Search:  

 
 
   News
newer
story category Verizon's NJ FiosTV Push Stalls
As franchise law sits unsigned on Governor's desk
(old news - 10:42AM Thursday Jul 20 2006)
tags: Video · Fiber · coverage · telco · TVIP
Verizon has traditionally used the lure of utopian broadband deployment to nudge state lawmakers into changing laws they don't like. In 2004, Verizon told New Jersey they might not see any Fios deployment after the state Board of Public Utilities ruled that Verizon could only "moderately increase" the wholesale rates the bell charges competitors to lease their lines.

"it is difficult to make a case to the corporation to invest here given the regulatory environment," Verizon warned at the time. That environment quickly became more friendly thanks to millions in Verizon lobbying expenditures in the state. Those lobbying efforts greatly greased the passage of new statewide franchise agreement legislation, the wisdom of which was recently debated by our readers.

The only problem is that the bill remains unsigned on New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine's desk, stalling Verizon's TV push, according to the local Courier Post On-line. The Governor's office has given no timeline on signing the agreement; Corzine says he's reviewing it "very carefully." Verizon has 92 local franchise applications filed in towns across New Jersey, but has held off working on more as the new law sits in limbo.

Related:
  1. NY's First FiosTV Franchise
  2. AT&T IPTV Launches In Fifteenth Market
  3. House Passes Bill Delaying DTV Transition
  4. Tuesday Evening Links
  5. Wednesday Evening Links
  6. Smithville Telephone Offers 100Mbps
  7. Verizon Slows California FiOS Deployment
  8. What Network Neutrality Is REALLY About
Forums » Verizon's NJ FiosTV Push Stalls
view: topics flat text 
Post a:

oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA

Franchise agreements are needed...

...but they have to be reasonable. I'm in favor of statewide agreements so long as they provide decent consumer protection which is the purpose for them. What I would like to see limited or eliminated through statewide agreements are these extortion operations local government tries to run where in order to get the franchise the providers have to build a bunch of other completely unrelated crap or whatnot.
Artec

join:2003-02-23
Middletown, NJ

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

This is why I am calling on everyone that reads this and live's in NJ to call the office of the Gov every day for the first week and then 2xtimes a day and so on till this bill gets signed!
BosstonesOwn

join:2002-12-15
Everett, MA
clubs:
·Comcast
·Comcast Formerly ..

That is what keeps a lot of companies from expanding when the state wide franchise laws are passed it gives a much fairer shake to the telcos and cable cos.

In all honesty this should have been done quite some time ago. The local buffoons in many areas hold out in hopes of getting free cable for themselves and other "perks" so they can abuse their power and screw their neighbors in a effort to make themselves richer.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!"

tsu9

join:2001-08-17
Wheeling, IL

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

The problem (corruption) should be fixed, and the solution does not have to deny the local populace's proper place in the scheme of things.
BosstonesOwn

join:2002-12-15
Everett, MA
clubs:

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

The local populace is usually the source of the corruption that is the major problem.

JPuppy
Java Heathen
Premium
join:2002-11-24
Honesdale, PA
clubs:
In addition to consumer protection, I opposed this bill because it takes power out of the local municipalities. I have much more voice with my Mayor than my Governor.
--
Official BBR Grouch

oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

The locals can be a problem when they go beyond protecting consumers and move to fleece the provider in an extortion scheme to solve their budget problems.

tsu9

join:2001-08-17
Wheeling, IL

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

Yeah, but you don't screw the constituents further by skipping over their former legal rights and whatnot.

oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA


1 edit

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

What screws the constituents are providers not deploying because they refuse to bow to local extortion attempts. A statewide general consumer protection platform benefits everyone who needs benefiting.

