[opendtv] Re: SBC Joins the Convergence Crowd
- From: "John Willkie" <JohnWillkie@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 09:47:14 -0800
Sorry about the late response on this, but in gleaning my inbox, I realized
I had not previously read this response to my posting.
John, I wouldn't think of that argument being the reason for a franchise
fee, but a rationalization, at least these days. As a practical matter, it
only applies to cable systems with aerial plant; in CITIES, most outside
plant construction since the 1980s has been underground, and in those
cases -- at least the cases I'm familiar with in Southern California and
elsewhere, the cable companies pay a franchise fee AND they cover all the
costs of underground construction. The cable companies will also in many
cases pre-wire the house, at least if they have an exclusive or tantamount
to an exclusive franchise agreement.
I've never heard of a franchising authority reducing the franchise fee
because of the lack of telephone poles. Indeed, many still spend many
thousands of good dollars on the futile attempt to get the 5% franchise fee
that the cable company has promised them, even though the cable company
knows that in the last three decades, of the FCC., perhaps three cable
systems have been permitted to pay more than the standard 3%. (I read EVERY
one of these rulings issued between mid-1982 and late 1990; not a single up
from 3% was granted and there were many hundreds of rulings!)
Of course the cities don't get franchise fees from satellites; they don't
have jurisdiction over anything not attached to ground. Airlines don't need
city or county or state approval to fly over a state, and under
international 'law" ("Open Skies" of 1972) and under federal law and case
law, the federal government has exclusive jurisdiction over things not
attached to the ground. (Even state pollution controls apply only to the
terrestrial sources of pollution.)
Since the mid-1990's, the FCC has permitted the cable companies to charge a
percentage of the franchise fee to subscribers as a "local regulatory fee"
or something such. I believe that means that consumers are charged more
than once (but less than twice) for the same cost item.
Gotta love that scam!
I'm heading into areas where I have no knowledge; I've tried to analyze the
excel spreadsheet that the City of San Diego uses to model cable costs (they
got a minor reduction some years back, after much financial and legal work)
and my eyes glaze over. I should also point out that the official that I
used to talk to on this -- Frank Exharos -- left this mortal coil last fall.
May he rest in peace; he doesn't have to deal with the cable companies
anymore.
John Willkie
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Shutt" <shuttj@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 2:24 PM
Subject: [opendtv] Re: SBC Joins the Convergence Crowd
> I thought the theory behind a franchise fee was to provide access to the
> 'right-of-way' on telephone poles.
>
> I don't recall DirecTV or Dish Network paying a dime in franchise fees to
my
> community.
>
> John Shutt
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Willkie" <JohnWillkie@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> > Nothing new here; this same argument came up in 1994 before the San
Diego
> > City Council. So, instead of paying a 3% franchise fee to the city
(like
> > cable), PacTel offered to pay a 5% fee on HFC.
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
>
> - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
>
> - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
