Jump to content

MacinJosh

S4GRU Staff
  • Posts

    11,793
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Posts posted by MacinJosh

  1.  

    The wired broadband duopoly/oligopoly is local to each market. It does not matter a whit that there may still be dozens or even hundreds of wired broadband providers (e.g. Comcast' date=' Time Warner, Cox, VZ, AT&T, CenturyLink, etc.) around the country.

    [*']Wired broadband does not travel with you; it is tied to a specific location.

    [*]Many options are mutually exclusive -- for example, if you have the option of Comcast, then you do not have the option of Time Warner.

     

    Thus, from a competition standpoint, what matters is the number of choices that you have at a specific location. And, for most, that tends to be two choices: one cable, one telco.

     

    At my house, I do have exactly two choices: Knology (cable) and AT&T (telco). As I like to say, I get a tough choice "between a rock and a hard place." I begrudgingly choose Knology because it offers 10M/512k DOCSIS 2.0 service but with a 50 GB/mo quota, and I pay 47/mo for that privilege. I would pay only 36/mo, but Knology tacks on an unscrupulous "cable transport fee" (which is really just a protectionist, non bundling penalty) of 10/mo because I do not subscribe to its cable TV or digital phone services.

     

    My other option is AT&T, but it is a non option for multiple reasons.

    [*]U-verse is not available at my address; my only choice is standard DSL.

    [*]The price is low at 20/mo but so is the DSL rate at 3M/512k; higher speeds are not available on my wireline.

    [*]Even if AT&T offered U-verse at my address and a low price, I refuse to do business with such an unethical, anti consumer company.

     

    So, there is the wired broadband duopoly for you. It is patently ridiculous, almost criminal that we have allowed such a dysfunctional "free market" to dominate our wired broadband service. We traded away competition and consumer choice so that cable companies and telcos would have incentive to roll out wired broadband services quickly and widely. Yet, now, even though they face minimal competition, cable and telco want to reduce competition further through collusion (see the VZW-SpectrumCo cross marketing arrangements between VZ and Comcast and the end of FiOS).

     

    Other countries are laughing at us that we sold ourselves to capitalism and got inferior broadband infrastructure in return. Big Cable, the Baby Bells, and their shareholders, too, are also laughing at us -- laughing all the way to the bank. What a joke.

     

    AJ

     

    well then in Pahrump it is a duopoly that really would be considered a monopoly because our local cable provider won't expand what they feel like and at&t refuses to upgrade my neighborhood's copper to modern standards so we can have dsl at least while 1 mile from where i live is a fiber line.

     

    Sent from Joshs Evo Shift 4G using Forum Runner

  2. I like it. Never heard of it, but I like the potential. Still looks like a start up since it doesn't have a large list of phones and $59.00 for the basic treatment. Will have to keep my eye on this one. Good product if you live in Seattle.

     

    It's also a good product if you have a habit of dropping phones in water like me, lol.

  3. Quoting from the original article found on GigaOM:

     

    1st Update.An AT&T spokesperson told us that the letters are going out only to customers in New York and only a small group of them at that. Whatever AT&T’s plans are for its nationwide 2G network, it’s starting off conservatively. The spokesman also said it is offering each of those customers a free 3G device, so AT&T appears to being taking the carrot, rather than the stick, approach to migrating its customers away from 2G-only phones.

     

    2nd Update. A quick search of the AT&T retail site revealed that the carrier is still selling 2G-only devices, the Samsung a777 and the AT&T Z221. Both are among the most budget of the budget category in its GoPhone prepaid line, and the vast majority of its prepaid — and all of its postpaid — phones are 3G. But generally it’s bad form to tell one customer his 2G service is going to degrade while trying to sell a different customer a 2G-only device.

     

    I guess I'm not surprised that at&t is going that route now with the old 2G services. At least it will be forcing them to upgrade the rest of their service footprint with 3G.

  4. With VZW and AT&T the helm, we are heading toward a wireless broadband duopoly as bad as, if not even more dysfunctional than the current wired broadband duopoly present in most markets. If you are okay with that in exchange for better wireless service, then you have made your rational choice. I may not necessarily agree with it, but I can understand it.

     

    AJ

     

    Wired broadband duopoly? Who are the 2 players in that? I know that 3 baby bells still technically exist since CenturyLink owns one of them, and I thought that they are a relatively large player still in the telecommunications market.

  5. This should be unncecessary. Unlimited is alive and well in every country other than our own and the poor canadians. att must have had focus groups work to find new ways to add revenue with no investment and inventing a problem where there wasn't one was their answer.

     

    By acknowledging that these companies need to sell data by the byte you have fallen for their scam. Never ever accept tiered data as if it were necessary. Fight against it!

     

    Actually, there is 1 Canadian carrier with Unlimited Data. Wind Communications. They are a 2009 upstart, and they really have big potential if they would just hurry up and expand their network.

×
×
  • Create New...