My point is only that a provider deploying shouldn't equal a payday for mismanaged municipalities.
kdandaoc

join:2003-10-13
608052427

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

Currently, these telcos are handpicking deployment spots. If they think they're being fleeced by the municipality, then they don't have to deploy there. This is the argument that ATT is using in Illinois. That they have the right to choose where they deploy!

oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

That's fine but screws the consumers who would benefit from the service and additional competition...all because some local gov't sees the provider as the solution to their budget problems.
kdandaoc

join:2003-10-13
608052427

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

There nothing new here. Local gov't sees everything as a potential revenue base. From sin taxes (tobacco, booze, and gas) to intersection cameras that mail you a ticket and a fine for going to fast.
It is up to the telcos to negotiate the revenue that they are willing to deprive themselves of. I am in no way an advocate of the telcos, I just believe this should be either take it or leave it, or straight across the board flat tax.
This is the problem with TIFs, everyone negotiates better deals screwing their neighbor

sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
·Optimum Online

said by oliphant See Profile :

A statewide general consumer protection platform benefits everyone who needs benefiting.
You clearly don't live in NJ.
--
Day dreaming days in a daydream nation

oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

A consumer protection platform would be different from a political whores taking bribes from telcos in exchage for favors platform.

sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
·Optimum Online

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

said by oliphant See Profile :

A consumer protection platform would be different from a political whores taking bribes from telcos in exchage for favors platform.
You clearly don't live in NJ.
--
Day dreaming days in a daydream nation

oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

LOL.

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast

said by sporkme See Profile :

said by oliphant See Profile :

A consumer protection platform would be different from a political whores taking bribes from telcos in exchage for favors platform.
You clearly don't live in NJ.
Heh... In NJ, consumer "protection" takes on an entirely different meaning
--
Tancredo 2008!

TScheisskopf
World News Trust

join:2005-02-13
Belvidere, NJ
·Sprint Broadband D..

said by oliphant See Profile :

The locals can be a problem when they go beyond protecting consumers and move to fleece the provider in an extortion scheme to solve their budget problems.
Oh man. You have got to be kidding. When Comcast renegotiated and re-upped their franchise agreement with my town, they cam in, dictated terms, said they were non-negotiable, and told the town council that they would have no problems stripping every last bit of hardware off the polls if the council failed to rubberstamp what they wanted.

Which council did. They had no leverage at all.

I got this from one of the councilpeople, a fine and honest man,, and a municipal lawyer friend who was there. So please, enough about these poor telecoms getting victimized by those mean, nasty municipalities. You apparently haven't a clue about the realities.

oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

Sorry, your single example evidentally isn't how it goes everywhere.
SD6

join:2005-03-26

"When Comcast renegotiated and re-upped their franchise agreement with my town, they cam in, dictated terms, said they were non-negotiable, and told the town council that they would have no problems stripping every last bit of hardware off the polls if the council failed to rubberstamp what they wanted.

Which council did. They had no leverage at all."

council had leverage, sounds like they didn't know it is all...

FLea973
Premium
join:2001-02-27
Morristown, NJ
clubs:

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

Take a look at where Belvidere, NJ (est pop 7/04= 2,761) actually is. The council really didn't have much leverage... the WHOLE town is the type of place that companies would love just to avoid - lots of cabling, not many customers. Comcast probably didn't wire it themselves either - just bought the company that did. Lose Comcast, they pull their plant.. no-one is gonna wire it.

Sadly, I don't see FIOS, let alone ANY choice other than satellite, in that area anytime soon. (given their location, I'd think even over-the-air sucks.. but I've never seen it so can't be sure)
SD6

join:2005-03-26

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

although there's no competition, the breaking point for these companies is their profit margin per subscriber. Unless there are unmentioned extenuating circumstance, the threat to remove the network was a negotiating tactic.

DaveNJ
No Fear

join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
·Comcast
·Patriot Media

The problem is that the local goverments loose all power in this arrangement, what would make alot more sense would be that they get the statewide franchise. But each town has the right to lodge complains and have an avenue for resolution. This way if a town is getting neglected they have some power. They need to give them the franchise, but each town has to have the right to enforce service standards.
--
the darkest moment is often just before dawn (unless we hold onto the darkness). Anxiety spoils everything and solves nothing.

GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

said by DaveNJ See Profile :

The problem is that the local goverments loose all power in this arrangement, what would make alot more sense would be that they get the statewide franchise. But each town has the right to lodge complains and have an avenue for resolution. This way if a town is getting neglected they have some power. They need to give them the franchise, but each town has to have the right to enforce service standards.
Actually, the bill addresses the concerns you raised here: »www.njleg.state.nj.us/2006/Bills···4_U1.HTM

Do a search of the bills text using the following search terms:
"Standards of maintenance"
"complaint"
"Section 9 of P.L.1972"
Section 10 of P.L.1972
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page

GetAClueDude

@bellsouth.net

What I would like to see limited or eliminated through statewide agreements are these extortion operations local government tries to run where in order to get the franchise the providers have to build a bunch of other completely unrelated crap or whatnot.
Like what specifically ?

