& cplSiteName &
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View        ADD A COMMENT
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Phil_Britt
50%
50%
Phil_Britt,
User Rank: Light Sabre
10/31/2014 | 2:25:24 PM
Re: AFC
In some ways, it's back to the future, as you mention. But this time A&T is seeking the merger to continue to compete with the 800-pound gorilla, Comcast.
mendyk
50%
50%
mendyk,
User Rank: Light Sabre
10/28/2014 | 2:08:03 PM
Re: AFC
You say you don't think the issues should be "poluted" by politics, and yet you can't help but make a political reference in your comment. That's an odd way to make your point. But I'll play along for argument's sake: If we all accept the premise that "conservatives" are pretty much against most forms of taxation, and USF is funded by a federal tax on users of telecom services, wouldn't it make sense that conservatives would be predisposed to de-funding USF and eliminating a tax?
bigggtom
50%
50%
bigggtom,
User Rank: Lightning
10/28/2014 | 1:34:37 PM
Re: AFC
The FCC and telecom technology is too complex and important to be poluted by politics.  Issues regarding service in rural area where subscribers are only one or two per mile need more that Red or Blue considerations.  I'm a conservative, but sometime that group makes really dumb choices.  Liberals are dumber, with much more consistant stupidity.  
brooks7
50%
50%
brooks7,
User Rank: Light Sabre
10/28/2014 | 9:58:03 AM
USF
 

Dennis,

I think the problem here is that we are talking about the elimination of a tax supported program.  Those are public funds.  I jumped into this because bigtom was saying that the problem was these networks are built with private funds.  But his current argument is that public funds are required to keep many of the IOCs aliave.  This is true.

And by the way, the way he talks about rural RBOC properties is correct.  They are neglected but subsidized by the larger more urban properties.  The reason the Bell Companies did not get USF (in general) is that a high percentage of their loops in any state were not high cost loops.  USF was designed for companies that had a significant part of high cost loops in their properties.

Now also to be fair, there were accounting firms that were built around just doing work to make sure that IOCs got a maximum subsidy from USF.  

His current argument is that small IOCs are the only way to serve rural America.  I wonder how Fairpoint, Frontier, Centurylink, TDS and other substantial IOCs feel.  

seven

 
mendyk
50%
50%
mendyk,
User Rank: Light Sabre
10/28/2014 | 8:39:18 AM
Re: AFC
In D.C.,  almost all roads lead to Harvard or Yale, whether the cars are blue or red. To my earlier point, doing away with the FCC and USF has been a conservative "cause" for years. This is a power and lobbying issue that has very little to do with political affiliation.
bigggtom
50%
50%
bigggtom,
User Rank: Lightning
10/27/2014 | 9:54:40 PM
Re: AFC
Obama appointed te last two administrators, both venture capitalists, neither with telecom industry experience.  Genekowsi was his Harvard classmate.  While he was the administrator, Genekowsi had a radical experience when visiting a telephone company in Nebraska.  For the very first time in his life he road in a car on a gravel road.

Genkowsi was shocked to learn that there were more than a few telephone companies.  He felt that it was very inefficient to pay USF funds to rural companies because their cost of delivering service was higher than in the cities.  He suggested that the big companies should just take over the little ones and work out the cost difference internally. What are the chances that such an idea will be good for Rural America?
mendyk
50%
50%
mendyk,
User Rank: Light Sabre
10/27/2014 | 11:49:28 AM
Re: AFC
What's kind of funny here is that "gutting" of USF has been advocated by a whole range of political leaders across the political spectrum. Suggesting that this is an "Obama" problem is naive at best.
brooks7
50%
50%
brooks7,
User Rank: Light Sabre
10/27/2014 | 10:33:45 AM
Re: AFC
biggtom,

 

My point was and still is that the IOCs used a whole lot of public funds.  Your claim was that it was private funds.

If the rural company can't provide effective services and the only reason they survive is being on the public dole, then why would we not want AT&T or anybody else to build a wireless service and replace them?  It is not our job to make to keep any company in existence.

I commented on AFC simply to point out that I served this market.  We had an entire team of folks to help with USF applications.

seven

 
bigggtom
50%
50%
bigggtom,
User Rank: Lightning
10/27/2014 | 7:48:49 AM
Re: AFC
Arguing the merits and schedule of AFC and DSL is beside the point.  

AT&T is not overbuilding.  They will be using the spectrum they own and that of DirecTV and putting 4GLTE on towers and adding widely dispersered towers across rural America.  From those towers they can provide fixed wireless to antennas on the side of farm houses, and from a Wifi router device in the home provide voice and data services rivalling anything the small companies can offer. Then they add the DirecTV dish and they will totally put the rural company out of business.

With Obama and his FCC gutting of USF,rural companies need broadband to survive.  They will go the way of AFC when it tried to sell to the Bell Companies. gone.   
brooks7
50%
50%
brooks7,
User Rank: Light Sabre
10/26/2014 | 12:40:55 PM
Re: AFC
biggtom,

Better go check your facts.

Broadband has a specific set of funds.  And we introduced DSL in 1999...in fact the same year I got DSL from AT&T at my house.

seven

 
Page 1 / 2   >   >>


Featured Video
Flash Poll
Upcoming Live Events
September 17-19, 2019, Dallas, Texas
October 1, 2019, New Orleans, Louisiana
October 2-22, 2019, Los Angeles, CA
October 10, 2019, New York, New York
November 5, 2019, London, England
November 7, 2019, London, UK
December 3-5, 2019, Vienna, Austria
December 3, 2019, New York, New York
All Upcoming Live Events
Partner Perspectives - content from our sponsors
Transform Beyond Borders to Lead the Innovation
By Ben Zhou, CEO, Whale Cloud
Reject Limits. Build the Future.
By David Wang, Huawei
China Telecom & Huawei Jointly Complete the World's First End-to-End 5G SA Voice & Video Call
By Jay Liu, Senior Marketing Manager, Cloud Core Product Line, Huawei Technologies
All Partner Perspectives