SBC, AT&T say Bell breakup doesn't work

TalkBack 10 of 23:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

The field is a little more open than you indicate.

If one limits themselve to just two sets of wires, one would definitely perceive a monopoly in telephone, television, and broadband at the local level. However, this is, I would venture, dependent on the area in which you live. I can't speak for your region Anton, but I can speak for my own.

Here the Baby Bell remenant competes with three CLECS, who offer varying rates and packages for phone service. I previously used one as my majour landline provider. Further, though I don't avail myself of the service: one can easily dispense with the landline and live off mobile service, which is not necessarily provided by your local phone service Bell fragment. Mobile service represents yet another avenue of competition in phone. Add to those two the ubiquity of VOIP, which can be provided by any CLEC, and perhaps you begin to see that there is much competition at the local level.

As for cable television, indeed I did see rising rates as you opine. What to do? I waited until I was uncomfortable. When the local cable television provider shifted too many channels I watched to digital subscription only, with a corresponding 20 dollar rate increase; I bid them adieu! I instead went to satellite television, which has paid for itself in monthly savings. Moreover, I have back the channels I most want, but without excessive fluff. Cable companies, I would opine, do have competition at the local level: they compete with broadcast networks and they compete with satellite service. However, the competition is not enough to force a rate lowering. You're correct, there needs to be another player to bring rates lower.

As for broadband, there's the same three players mentioned above (satellite, cable, and telco), and soon there may even be a fourth! Recent advances may allow your electric power utility to enter broadband provision with IP over power line. Strange sounding to me, but the technology is in trials by SDG&E.

Truly there is a tyranny of the poles and a tyranny of the wires and tyranny of the networks for the so-called last mile. I'd say the solution to that is to insist that service providers be required to spin off their wire service as a condition of merging. Does that sound good to you? A company with a vested interest in expanding the network, since that's the only way they can grow - expand to new customers - and yet charging all players to provide the wires. Does this sound familiar? It might if you lived in this State: the power industry functions this way.

I'm sorry I can't enter the "naked services" debate, unless by accident I've already covered it. I really don't know the particulars of that debate in DC. If it involves unbundling as a condition of cross polinization of each other's markets; I say "Good deal", but probably I've misinterpreted, again. Feel free to feed me more details - the trough here stands empty.

Posted by: John Le'Brecage   Posted on: 02/23/05 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Building the Virtualized Enterprise with VMware Iinfrastructure VMware VMware virtualization software has been adopted by over 120,000 enterprise ... Download Now
• Three Steps You Need to Know to Stop Data Loss Varonis Sensitive data exposed to misuse or loss... it is the stuff of nightmares ... Download Now
• Why Isn't Server Virtualization Saving Us More? A Few Small Changes May Dramatically Increase Your Efficiency VMware Companies have rapidly adopted server virtualization over the past few ... Download Now