There's a lot to be lost by the customer and local communities if providers get their way... Statewide franchises are going to make the service climate worse for the average customer. And anything that makes it worse than it currently is needs to be carefully examined.

oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

You can start with 65 public access channels. 65!?! WTF does a local gov't need with 65 public access channels?

GetAClueDude

@bellsouth.net

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

That's a reasonable example then...

The problem with statewide franchise agreements is that local access channels might be cut. For example, we have two locally where I live. If my state were to pass a franchise agreement with one of the Bells, where's the assurance that I would still be able to see the local council meetings, emergency notices (we live near a nuclear facility and several of the nations largest refineries and chemical facilities) and school board meetings/functions on television ?

And what about the free cable to classrooms and government offices ? A reasonable concession from these companies. What about those ?

What about local redress when they screw up property or give crappy service ? Who do I complain to, the megalithic state agency the oversees them ?

Statewide agreements put those types of public service in jeopardy.

oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA


3 edits

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

No a reasonable compromise would be say 3 public access channels at most. Free cable for classrooms and worse, gov't offices? Why? Let those organizations pay for the services they use just as they pay for electicity, telephones, paper, copiers, books, and everything else.

Emergency notices? The EBS is already active through cable, DBS and radio via the local network channels. Live council and school board meetings? Go see them. They're open to the public, or they could be carried on 2 or 3, not 65 public access channels.

Why should there be these types of concessions? Why should they have to submit to extortion, having to give the gov't a bunch of freebees. Their concessions should have to be uptime guarantees or face penalties, on time guarantees or face penalties, correctness in billing or face penalties, minimum deployment requirements etc. Not free cable for gov't workers, cable TV in school or 65 public access channels.

Franchise agreements are about protecting consumers, not gov't freebees.

jslik
That just happened
Premium
join:2006-03-17
clubs:

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

said by oliphant See Profile :

No a reasonable compromise would be say 3 public access channels at most. Free cable for classrooms and worse, gov't offices? Why? Let those organizations pay for the services they use just as they pay for electicity, telephones, paper, copiers, books, and everything else.


And who then foots that bill? You're forgetting that these providers want to use PUBLIC property (right of way) to operate. Why should that be given away for free? Free basic cable service to government building costs the company next to nothing. They're making millions in our communities; I don't think reasonable cable-related "freebies" are not too much to ask.

Live council and school board meetings? Go see them. They're open to the public, or they could be carried on 2 or 3, not 65 public access channels. Why should there be these types of concessions? Why should they have to submit to extortion, having to give the gov't a bunch of freebees.
What about those folks that can't get out to these meeting easily? I thought we wanted more transparent government. Televising government, education, and public access makes for better communities. Why is that so bad?

Also, don't paint one municipality's overreach as proof positive that all local franchising is bad.

Extortion? So it's extortion to expect something for your property you're renting out to a tenant? Cable has been able to make boatloads of money with all this supposed 'extortion'. It's not going to hurt the telcos any.

oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA


1 edit

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

Let's not forget, these providers pay hefty taxes and regulatory fees on the millions they make in our communities. IMO, they are already contributing their fair share with that money, more than enough to offset the right-of-way they get. Without the right of way, those gov'ts don't see any of that tax money and stand to lose tons more. I would agree if gov't didn't already make tons of money off of the business these providers generate, both paying taxes on their profits, by employing tons of local workers who also pay taxes, but also by attracting businesses with the services they provide and those guys pay taxes and generate sales tax and property tax revenue. Every time this telco or cable generated money changes hands, whether it's buying equipment, paying their building leases or paying employees...the gov't get a cut...EVERY time.

Now don't get me wrong. I'm not a telco or cable kiss ass who believes they can do no wrong. I simply believe that the franchise agreement should be about consumer protections, not a bunch of gov't payoffs with free stuff, 65 public access channels and all the other crap that the customers end up paying for on the back end anyway. 'Cause what I see happening sometimes are consumers losing 'cause they can't get service because gov't is greedy and wants their stuff or no one gets anything.

