imrf
Premium
join:2002-06-06
Utica, MI
 ·WOW Internet and C..
| reply to GhostDoggy
Re: Statewide Franchises
That's the governments fault, they labeled cable as an information service, not a telecommunications service.
I am glad that they so far haven't been give state-wide franchise agreement. It won't be any slower getting local agreements vs. a state-wide one, since they only has service active in a handful of cities. They just need to get off their butts and send out their proposals. |
|
GhostDoggy
join:2005-05-11
Duluth, GA
| I agree, its is all about paperwork. But that is only the initial process. What happens when those small townships start asking for unconventional conditions--which has been illustrated before on DSLR before as example is extreme requests.
A simplification of the process would benefit everyone, not just phone companies diversifying. |
|
imrf
Premium
join:2002-06-06
Utica, MI
·WOW Internet and C..
| said by GhostDoggy  :I agree, its is all about paperwork. But that is only the initial process. What happens when those small townships start asking for unconventional conditions--which has been illustrated before on DSLR before as example is extreme requests. That's part of the game in getting cable tv franchises. If Verizon and SBC can't play the game properly, then don't play at all.
A simplification of the process would benefit everyone, not just phone companies diversifying. Sure, but then the state would also have to give the cable companies the same opportunity. |
|
