Re: Quadruple for Comcast & TWC - Verizon supplies cell service
said by FFH5:I combined my Verizon DSL bill with my Verizon Wireless bill and now I talk to the "Verizon Wireless One Bill Department" whenever I call them. They actually seem to be a bit easier to deal with and better trained than the regular VZW reps, though we'll see how long that lasts.
But will it actually be better than dealing with Verizon directly for cell service?
Re: only wireless cable..
said by tmc8080:And how does that benefit customers? Company XYZ will have to spend Millions to create that network. They will want to make that $$ back and when they see that you will pay $X for service they will initially price their service at a little less than $X. But over time it will go up to near the same as the big boys. Why? Investors -at some point they will need to make a profit or increase their profit level.
Still, the focus should be on getting minority carriers to acquire and build upon new spectrum licenses. This is the main path to getting competition to flourish.
Competition does nothing but make you feel good. It almost never results in truly lower prices or better service. Look at gas stations or grocery stores as an example. All are roughly the same prices across the board....
Re: It all sounds very incestuous... Those are my exact thoughts. Consumers should be rooting for competition, not collaboration. Frankly, I'd rather see the spectrum go to a third party that competes with both of them.
| |IPPlanManHoly Cable Modem Batman
Meanwhile at AT&T....
I bet some corporate drone is saying:
Your Cupcake Tricks Will Not Work On Me...
"If only we'd have gotten them more cupcakes"...
Re: Now they can leave OTA alone The reality is that OTA is currently some of the most utilized and beneficial to the public spectrum there is. What isn't being used for OTA would be more valuable to the public with unlicensed white band device use than being auctioned to corporations that have already shown an unwillingness to invest what's necessary for a real broadband (fiber to the home) future. Unfortunately the other reality is there will be whining, lies, etc. aimed at taking away UHF OTA spectrum as long as it is practical for anyone to use an antenna to watch TV without paying a monthly bill. Greed, not spectrum, is the real reason behind the unfair attacks on OTA.
Re: i don't like this
said by 25139889:One problem with the idea that "plenty more [spectrum] can be opened up" is that wireless spectrum is already becoming ever more fragmented.
lol. and why???? This is crazy to be worked up over using the air waves there is still plenty more that can be opened up.
A few years ago, wireless carriers operated in essentially three different bands: Cellular 850 MHz, PCS 1900 MHz, and SMR 800/900 MHz. Today, those operating bands have expanded to include, as well, AWS 2100+1700 MHz, BRS/EBS 2500-2600 MHz, Lower 700 MHz (with multiple band classes), and Upper 700 MHz (with multiple band classes). Not to mention, LightSquared and EchoStar (Dish Network) both want to bring Ancillary Terrestrial Component satellite spectrum to the mix, potentially adding ATC 1500 MHz and ATC 2000 MHz, respectively.
All of this increasing fragmentation of wireless spectrum concomitantly leads to increasing fragmentation among device compatibility. Since wireless devices cannot readily support all of the emerging operating bands, device manufacturers frequently focus on largely/exclusively carrier specific capabilities (e.g. VZW and Upper 700 MHz band class 13, T-Mobile and AWS 2100+1700 MHz band class IV). And this becomes just another tie that binds in the dysfunctional contract subsidy system -- an impediment to true competition and consumer choice.
Re: i don't like this
said by 25139889:I "don't see" how your response says much.
Still don't see the problem.
And DishNetwork is a separate company from EchoStar. Has been for some time.
And both EchoStar and Dish Network hold stakes in Manifest, which is the license holding entity for Lower 700 MHz spectrum.