GetAClueDude

@bellsouth.net

No a reasonable compromise would be say 3 public access channels at most.
That depends on the size of the area and the viewership of an local access channels. A hard and fast number just thrown out, like 3, is just as unreasonable as asking for 65. It depends on the locality. If you've only got a small fraction of the public watching them, then it doesn't make sense to have tens of public access channels.

Free cable for classrooms and worse, gov't offices? Why? Let those organizations pay for the services they use just as they pay for electicity, telephones, paper, copiers, books, and everything else.
Becuase, by and large, most of the providers are willing to give this without any sort of resistance. Its good PR for them. They are willing to give it away because it helps education and the local governments.

Emergency notices? The EBS is already active through cable, DBS and radio via the local network channels. Live council and school board meetings? Go see them. They're open to the public, or they could be carried on 2 or 3, not 65 public access channels.
You seem to be stuck on the whole 65 public access channel thing... Emergency notices are often delivered through public access channels. Post-Katrina and Post-Rita, public access channels were some of the only ways locality specific information got to those citizens in the area. They addressed road-closures, status of clean-up, etc that couldn't be provided over typical OTA broadcasters because it would have taken too much time.

Franchise agreements are about protecting consumers, not gov't freebees.
Yes and no... They are about protecting the consumer and ensuring that the public good is balanced with the benefits the providers receive from the ability to market in that area.

Morac

join:2001-08-30
Riverside, NJ
·Comcast

I like the idea of a statewide franchise, as long as Verizon actually plans to deploy FIOS statewide.

Currently they do not. They are only deploying to affluent neighborhoods and major cities. They have no plans to deploy any where else.

I've experienced FIOS (my parents have it) and it really does blow away cable, but Comcast has nothing to fear with the spot picking that Verizon is doing.

I wish they would have tacked on a provision to the bill to force Verizon to actually deploy to the whole state.
--

The Comcast Disney Avatar has been retired.

oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA


1 edit

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

They've only been working on FIOS deployments for a few years. You can expect 100% deployment overnight. It's zillions of dollars and zillions of labor hours and they have to start somewhere. Look at cable...cable HSI started in 1996 and it was 10 years before cable HSI was fairly universal in availablilty to cable subs.

Hangmn
Don't Fight It...It's Inevitable
Premium
join:2000-04-08
Philadelphia, PA

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

said by oliphant See Profile :

They've only been working on FIOS deployments for a few years. You can expect 100% deployment overnight. It's zillions of dollars and zillions of labor hours and they have to start somewhere. Look at cable...cable HSI started in 1996 and it was 10 years before cable HSI was fairly universal in availablilty to cable subs.
OMG STOP IT!!! The telcos have had 10+ years to deploy, as promised in just PA ALONE!!!...they are rapists and ANY DEALS made with these gangsters need to be gone over with a fine tooth comb
--
»davescustompc.com

oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA

Re: Franchise agreements are needed...

I've been very vocal about Verizon stealing billions from PA taxpayers and they should have to return every penny, plus interest and penalties.

Meanwhile what I've said is true. It's only been a few years since the start of deployment and it doesn't happen overnight.

Morac

join:2001-08-30
Riverside, NJ
·Comcast

True, but it is interesting how basically 99% of the towns that Verizon has said they are going to wire is in the North have of the state.

Verizon hasn't even committed to upgrading the whole state. When Comcast started upgrading they at least were able to tell me that it would come to my area (even if they couldn't say when).
--

The Comcast Disney Avatar has been retired.

PGHammer

join:2003-06-09
Accokeek, MD
clubs:
·Comcast

Only affluent neighborhoods? That's funny; I don't consider either Prince George's County, Anne Arundel County, or even Baltimore County affluent (VZ is deploying FIOS Internet currently in all three Maryland counties, and has agreements in place to deploy FIOS TV in two, and is actively negotiating in the third). The one Maryland county that *is* affluent (Montgomery County) is actually being sued by Verizon due to their negotiating tactics and their interpretations of local laws. For that reason, I'd say your *cherry picking* argument doesn't hold water.
SurfPunk

