more on FCC rules that telcos can cut off DSL resellers

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

> X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2
> Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2005 10:34:09 -0400 (EDT)
> From: EEkid () aol com
> Subject: Re: [IP] more on FCC rules that telcos can cut off DSL resellers
> To: dave () farber net, joe () via net
> X-Mailer: 9.0 Security Edition for Windows sub 5200
> X-Virus-Scanned-At: eList eXpress <http://www.elistx.com/>
> X-Spam-Filtered-At: eList eXpress <http://www.elistx.com/>
> Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 10:35:33 EDT
> Resent-From: dfarber+ () ux13 sp cs cmu edu
> Resent-To: dfarber () cmu edu
> X-Spam-Clean: 7% (NO_REAL_NAME 0, __AOL_FROM 0, __BAT_BOUNDARY 0, 
> __C230066_P5 0, __CHILD_PORN_NOT_1 0, __CT 0, __CTYPE_HAS_BOUNDARY 0, 
> __CTYPE_MULTIPART 0, __CTYPE_MULTIPART_ALT 0, __FRAUD_419_BARRISTER 0, 
> __HAS_MSGID 0, __HAS_X_MAILER 0, __LINES_OF_YELLING 0, __MIME_HTML 0, 
> __MIME_VERSION 0, __SANE_MSGID 0, __STOCK_CRUFT 0, __STOCK_PHRASE_7 0, 
> __TAG_EXISTS_HTML 0)
> X-Greylist: Default is to whitelist mail, not delayed by 
> milter-greylist-2.0 (mx5.andrew.cmu.edu [128.2.10.115]); Mon, 08 Aug 2005 
> 10:35:36 -0400 (EDT)
> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on
>         waveman.securesites.net
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE,
>         NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.63
> X-Spam-Level:
>
> Yes, but what happens when the ILEC (incumbent local exchange carrier) 
> won't allow the customer to purchase THEIR DSL service?  Sound odd?  I 
> thought so too.  Since all the local exchanges were used in my area, I had 
> to get what is called a "foreign exchange" for my telephone.  Once I got 
> this foreign exchange I was no longer allowed to purchase DSL through 
> Verizon while using the foreign exchange.
>
> I then purchased the DSL from Covad which uses Verizon's infrastructure 
> (same phone line).  If Verizon, dumps Covad as is now possible, I'll be 
> without broadband access.
>
> Better price?  Hardly!  Covad charges $29.99 per month.  Verizon charges 
> $29.99 per month.  While Verizon may be able to charge less, they choose 
> not to do so.  I have received numerous calls from Verizon wanting me to 
> switch to their DSL service.  I simply explain to their solicitors that 
> I'm ineligible for DSL service.  They always argue that their computer 
> shows that DSL is available for my address, I then have explain that while 
> that is the case,  VERIZON CHOOSES NOT TO ALLOW ME TO USE THEIR SERVICE.
>
> Jerry Ballman
>
>
> In a message dated 8/7/2005 9:16:51 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
> dave () farber net writes:
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: Joe McGuckin <joe () via net>
> Date: August 7, 2005 9:12:52 PM EDT
> To: dave () farber net, Ip Ip <ip () v2 listbox com>
> Subject: Re: [IP] FCC rules that telcos can cut off DSL resellers
>
>
> (For IP )
>
>
> Brett,
>
> Is this another 'the sky is falling' warning?
>
> I've been hearing for years about how the telcos are going to crush
> independent ISP's, yet small ISP's seem to be thriving. Yes, if you
> try to
> complete directly against an ILEC such as SBC, you're going to get
> squashed.
> You cannot beat the ILEC on price, service availability or install lead
> times. Did I mention price?
>
> I know the president of a large DSL reseller here in California. Even
> though
> they are probably one of the SBC's top 10 dsl resellers, he mentioned
> to me
> that after adding in the various costs imposed on them by the SBC for
> access
> to the DSL network and fees for accessing DSLAMS and CO's, their cost
> per
> subscriber was higher then the SBC's retail street price. They have to
> compete on selling a 'better' product, but the sad fact is that
> consumers
> generally buy the cheapest product - and the ILEC will always be able to
> sell it cheaper than any of their resellers.
>
> Every bill received by a SBC telephone customer is a pitch for their
> data
> services. Every time a subscriber talks to the SBC customer service,
> there's
> a pitch to combine or consolidate services to save money. Three months
> before a resale customer's contract is up, they're being cold-called by
> SBC's telemarketers to switch over direct to SBC.
>
> DSL is a lost cause - as T1's will be. Any service that remotely
> resembles a
> commodity and where the underlying access is controlled by an ILEC will
> eventually be price-pointed below profitability for the non-
> facilities based
> ISP.
>
> As far as backhauls go: Except for very rare circumstances, ILECS are
> already the most expensive option for circuits. Any ISP with any
> sense will
> have moved their gear into network neutral colo with a wide selection of
> carriers in order to guarantee themselves reasonable pricing.
>
> I don't think the independent ISP's are endangered, you just have to
> sell
> against the ILEC's weaknesses, not their strengths.
>
> Joe
>
>
> On 8/6/05 4:25 PM, "David Farber" <dave () farber net> wrote:
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > From: Brett Glass <brett () lariat org>
> > Date: August 6, 2005 4:35:03 PM EDT
> > To: dave () farber net, Ip Ip <ip () v2 listbox com>
> > Subject: Re: [IP] FCC rules that telcos can cut off DSL resellers
> >
> >
> > Dave:
> >
> > The most serious problem with this ruling is that it may not only cut
> > off local providers' access to the DSL infrastructure but also their
> > "backhauls" -- their connections to the Internet. The ruling will
> > allow the Baby Bells to price wholesale access (the "big pipes" that
> > ISPs buy) above the retail value that can be derived from them, thus
> > making it infeasible for others to compete and ensuring vertical
> > integration. The days of the independent ISP may well be numbered.
> >
> > --Brett Glass
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------
> > You are subscribed as joe () via net
> > To manage your subscription, go to
> > http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
> >
> > Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-
> > people/
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
>
> Joe McGuckin
>
> ViaNet Communications
> 994 San Antonio Road
> Palo Alto, CA  94303
>
> Phone: 650-213-1302
> Cell:  650-207-0372
> Fax:   650-969-2124
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------
> You are subscribed as EEkid () aol com
> To manage your subscription, go to
>   http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
>
> Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

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