  LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5
1 edit |  Looks like Verizon made right choice
The regulators approved a deal where they should have known that Fairpoint couldn't meet the promises they squeezed out of them to gain approval.
So what now? Will the regulators watch Fairpoint go bankrupt a second time, or will they allow Fairpoint to break their promises by allowing rate increases and slower rollout of promised new services? | |
|
 | | | Re: Looks like Verizon made right choice That deal should never have been allowed. I still say there was some back-room dealings there. | |
|
| | | DONT ANYONE PANIC!!..... the high executives will have there golden parachutes when the company fully fails. The puppets at fairly-pointless are all in the pockets of big red so they will get the stock options when the company fails. Lower end employees will be laid off, Creditor of the DEBT will loss money. The I think the FCC should have the authority to use jail time to as a "incentive" to make the agreeing parties think about this stuff more. No i have no facts to quote but when everyone else says it will fail and it still passes someone should REALLY be held accountable. | |
|
|  batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ | said by Linklist:It looks like Verizon made the right choice in unloading unprofitable territory.
The Phone Company dba Verizon was making money in all of their franchised areas. The problem was/is misguided government interference that forced TPC to do things that were not good business practice; like run the most advanced, and expensive to deploy, communication network in the world to areas where the subscriber rate is now less than 10%.
I wonder if the Maine Public Utilities Commission is now sorry they got involved in the internal affairs of the National Securities Agency?
»www.aclu.org/national-security/n···-utility | |
|
| | will this happen to frontier I'm waiting to see if frontier goes under as well. People on here are reporting lots of problems so far. I'm thinking verizon offloaded them to let them get into disrepair then swoop in and buy them back for bargain basement prices.
(kinda like selling a business to a 17 year old for $500k. Then watching the kid now 18 run it into the ground. Then swooping in and grabbing it for $90k). | |
|
| | Really? Did anyone not see this coming to begin with?
The regulators failed at allowing this to even happen.
Once Verizon starts offering LTE services, the last nail will be in the coffin of this company. | |
|
| | | Re: Really? I guess it really depends on the price of DSL and if Verizon can be competitive with LTE | |
|
batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ | I take umbrage with unwanted. quote:
Fairpoint Communications acquired Verizon's unwanted New England DSL network...
The Phone Company dba Verizon wants every subscriber; not only in New England but the entire world. But alas; our government's misguided interference has destroyed that dream along with universal 100/100 to every outhouse in the darkest corners of the world, even Canada.
The Great White North is a disgrace to the Bell name. The true Bell System is FiOS not a capped copper wire. | |
|
| | Why such a huge loss? Seems like it would be hard to lose that much money when everybody wants an Internet connection. All of their DSL lines must be in areas also served by cable. dumb dumb dumb. I'm currently in a suburban area without cable or dsl. If just one would spend the money on supplying the area, they would get all the customers. | |
|
| elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | Re: Why such a huge loss? said by biochemistry:Seems like it would be hard to lose that much money when everybody wants an Internet connection. All of their DSL lines must be in areas also served by cable. dumb dumb dumb. I'm currently in a suburban area without cable or dsl. If just one would spend the money on supplying the area, they would get all the customers.
But those customers have to be willing to pay the market rate, in sufficient numbers, to make the venture profitable. There is no point in getting "all the customers", if you're going to operate at a loss.
Fairpoint and Frontier bought up the VZ franchises without doing their homework. They probably thought, with an exclusive customer base, they could charge triple the urban rate, and people would just pay it, and they'd break even. But the rural uptake just isn't that high, at that price-point - the rural subscriber is too cheap scrupulous with his money.
A similar analysis probably informs on why your neighborhood goes unserved. How many in your 'burb would pay $60-80/month for basic (1M) broadband ? | |
|
| | | | Re: Why such a huge loss? My neighborhood is supplied by people using 3G internet or hughesnet, both pretty expensive for what you get. LTE just got here so speed is now great but the download cap is unbelievably low. | |
|
| | | elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | Re: Why such a huge loss? said by biochemistry:My neighborhood is supplied by people using 3G internet or hughesnet, both pretty expensive for what you get. LTE just got here so speed is now great but the download cap is unbelievably low.
Again - unless there are enough people in the neighborhood willing to pay market rates, it doesn't pencil out for the wired provider. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Why such a huge loss? I don't think you understand my point. The internet options here that people are paying for are way ABOVE market rates. 2 Mbps of Hughesnet is $100! We'd love to pay for what others get DSL and Cable for. | |
|
| | | | | elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | Re: Why such a huge loss? said by biochemistry:I don't think you understand my point. The internet options here that people are paying for are way ABOVE market rates. 2 Mbps of Hughesnet is $100! We'd love to pay for what others get DSL and Cable for.
Ok, let me rephrase.
In pure economic terms, your market rate is higher than the $100/month you pay for Hughesnet. Hughesnet does not require a quorum - they don't care if 1 or 100 of you subscribe, but a local wired concern lives and dies by penetration rate - and there aren't enough of you willing to pay a high enough price to keep such an isp afloat.
LTE will be the nails in the coffin. Your neighbors will gladly switch from $100/month Hughesnet to $50/month LTE, and a wired provider will never have a chance. | |
|
|
|