join:2002-11-10
Crofton, MD

Dude,
"Provide decent consumer protection", my a$$. The only reason the local governments want these agreements is because they add a Franchise Fee (TAX) onto the consumers bill each month. My county finally passed a franchise agreement only after haggling for months over how to ensure that they are able to audit Verizon's books to make sure they are getting every penny they think they deserve. I'm sorry; I pay enough taxes to the county, state, and feds. I really don't need additional hidden taxes on every little thing that these politicians think they have a right to tax with these stupid fees. These franchise fees are passed onto the consumer, causing me and everyone else a higher bill every month. DO AWAY WITH LOCAL FRANCHISES AND THE TAXES THEY ADD TO THE COST OF SERVICES! If this were truely for consumer protection, my Comcast TV service wouldn't suck as bad as it does.

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

Useless State Government

Maybe Verizon should have lobbied for another 1% sales tax hike in NJ and have their franchise agreement attached to that. It would have passed in a heartbeat.
--
Tancredo 2008!

See 9 replies to this post

ss4vegito7

join:2004-07-24
Cranbury, NJ

Oh

So thats why my town doesn't have FIOS yet!

calvoiper

join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA

VZ can't think outside the box....

Maybe Verizon's problem here is that they aren't thinking creatively enough.

They are trying to mirror the video delivery of cable and satellite. Shouldn't they just scrap the whole "broadcast" mentality and go for "on demand" video as a data service?

Of course, this would require true entrepreneurial spirit--something almost entirely lacking in a corporation made up almost wholly of century-old monopolies and run by dedicated monopolists.

calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies!

InvisibleBW

@swbell.net

Re: VZ can't think outside the box....

Maybe Verizon's problem here is that they aren't thinking creatively enough.

They are trying to mirror the video delivery of cable and satellite. Shouldn't they just scrap the whole "broadcast" mentality and go for "on demand" video as a data service?

FIOS doesn't have enough bandwidth to replicate our current TV experience as an on-demand service nor do they have the content rights to provide this service. Broadcast/IP multicast is a LOT more efficient at delivering stuff that a group of people want to watch at around the same time.

For really long-tail content, the equation flips, and on-demand is more BW efficient.

Doc

calvoiper

join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA

Re: VZ can't think outside the box....

I understand what you're saying, but you're still thinking in the same box.

The dynamics of broadcasting have conditioned folks to simultaneous viewing of content--but that is exactly the conditioning that will eventually be broken. He who breaks that conditioning first has a tremendous lead--but VZ seems uninterested, focusing instead on services catering to existing patterns.

And as for the content licenses, that's just another excuse not to try something different. Content is available for on-demand services, but it isn't VZ that's pioneering in that field. Even the segment of transitioning broadcast content to on-demand is being led by independents.

It's almost as bad as if Xerox had made its copy machines copy only existing books, because before the Xerox machine, books were the only thing produced in batch runs of more than 4 or 5, due to the limitations of carbon paper....

calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies!
tmc8080

join:2004-04-24
Floral Park, NY

stapped for cash

well, now that NJ raised their sales tax to make it more expensive for just about EVERYTHING in NJ.... dont' think they won't want some goodie$ from Verizon as well-- don't forget, POTS taxes are still a REALITY in the garden state.. but cable tv franchises might have to be re-negotiated, so just when you think your out of the tax man's game, they pull you back in..

Ream0

@comcast.net

It's A No Brainer!

.....Just write the governor a bigger check! After all,Bribery is what Verizon does best!

Rob A
Same Old Jets
Premium
join:2005-01-17
Pompton Plains, NJ

Why the stall?

I wonder what is keeping corzine from signing, he said previously he was in favor of a statewide franchise agreement.

RustyTheDog
Premium
join:2003-05-27
Trenton, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..

Re: Why the stall?

said by Rob A See Profile :

I wonder what is keeping corzine from signing, he said previously he was in favor of a statewide franchise agreement.
Corslime won't sign yet becuase there isn't any money in it for him. Plain and simple.

kamm

join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
·T-Mobile US

Re: Why the stall?

said by RustyTheDog See Profile :

said by Rob A See Profile :

I wonder what is keeping corzine from signing, he said previously he was in favor of a statewide franchise agreement.
Corslime won't sign yet becuase there isn't any money in it for him. Plain and simple.
Or perhaps he just not convinced a statewise franchise will do any good...?

