interesting-people message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


Subject: [IP] more on FCC Plans to Erase Key Rule On Local Phone Competition

  • From: Dave Farber <dave@farber.net>
  • To: ip <ip@v2.listbox.com>
  • Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 08:31:10 -1000

------ Forwarded Message
From: david.e.young@verizon.com
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 13:16:37 -0500
To: dave@farber.net
Subject: Re: [IP] more on FCC Plans to Erase Key Rule On Local Phone
Competition


Dave, 

This letter is heartfelt and sincere, I'm sure, but there are some internal
inconsistencies that just can't go unmentioned.  First and foremost, of the
$350 per month cited for communications expenses, only 20% is going to the
local phone company, which the author claims has the "teeth and tollbooth of
the local monopoly".  Nearly 30% of his monthly spend is going to wireless
voice providers (neither of which is affiliated with his local phone
company). Second, he claims that Ivan Seidenberg  "said its important for
the software industry to lean on the state regulators to let Verizon have
its DSL monopoly."  What monopoly?  He himself sends $50 per month to AT&T
broadband as do 2/3rds of all broadband subscribers.  Why should the ILEC
DSL service with 1/3 of the broadband market be regulated more heavily than
the cable company with 2/3rds.  Finally, he cites the decline in telecom R&!
D.  This unfortunately is an unintended consequence of the dismantling of
the Bell System.  Under the Bell System, the cost of basic research at Bell
Labs could be included in the overhead at Western Electric, which was
included in the cost of equipment purchased by the BOCs which was included
in the rate base and paid for over a long period of time.  Most telecom R&D
is still done by the equipment manufacturers, but unless somebody starts
buying more equipment it is in serious jeopardy.  Any regulations (such as
UNE-P) that discourage companies from investing in networks and equipment
threaten the health of research and innovation in the remaining labs.

-David 

--------------------------------
David E. Young
Director, Internet & Technology Policy
Verizon Communications
1300 I Street NW
Washington, DC 20005
+1 202-515-2425  <Office>
+1 202-365-4755  <Mobile>
+1 202-336-7923  <Fax>
david.e.young@verizon.com


"Dave Farber" <dave@farber.net>
Sent by: owner-ip@v2.listbox.com 01/06/2003 12:16 PM
Please respond to dave
        
        To:        ip@v2.listbox.com
        cc:        
        Subject:        [IP] more on FCC Plans to Erase Key Rule On Local
Phone Competition 



------ Forwarded Message
From: jordan pollack <pollack@cs.brandeis.edu>
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 11:35:43 -0500
To: dave@farber.net
Subject: Re: [IP] FCC Plans to Erase Key Rule On Local Phone Competition

First, I don't see how telecommunications could be hurting so badly.
When it was just Ma Bell, I was only paying a total of $60 a month.
Yesterday I paid my Telecommunications bills:

$70 Verizon Local
$70 Sprint Long Distance
$50 ATT Broadband
$75 Sprint Wireless
$40 Nextel Wireless
$45 RCN Blackberry wireless
-----
$350

Not to mention $2 in stamps:)

Second, maybe there IS something to a natural monopoly granted in
exchange for social responsibility. As Dave's photos from Pittsburgh
showed -
> I took these pictures right next to the Verizon building in downtown
>    Pittsburgh. The plaque was on a seedy dirty abandoned set of stores next to
>    the Verizon Building.
- ATT was almost a civil service. Bell labs was the envy of all nations.
Now, ATT Labs laid off 40% last year, including everyone I knew in AI,
and Bell labs is part of dying Lucent.

Meanwhile the RBOC's have the teeth and tollbooth of the former natural
monopoly, with absolutely zero social responsibility.

I'm sure Verizon is a great company and I don't mean to pick on them or
insult many employees who are friends of mine. But Verizon's formerly
great GTE labs doesn't seem to do any published research anymore, just
service development. And Verizon seems to be bullying states with
conscientious public utility regulators by selectively withholding and
depressing its capital expenditures.  (Bob Frankston and I were next to
each other at Ivan Seidenberg's talk to the Mass Software Council where
he said our state's share of the $14B capex budget dropped from $900M to
$500M in 02, and would likely go down further. He also said its
important for the software industry to lean on the state regulators let
Verizon have its DSL monopoly.)

If FCC kills Une-P, they should cancel RBOC's entry into long distance.
And phone companies should, like bank's fined for redlining, be required
to document how they put money back into the communities they collect
their tolls from. 

The unintended side-effects of deregulation make me want my Ma Bell
back!

Jordan


------ End of Forwarded Message

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as david.e.young@verizon.com
To unsubscribe or update your address, click
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/





------ End of Forwarded Message

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people@lists.elistx.com
To unsubscribe or update your address, click
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Search: Match: Sort by:
Words: | Help

</form>

Powered by eList eXpress LLC