spending their whole day in the coffee shop. Get a job already! [\humorous commentary] [humorous reply] and YOUR excuse for hanging out at the coffee shop all day watching losers is???? [/humorous reply] [humorous counter reply]I never said I wasn't a loser as well...  [/humorous counter reply] | |
|
 DadCooksPremium
join:2005-02-28
Kennewick, WA |  The Rest of the Story
Since when does AT&T cooperate with anybody? | |
|
| |
| | |
| Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA | said by DadCooks:Is this just an indication that AT&T is maybe considering absorbing T-Mobile America in the next couple of years? Whenever Deutsche Telekom decides to sell it whether or not in the next couple of years. | |
|
| |  n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
·Optimum Online
| Re: The Rest of the Story I'm a TMO customer and I suspect the clock is ticking. They rarely factor into any reports now on the cellular industry. The heavyweights are AT&T and Verizon. Other than SunCom, TMO has not acquired any other providers lately. Their 3G rollout is stalled until the government vacates the AWS frequencies and they only have a fraction of the spectrum that Verizon and AT&T have.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears. | |
|
| | | Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA | Re: The Rest of the Story Deutsche Telekom is probably reluctant to give up the cash flow but if they find a major acquisition they like somewhere else in the world there's a good chance T-Mobile USA would go up for sale. | |
|
| | |  rcdaileyDragoonflyPremium
join:2005-03-29
Rialto, CA | So long as my prepaid T-Mobile phone works, I guess I don't care who owns the company. I could live without Starbucks, too. Come to think of it, I do. | |
|
| | All T-Mo customers can access? If I'm not mistaken, only those customers who were paying the full price of internet-related services ($20/mo) were able to log onto the wifi T-Mobile hotspots.
If there is a roaming agreement, I wonder if, now, all T-Mobile customers will be able to use the Starbuck's hotspots. | |
|
 ptrowskiGot Helix?Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4 | All about marketing.... So when will we see "AT&T, the exclusive WIFI provider to Starbucks" in their advertising? | |
|
| |  It146;s a good thing, stop the hate
| |
|
 highhatsizeNorm, The Basset For All TimePremium
join:2001-02-08
Spring, TX
·Comcast
| Disincentive I don't go to Starbucks here in San Francisco because there are other coffee houses, private and chains, that have better coffee. On top of that, they all offer free wi-fi to everyone.
Now I have another reason of which I was unaware not to go to Starbucks. They don't have free wi-fi.
I suppose having an exclusive arrangement with a single provider in Toonerville is a good idea, but in the city, it is just that, "exclusive".
--
Cordially, SANFRANSON | |
|
|
|
·
·