This whole idea is NONSENSE and CLEARLY goes against any market, even plain logic.
op

join:2005-07-16
Smyrna, DE

Redline question

Will this statewide franchise agreement give VZ the ability to redline or not?
Artec

join:2003-02-23
Middletown, NJ

Re: Redline question

"Currently they do not. They are only deploying to affluent neighborhoods and major cities. They have no plans to deploy any where else." For the post who posted this

WRONG!!! Right now verizon is doing Asbury Park. I tend to think that is a big city or Afflutnet. I think you need to find your facts before you speak. And I dont want to hear well they are doing the waterfront becasue they are not. They are doing it becasue it is a large CO!
RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
·XMission

Power to the corporation

The higher up the chain in politics (government) that you go, the less you are beholden to the voter (aka "The PEOPLE") and the more you can be beholden to big money (corporate in many cases). It seems to me that once you strip the rhetoric away, you boil the franchise issue down to two issues, 1. do the people have a chance to control things, or 2. does the corporate industry gain more control over things.

Your local elected officials are more likely to get voted out if they mess up too badly and too often. Word of mouth can often overcome the bias of media. You get to the governor or state legislature, then word of mouth is not as important as what the media can be convinced (or desires) to say or spin. Hence the corporations would like to see franchise taken out of the locals and moved up. Less bribes and less leg work, along with less ability for the PEOPLE to make a stir.

As I look at many of the posts in favor of what looks like giving more power to the corporates and in the process most likely diluting the power of the people, I wonder how many of the same people complain about Bush taking away the power of the people? It would be interesting to have someone with the time and resources to go through and analyze various posts and see who complains about one viewpoint, but espouses the other one. Or for that fact, are constant on their points of view.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time.

richardpor
Fur it up

join:2003-04-19
Portland, OR

Abolish Franchising

Forget state wide franchising the who idea of franchising needs to be abolished.

Franchising has nothing to do with guaranteeing customer service; it is form government sponsored extortion, a la Tony Soprano, of favors from cable or telco provider and a way to pass a tax increase on the consumer. Often the demands place by the local government has noting to do with customer service These favors include TV channels (public access) for political purpose and landscaping.

GetAClueDude

@bellsouth.net

Re: Abolish Franchising

And without frachising, how exactly do you think that consumers are protected from the providers or gauranteed minimum levels of service delivery or customer service ? Who exactly do the consumers go to if there is no oversight ?

Rick
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT
clubs:

While I agree that the Governor

should certainly take his time and review the agreement carefully, that shouldn't mean that this issue shouldn't be expedited and moved ahead with as quickly as possible.

Competition is severely needed and this WILL benefit the consumer.

As many users have shown here at BBR, fios is an exciting new development and carries with it the potential to significantly lower prices across the board for consumers for services ranging from voice, HSI, and TV.

When you consider the way that Verizon and the Death Star have approached this issue, it is night and day. The death star apparently feels they don't need no stinkin agreements and will sue their way into some communities instead. Verizon has taken the responsible approach and is working very diligently in negotiating agreements.

In addition, Verizon has shown that, despite tremendous shareholder pressure, they are proceeding in the more costly manner to roll out fiber to the home to insure high quality service. The death Star apparently sees things very differently and wants to continue on with using as much of their copper network as is possible, which I submit will come back and haunt not only them, but their customers as well.

All of this in my book equals Verizon SHOULD receive favorable treatment. From regulators, politicians right down to you and me...this company should be supported in their efforts to do the right thing.
--
The life you help save just might be your own Team Discovery
majortom1981

join:2004-08-26
Lindenhurst, NY

Re: While I agree that the Governor

Did you see why they didnt serve nj?

Because nj passed a law that Verizon could only raise rates by a certain amount.

Why is everybody all of a sudden on Verizon's side?

batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ
clubs:
·Verizon Online DSL

Re: While I agree that the Governor

said by majortom1981 See Profile :

Did you see why they didnt serve nj?

Because nj passed a law that Verizon could only raise rates by a certain amount.

Why is everybody all of a sudden on Verizon's side?
Verizon is a private company no longer Ma Bell. Cable companies don't have to share their network why should Verizon?

People love to talk but not learn.

