shit
join:2003-07-14
Skowhegan, ME | DSL
I hope this doesn't go national and raise my dsl bill,I get my service from one of its competitors. |
|
keyboard5684
join:2001-08-01
Youngsville, PA
 ·Teliax VOIP
 ·WestPAnet Inc.
 ·WestPAnet Inc. CA..
| You get it from a competitor or a CLEC?
To me a CLEC, or anyone who uses Verizon lines, is not a competitor. They are simply sucking off of a resource that someone else established.
A competitor is a DSL line that is not owned by Verizon. This means the copper is your providers, not Verizons.
Cable is a good example. Wireless is a good example. Yahoo DSL (or whatever) is not a good example. These "piggy back" DSL providers are not any better than the people they truly pay. They have simply found a way to charge you less and force Verizon to charge others more for something else. |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| excuse me?
said by keyboard5684  :
To me a CLEC, or anyone who uses Verizon lines, is not a competitor. They are simply sucking off of a resource that someone else established.
you know who that someone else is? the consumer, that's who.
that infrastructure was paid for by the consuming public - the bells were allowed their monopoly in return for building the infrastructure. In other words, these monopolies were guaranteed a rate of return sufficient to pay for that copper; there was no risk, they didn't "go out on a limb" and hope they made enough money to pay for their investment, the government decided they would make the consumers provide that money, sometimes upfront before anything was built. Go ask Pennsylvania about that last one.
you better go brush up on the history of the telephone industry as you are clearly suffering some delusional beliefs. |
|
amdace
BOHICA
join:2001-02-02
Novi, MI
clubs:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·Comcast
| reply to keyboard5684
Re: DSL
said by keyboard5684 :
Yahoo DSL (or whatever) is not a good example. These "piggy back" DSL providers are not any better than the people they truly pay.
I thought Yahoo partnered with SBC. SBC provides the copper, and Yahoo plays ISP. They both share in the profits.
Telco advocates say that companies should build out their own networks. I would like to see a company come into some of the built up cities in my area and try to get approval and rights of way to put in a whole new infrastructure, poles and all. It would be nearly impossible.
So, the only alternative is to allow CLECs to "piggyback" on the present infrastructure.
Telcos get compensated and a return on their infrastructure investment from "Attachment Fees".
Here is a snippet from an FCC ruling regarding a company trying to raise "Attachment Fees".
"The Bureau Order further concluded that the Cable Formula used to calculate an annual pole attachment rate allows a utility full recovery of its costs associated with the space used for the attachment as well as a return on investment and provides just compensation to the utility for the space occupied on the pole."
You can read the full ruling here. »www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders···1181.txt
You also said "Cable is a good example."
I would like to point out that, at least in my area, the cable company, which provides not only video but also data and voice on its own wire, "piggybacks" on the Telco pole (again, the Telco charges Attachment fees).
I am using the Telco as the example for owning the poles. It might be the electric utility. Whoever it is, they are getting compensated by at least three companies (in my area) for attaching to the pole (We have two cable companies, a Telco and an electric utility all on the same pole. In some areas there is so much crap hanging on these poles that they bend from the weight and have to be supported with up to five guy wires.). I would say that some company is being compensated quite well for having others "piggyback" on their infrastructure.
Here are some interesting links.
»asac.ameritech.com/documents/for···0P-1.pdf
»www.sbc.com/Large-Files/MI-LD/Ap···0206.pdf |
|
