said by Kearnstd:I rarely full-quote, but the above bears repeating.
the CFO has no choice in this to play devils advocate here. odds are the investors are pressuring Verizon to not ever expand FiOS any more because returns for FiOS are estimated at something like ten years. the upper crust's job depends on keeping the investors happy and if they don't the stockholders who nowadays are the dumbest people in business because they only care about NOW NOW NOW profits will just fire the executive board and put in people they can control.
This is part of why America is a weaker economy as well, the "NOW NOW NOW" investors have taken over and as such if they can make a cheap POS product in China they will because even the non-union American worker needs things like factories that actually are up to safety codes and actual days off and a livable wage.
Right now, Sprint's CEO, Dan Hesse, is fighting the same battle. Only Hesse is a TelCom guy and he's sticking by his guns. He knows Sprint has to step back and punt, become a technologically superior competitor, or it's dead.
One big difference between Sprint and Verizon is Sprint has competition in most, if not all, of its markets, whereas Verizon, in its wired areas doesn't, so much. So while Hesse can argue Sprint must upgrade so as to offer superior products down the road to survive, Verizon's investors know the company can tell customers "this is what we're offering--take it or leave it."
This is what comes of deregulation + effective monopoly. You can have one or the other, but not both.