Travelfan1
RIP Analog Go Digital

join:2005-08-23
Iselin, NJ
·Comcast

possible answers to majortom:

1- To have a cheaper Cable TV bill.
2- To have a better channel lineup than what Comcast in Northern NJ offers

I am not on Verizon's side, I am on Mr. and Mrs. TravelFan1 pockets side
--
Comcast of New Jersey II(Union)
Verizon DSL

batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ
clubs:

Corzine is an ass

That slime ball jumped from the Senate to the State House because that is an easier rout to the White House. He is like a spoiled kid when he doesn't get what he wants. He shut down the state to get his massive tax increase passed.

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast

Re: Corzine is an ass

said by batterup See Profile :

That slime ball jumped from the Senate to the State House because that is an easier rout to the White House.
Unfortunately, NJ is a lot like Philadelphia in the sense that all the people who got tired of being screwed like that already moved out. The remaining people don't seem to care and they will continue to vote in these sorts of people year after year.
--
Tancredo 2008!

TScheisskopf
World News Trust

join:2005-02-13
Belvidere, NJ
·Sprint Broadband D..

said by batterup See Profile :

That slime ball jumped from the Senate to the State House because that is an easier rout to the White House. He is like a spoiled kid when he doesn't get what he wants. He shut down the state to get his massive tax increase passed.
Yeah, let's just have the telecoms jam another bad bill down out throats. Why should our governor look out for the consumer and do due diligence? After all, we only exist for big corporations to perform Combat Proctology upon, right?

It's all so easy once you shut down everything above the medulla oblongata. I wish I had seen that before. Life would be simpler.

batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ
clubs:
·Verizon Online DSL

Re: Corzine is an ass

said by TScheisskopf See Profile :

It's all so easy once you shut down everything above the medulla oblongata.

Thank you for explaining how you post.

TScheisskopf
World News Trust

join:2005-02-13
Belvidere, NJ
·Sprint Broadband D..

Re: Corzine is an ass

said by batterup See Profile :

said by TScheisskopf See Profile :

It's all so easy once you shut down everything above the medulla oblongata.

Thank you for explaining how you post.
Clown

NJ sux

@verizon.net

First, 99% of the NJ Governors in the past 30-40 yrs have either been crooks
or self indulging PRI*KS. One being a total "closet case" bone smuggler.

Second,in just about every area.. Taxes,High cost of living, car insurance etc.,
NJ ranks as bottom of the barrel, to the rest of the country.

Third, we live in a highly polluted state in the way of Toxic Areas
NJ turnpike,Meadowlands,and other cess pool areas.

So why are people making such a fuss over the Verizon cable issue?
Even though I admit, current cable Tv sucks in NJ, way over priced,
rarely anthing that good to watch, and those highly annoying and dumb
cable tv commercials that are played repeatly 1000 times a day. It is the least of NJ'S PROBLEMS!!!

Tzale
Proud Libertarian Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
Sweden

COME ON!

Corzine SIGN IT!

Can't he do anything right? He and McGreevy are the WORST Governors ever in New Jersey.

Leave it to the Dems! Good in the Federal offices, but they suck at local government!

-Tzale

jslik
That just happened
Premium
join:2006-03-17
clubs:

Re: COME ON!

said by Tzale See Profile :

Corzine SIGN IT!

Can't he do anything right? He and McGreevy are the WORST Governors ever in New Jersey.

Leave it to the Dems! Good in the Federal offices, but they suck at local government!

-Tzale
Isn't the issue here New Jersey as opposed to Democrat vs. Republican? I think it's safe to say that Republicans and Democrats in places like New Jersey, Vermont, North Dakota, California, Louisiana (for example) share a party label, and that's pretty much it.
cdobol

join:2002-02-12
Denville, NJ

How many democrats vs. republicans sponsored this bill? I don't think this has anything to do with democrat vs. republican. I think he will eventually sign it, but he wants to look it over (isn't this his job?) I just hope this gets attention before the fight about property tax reform... otherwise it may be a VERY long time before this get attention (how long before it is pocket vetoed?).

Also note if for some reason it gets vetoed there were enough votes to override it.
Forums » Verizon's NJ FiosTV Push Stalls


Monday, 09-Nov 21:33:23 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.