Shadow01
Premium
join:2003-10-24
Wasteland
 ·AT&T Midwest
| Muni not going to win this one
Just want to throw this out... If the copper network was paid for with money earned as a monopoly, why have I read comments that feel broadband should be transported over a regulated network?
Posted by nasadude...Monopolies by nature tend to not innovate or reduce prices or treat their customers right - why should they, you have no other choice (BTW, having a choice between one cable provider and one ILEC in NOT competition). The legacy copper networks were built with customer money - there was absolutely no risk to the original RBOCs for building out the copper network.
Another felt that the ILECs should fold up and leave their networks intact for someone else to use... Either these companies need to be kept as monopolies and fully regulated and out of any competitive products along with keeping others from infringing on these monopolized services or they need to be allowed to fully move into the competitive market with no restrictions. Sorry, but most of you want your free marked priced broadband with government forced service areas. Hard to work both sides and come out winning. This argument is no different than saying a small town of 4,000 people are entitled to have a local walmart to shop in, rather than having to drive 30 miles to the closet store. I vote we completely unregulate the entire telecom side. If you insist on the ILECs not using the old copper networks under the new platform, then you can wait for your services until the new completely unregulated network is installed and ready for use. By the way, what company are you going to hold as the 'provider of last resort' so no one will be denied service? |
|
batageek
Slave To The Duopoly
Premium
join:2003-01-25
| I may not deserve a walmart in the eyes of walmart. But I also shouldn't be required to get permission from walmart if I want to build my own store.
--
»www.tricitybroadband.com |
|
Shadow01
Premium
join:2003-10-24
Wasteland
·AT&T Midwest
| yes, but your town shouldn't build it to compete directly with other stores
All I'm saying is, people want BB and if they don't get it they want Gov. to make someone give it to them, but God forbid they happen to use a legacy network that was built under a monopoly. We have to decide to pay more for BB on an all fiber network or let the Services convert over time. I know that I will never see FTTH in the town I live in, but I also understand that BB is not a service that I am entitled to recieve.
Maybe we could solve all of this if we would just make BB part of Social Security and let the working people pay for its deployment on an all fiber network. |
|
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
| reply to Shadow01
the problem is BB is a service required for progress as a first world country, problem here in the US is that if your street isnt profitable for SBC or whoever then you dont get BB reguardless of if it would be in your budget. this is where the city needs to step in, most of this country still wouldnt have electric power if the feds didnt form the TVA.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports |
|
Fiber2home
join:2004-12-30
Lafayette, LA | Yes - let's think about this... Our nations telecommunications infrastructure upgrades are based on corporate profit margins. What if interstates were build on the same model... we would still be driving on gravel roads. |
|
hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH | reply to Shadow01
sounds like you work for SBC or own stock in them. |
|
