republican-creole
Search:  

 
 
   All ForumsHot TopicsGallery






how-to block ads


 
Forums » Project LightSpeed » Seriously, though....
Search Topic:
Share Topic:
RSS topic:
toggle:
flat / full
normal / watch
Post a:
Post a:
Pronto »
« FIber All The Way  
AuthorAll Replies

nasadude

join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast

reply to soothsayer15
Re: Seriously, though....

said by soothsayer15 See Profile:
The Telco's aren't doing this because they like empty promises. FTTP is a must for their survival.


If that's true, why do they need deregulation to do it? Are you saying the bells would rather wither and die than not get their monopoly on fiber?

I have absolutely no sympathy for any of the ILECs. They should have been doing this a couple of years ago, before they were getting their lunch eaten by cable and VOIP. That's not the way would be monopolies play though. Instead of innovating and leading in technology, they spend their money on lobbying and FUD; how many fiber connections could have been laid with the ILEC lobbying budget? If the FCC hadn't given in the the bells lobbying, I guarantee you fiber would have been deployed, deregulation or not.

The ILECs only held out this long because they were sure they could buy (thru lobbying) the deregulation they sought.

lvas

join:2001-05-17
Glen Carbon, IL

why should they have done it years ago? because you say so?
ha thats funny. Yes of course they waited until the legal climate was right for investment - something wrong with that? as for cable and VOIP eating their lunch - boy have you got your facts wrong. VOIP is used by less than 1% of phone users nation wide - yes thats right the other 99% is still their market. as to cable - DSL is gaining ground everyday on cable and when fiber lights up SBC will be offering VIOP. so to me it looks like SBC buisness plan is right on track

nasadude

join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast

said by lvas See Profile.. Yes of course they waited until the legal climate was right for investment - something wrong with that? as for cable and VOIP eating their lunch - boy have you got your facts wrong. VOIP is used by less than 1% of phone users nation wide - yes thats right the other 99% is still their market. as to cable - DSL is gaining ground everyday on cable and when fiber lights up SBC will be offering VIOP. so to me it looks like SBC buisness plan is right on track
[/BQUOTE:



I'm being optimistic about VOIP "eating their lunch" - I can dream, can't I?

And yes, if the business plan is to get their monopoly back, I would say SBC and Verizon are right on track.

Don't get me wrong, the ILECs have every right to pursue their monopoly; that doesn't mean I have to like it. The real problem is the spineless, corrupt political process that allows this sh1t to happen. It would just be nice not to be a semi-third world country when it comes to broadband.

soothsayer15

join:2002-03-01
Irving, TX

reply to nasadude
said by nasadude See Profile:
said by soothsayer15 See Profile:
The Telco's aren't doing this because they like empty promises. FTTP is a must for their survival.


If that's true, why do they need deregulation to do it? Are you saying the bells would rather wither and die than not get their monopoly on fiber?

I have absolutely no sympathy for any of the ILECs. They should have been doing this a couple of years ago, before they were getting their lunch eaten by cable and VOIP. That's not the way would be monopolies play though. Instead of innovating and leading in technology, they spend their money on lobbying and FUD; how many fiber connections could have been laid with the ILEC lobbying budget? If the FCC hadn't given in the the bells lobbying, I guarantee you fiber would have been deployed, deregulation or not.

The ILECs only held out this long because they were sure they could buy (thru lobbying) the deregulation they sought.


This is exactly what I am talking about, business sense. Would you spent billions of dollars deploying a network, if there was a chance you would have to share it with your competitors? Why not just paid for their advertising while they are at it. The Bells are paying it's own employees and contractors to deploy this network. I don't envision their competitors sharing the costs. This also shows what you know, lobbying does not cost BILLIONS of dollars. It is expensive, but nowhere near the cost of building a fiber network. Do you think The Bells or the Cable Companies competitors don't lobby?
Forums » Project LightSpeedPronto »
« FIber All The Way  


Sunday, 08-Nov 23:56:24 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.
page compression OFF
Most commented news this week
· [156] Cable Uncapper Faces Criminal Charges
· [140] AT&T Sues Verizon Over 3G Ads
· [112] Why Run Fiber When You Can Run Ads That Pretend You Do?
· [108] Comcast Is Simply Getting Huge
· [93] Apple Cooking Up New $30 A Month TV Service?
· [83] Bits Of ACTA Agreement Leaking Out
· [80] Will 'Three Strikes' Come To The United States?
· [78] Verizon To Double Smartphone ETFs?
· [77] Verizon: Droid Tethering Will Cost $30 Extra
· [73] Comcast, NBC Deal Almost Complete
Most people now reading
· My cat is reluctant to exercise. [General Questions]
· [NFL] Week 9 Games Thread [Sports Chat]
· Hit and run [General Questions]
· 3.x Feral Druid - Bear Tanking Guide [World of Warcraft]
· [Rant] Brand New 'Jasper' Xbox360 - RRoD Hardware Failure [Rants, Raves, and Praise]
· TekSavvy site down? [TekSavvy]
· [FS] Motherboard + CPU + Hard Drive + Servers + More! [For Sale/Wanted]
· Garbage Disposal and Dishwasher [Home Repair & Improvement]
· [How to] Install Asterisk on an Asus WL-520GU router [VOIP Tech Chat]