[opendtv] Re: ISPs denied entry into apartment buildings could get help from FCC
- From: Craig Birkmaier <brewmastercraig@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2017 07:41:52 -0400
On Jun 7, 2017, at 12:48 AM, Manfredi, Albert E
<albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Let's revisit this in a few years then, Craig, if things really do change.
You get no points for repeating falsehoods about "multiple options." This is
THE main issue. Inadequate competition **means** that the industry cannot
credibly self-regulate. And don't forget, whatever choice you make, switching
over is a pain. It's not something you do on the spur of the moment. It is
something you have to schedule, and it easily takes more than just one week.
It may even take several weeks.
No. Let's create the proper regulatory/enforcement regimen for this industry,
for today and the future. There is NO QUESTION that technology is going to
transform this marketplace, and that the FCC is not capable of properly
regulating innovation - history teaches us that heavy handed regulation slows
innovation and inhibits competition.
Industries CAN self-regulate if the rules are clearly defined and the proper
enforcement regime is implemented. The FTC has a solid record in this area, and
is fully capable of enforcing whatever definition of "Net Neutrality" emerges
from the current FCC NPRM.
And you're going around in circles. I already covered that, way back. I
already said that in principle, theoretically, call it what you will,
wireless broadband could create the competition.
It will create competition Bert. Look what happened with WiFi.
But then you move beyond just bullh*t words, and you notice what is actually
happening. The fixed broadband schemes that will be using wireless to homes,
such as Verizon fixed 5G and Google Fiber 2.0, are not all wireless at all.
They use the same fiber backhaul as FTTH. That takes investment down to
individual neighborhood level. The ACTUAL effect of fixed 5G is, the Googles
and the Verizons can expand their broadband offerings, AS OPPOSED TO GIVING
UP. As both of them had done!! Read that again, Craig.
Bert. Wireless is just the last 1/4 mile technology. Our cellular voice and
data infrastructure ALSO relies on various backhaul technologies including
fiber to the tower and microwave.
You are correct that it will additional investment, including backhaul for new
competitors. But the backhaul technologies are ALSO evolving and will likely
use point-to-point 5G as well.
In the end you agree, so why do you continue to throw up inane arguments?
You are fabricating this 5 or 6 providers per household. It's just fantasy,
as of now. Meanwhile, the FCC has a job to do, and that does not involve
handing over, on a silver platter, what only the local monopolies could wish
for.
It is not fantasy Bert. It is reality as I pointed out...
Does Sprint offer broadband in your neighborhood?
Does T-Mobile offer broadband in your neighborhood?
Does Century Link offer broadband in your neighborhood?
Does Google offer broadband in your neighborhood?
No, of course not. I already mentioned that 4G wireless is not credible, for
home broadband to the masses. Why waste time with silly questions.
These are not silly questions Bert. We have four major cellular carriers in the
U.S., not to mention many more that lease access from the major carriers. EVERY
ONE of these four will be fully capable of offering fixed broadband in your
market, my market, and most of the U.S.
In addition we have multiple legacy telcos in many markets. Century Link is the
reincarnation of Quest, and competes in many U.S. markets including Ocala -
they do not currently serve your area or Gainesville, just as Google is only
serving a few markets today.
The reality is that new competitors will be looking at several things as they
deploy fixed wireless broadband:
1. Opportunities to use the Connect America USF fund to build out service in
rural areas;
2. Areas where competition is currently limited; e.g. It is less likely that
Google would build in your market as there are already two fixed broadband
providers.
3. Cities that aggressively pursue new competitors, reducing or eliminating
current roadblocks to construction and pole attachment.
In the end there will be multiple competitors in every market, but it is
unlikely that every company will build out in every market. My best guess is
that we will have the four major cellular carriers and two additional
competitors in most markets.
Unlikely, as I already explained, but if true, great. Until then, we still
want neutral service.
We already have neutral service. Get over it...
It is highly likely that the four cellular carriers will add fixed broadband,
as this will become critical to customer retention. That is, they will need to
bundle both wireless data to mobile devices and fixed broadband in order to
remain competitive.
You need to start to tear down the regulatory morass somewhere Bert.
No, Craig. Regulations have to make sense for existing conditions, not some
fantasy future. Chairman Pai had the PERFECT opportunity to float some new
and better neutrality-guarantee trial balloons. Instead, just like you, he
happily ignored the whole issue, even misinforming the public about the
nature of Internet service. Hide head in sand, feed them BS, they'll buy it.
And yet, "they" didn't!! People aren't so stupid!
And you are not so bright. You opine continuously about subjects that you do
not understand...
Economics
Competition
Regulation vs deregulation
If there is disinformation, it is coming from those who argued in favor of
Title II regulation, then told us they would forebear from using that
regulatory authority. They did not forebear. They immediately started doing
what regulators do - adding regulatory largess (fees, filings, and lawyers to
navigate the regulations). And they immediately started picking winners and
losers.
Frankly I am growing tired of the BS you are injecting into almost every
thread, trying desperately to tie everything to net neutrality.
The fixed 5G option convinced them to give it another try, only because the
costs would go down for them. Do you really think that multiple players, in
these **same circumstances**, could justify high enough returns to their
investors?
They have no choice if they want to remain competitive Bert. This is certainly
true for the four major cellular carriers. It remains to be seen how companies
like Google and municipal systems will approach this opportunity.
Much more important, spectrum is not exactly scarce for 5G.
That's why I said 4G, wrt spectrum shortage. 5G we I just finished
describing. Again, you have already been past this point, Craig. Why are you
circling back? You had already understood the range limitations of 5G.
Suddenly you forgot all of that?
The range limitations are specific to the application. Point-to-point backhaul
can operate as a mesh network using higher power levels than micro cells and
the last 1/4 mile nodes that provide service to a neighborhood.
ROTFL. Put on your thinking cap, Craig, and explain to us how an enforced
expense, single choice, on tenants, is anything but anti-competitive. No
wonder you have a hard time understanding why the FCC needs to guarantee
neutrality.
;-(
It is not anti-competitive when most of the student housing complexes here in
Gainesville now include broadband as a FEATURE to attract new tenants.
It will NOT be anti-competitive when the cellular companies begins to bundle
fixed broadband, and the legacy MVPDs begin to offer cellular service bundled
with fixed broadband and TV.
There are no trivial answers when it comes to installing and maintaining
labor-intensive infrastructures, Craig. That's the whole point of "natural
monopolies.
The whole point of natural monopolies was to limit competition and partner with
the politicians and regulators to to support monopoly pricing. We have been
trying to tear down barriers to competition for decades Bert.
You want to strengthen the monopoly walls, let the regulators drive up the cost
of service, and start regulating Internet services.
Enough!
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
