<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Re: Corporations Win Again!! in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r4492585</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 00:36:53 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 00:36:53 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: Corporations Win Again!!</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,4492585</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/578896"><b>jimbos76</b></A> : AT&T did no upgrades to the tci systems. One of the conditions for AT&T buying TCI was they had to upgrade before the sale. So TCI threw together a bunch of crap including using telephone for the return path in order for the sale to go through. As for "more experience" the only thing AT&T has more experience with is losing money and over paying for things.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,4492585</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 21 Sep 2002 23:03:14 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Corporations Win Again!!</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,4470688</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/625141"><b>pnh102</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by systems2000:</SMALL><HR> They have been running HSI service for less than a year and AT&T has been networking a lot longer. I'd say AT&T has more experience than Comcast. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br>True... but keep in mind AT&T's interaction with home-based customers, which are the bread and butter for cable, used to be long distance service, in which an ILEC would pretty much handle everything for them.  Aside from credits for wrong numbers, or other LD service problems, AT&T didn't really have familiarity with the hands on approach that cable TV requires.<br><br>Additionally, when AT&T bought TCI, they overpaid significantly.  They got <A HREF="http://www.post-gazette.com/regionstate/19991123ccable2.asp">TCI for $54 billion in 1999</A> and are now selling it to Comcast for $54.6 billion.  Even factoring in inflation this was a horrible deal for AT&T, they had been pushed into the corner and now have no choice but to sell.  What I wonder is, and the link I give makes mention of this, is that AT&T spent "$100 Billion" on other cable TV operations.  Does this include TCI or not?  And is ATTBI their ENTIRE operation, that they reportedly spent $100 to $150 Billion on, that they are selling for $54.6 billion now?  I'm not even sure if this factors in the upgrades AT&T had to do to TCI's network to make it up to snuff.<br><br>Yikes.<br><small>--<br>Proud to be an American infidel.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,4470688</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 19 Sep 2002 16:19:37 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Corporations Win Again!!</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,4470578</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/525155"><b>systems2000</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by pnh102:</SMALL><HR>Or sell to a company that's been in the cable business for years and knows what its doing?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>They may have been in the cable business for years, but how does that equate to them knowing what they are doing? They have been running HSI service for less than a year and AT&T has been networking a lot longer. I'd say AT&T has more experience than Comcast.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,4470578</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 19 Sep 2002 16:06:53 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Corporations Win Again!!</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,4470436</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/625141"><b>pnh102</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by systems2000:</SMALL><HR>How does this benefit the general public? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br>AT&T's broadband customers will continue to have service even though the rest of AT&T is in the toilet.  What's better?  Having AT&T close down its cable/broadband operations because they lack the money to run them and the brains to manage them properly?  Or sell to a company that's been in the cable business for years and knows what its doing?<br><small>--<br>Proud to be an American infidel.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,4470436</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 19 Sep 2002 15:52:29 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Corporations Win Again!!</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,4449272</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/525155"><b>systems2000</b></A> : <BR>As long as the Corporate big boys have influence in Washington, true competition and customer service will lose every time. This stinks of the same cr** as Microsoft. Slap them on the wrist when they shaft the public, then award them with bigger growth and less competition. How does this benefit the general public?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,4449272</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 17 Sep 2002 11:42:03 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
