oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| Franchise agreements are needed...
...but they have to be reasonable. I'm in favor of statewide agreements so long as they provide decent consumer protection which is the purpose for them. What I would like to see limited or eliminated through statewide agreements are these extortion operations local government tries to run where in order to get the franchise the providers have to build a bunch of other completely unrelated crap or whatnot. |
|
Artec
join:2003-02-23
Middletown, NJ | This is why I am calling on everyone that reads this and live's in NJ to call the office of the Gov every day for the first week and then 2xtimes a day and so on till this bill gets signed! |
|
BosstonesOwn
join:2002-12-15
Everett, MA
clubs:
 ·Comcast
| reply to oliphant
That is what keeps a lot of companies from expanding when the state wide franchise laws are passed it gives a much fairer shake to the telcos and cable cos.
In all honesty this should have been done quite some time ago. The local buffoons in many areas hold out in hopes of getting free cable for themselves and other "perks" so they can abuse their power and screw their neighbors in a effort to make themselves richer.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" |
|
tsu9
join:2001-08-17
Wheeling, IL | The problem (corruption) should be fixed, and the solution does not have to deny the local populace's proper place in the scheme of things. |
|
JPuppy
Java Heathen
Premium
join:2002-11-24
Honesdale, PA
clubs: | reply to oliphant
In addition to consumer protection, I opposed this bill because it takes power out of the local municipalities. I have much more voice with my Mayor than my Governor.
--
Official BBR Grouch |
|
DaveNJ
No Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
·Comcast
·Patriot Media
| reply to oliphant
The problem is that the local goverments loose all power in this arrangement, what would make alot more sense would be that they get the statewide franchise. But each town has the right to lodge complains and have an avenue for resolution. This way if a town is getting neglected they have some power. They need to give them the franchise, but each town has to have the right to enforce service standards.
--
the darkest moment is often just before dawn (unless we hold onto the darkness). Anxiety spoils everything and solves nothing. |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA | reply to JPuppy
The locals can be a problem when they go beyond protecting consumers and move to fleece the provider in an extortion scheme to solve their budget problems. |
|
tsu9
join:2001-08-17
Wheeling, IL | Yeah, but you don't screw the constituents further by skipping over their former legal rights and whatnot. |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
1 edit | What screws the constituents are providers not deploying because they refuse to bow to local extortion attempts. A statewide general consumer protection platform benefits everyone who needs benefiting.
My point is only that a provider deploying shouldn't equal a payday for mismanaged municipalities. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| reply to DaveNJ
said by DaveNJ  :The problem is that the local goverments loose all power in this arrangement, what would make alot more sense would be that they get the statewide franchise. But each town has the right to lodge complains and have an avenue for resolution. This way if a town is getting neglected they have some power. They need to give them the franchise, but each town has to have the right to enforce service standards. Actually, the bill addresses the concerns you raised here: »www.njleg.state.nj.us/2006/Bills···4_U1.HTM
Do a search of the bills text using the following search terms:
"Standards of maintenance"
"complaint"
"Section 9 of P.L.1972"
Section 10 of P.L.1972
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page |
|
kdandaoc
join:2003-10-13
608052427
| reply to oliphant
Currently, these telcos are handpicking deployment spots. If they think they're being fleeced by the municipality, then they don't have to deploy there. This is the argument that ATT is using in Illinois. That they have the right to choose where they deploy! |
|
GetAClueDude
@bellsouth.net
| reply to oliphant
What I would like to see limited or eliminated through statewide agreements are these extortion operations local government tries to run where in order to get the franchise the providers have to build a bunch of other completely unrelated crap or whatnot. Like what specifically ?
There's a lot to be lost by the customer and local communities if providers get their way... Statewide franchises are going to make the service climate worse for the average customer. And anything that makes it worse than it currently is needs to be carefully examined. |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA | reply to kdandaoc
That's fine but screws the consumers who would benefit from the service and additional competition...all because some local gov't sees the provider as the solution to their budget problems. |
|
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
·Optimum Online
| reply to oliphant
said by oliphant :A statewide general consumer protection platform benefits everyone who needs benefiting. You clearly don't live in NJ. 
--
Day dreaming days in a daydream nation |
|
Morac
join:2001-08-30
Riverside, NJ
·Comcast
| reply to oliphant
I like the idea of a statewide franchise, as long as Verizon actually plans to deploy FIOS statewide.
Currently they do not. They are only deploying to affluent neighborhoods and major cities. They have no plans to deploy any where else.
I've experienced FIOS (my parents have it) and it really does blow away cable, but Comcast has nothing to fear with the spot picking that Verizon is doing.
I wish they would have tacked on a provision to the bill to force Verizon to actually deploy to the whole state.
--
The Comcast Disney Avatar has been retired. |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA | reply to GetAClueDude
You can start with 65 public access channels. 65!?! WTF does a local gov't need with 65 public access channels? |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
1 edit | reply to Morac
They've only been working on FIOS deployments for a few years. You can expect 100% deployment overnight. It's zillions of dollars and zillions of labor hours and they have to start somewhere. Look at cable...cable HSI started in 1996 and it was 10 years before cable HSI was fairly universal in availablilty to cable subs. |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA | reply to sporkme
A consumer protection platform would be different from a political whores taking bribes from telcos in exchage for favors platform. |
|
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
·Optimum Online
| said by oliphant :A consumer protection platform would be different from a political whores taking bribes from telcos in exchage for favors platform. You clearly don't live in NJ.
--
Day dreaming days in a daydream nation |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA | LOL. |
|
