Suing A Gaming Website For Having The Same Name As A Game Character

SBC Told To Get Naked

from the it's-about-time... dept

Fri, Mar 11th 2005 5:10pm — Mike Masnick

Earlier this week, my own experience trying to get naked DSL from SBC, and (in the comments) noted that Speakeasy, who would provide naked DSL -- does it in a way that it's economically pointless (i.e., it's so much more expensive, you're better off signing up for phone service from SBC). Now, the California ISP Association is apparently urging politicians to force SBC to offer naked DSL. This isn't the first time this has happened. Georgia told BellSouth they had to offer naked DSL, which the company did briefly until they figured out a way to get around those rules. What's silly about all of this is that it's probably costing them customers. People who don't want telephone service are simply going to rule out SBC as an option, and go with the local cable provider. Of course, if there were some real competition here, rather than a duopoly, there would be a lot more pressure for SBC to stop the forced bundling.

2 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Ravi, 13 Mar 2005 @ 11:29am

Speakeasy is a premium provider
From what I saw, naked DSL from Speakeasy makes economic sense if your alternative is shared DSL from Speakeasy. Then it costs $6/month more in your monthly rate plus a $99 installation fee. I think that's about breakeven for the first year and should be a mild savings after that (vs getting a phone line only for DSL).

I agree it doesn't make sense compared to cheaper alternatives (cable modem, or DSL from your local ILEC) but... there's also plenty of crap you don't have to deal with: they're Linux and Unix friendly, technically clueful and provide good add-on options (static IPs, hosting, ...) that cost much more from your local ILEC or cable modem provider. Certainly when I was fighting to get Comcast installed using my Linux laptop there were times that I thought about paying extra for Speakeasy, even though that extra was a fair chunk of change.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- W Klink (profile), 14 Mar 2005 @ 7:52am
  
  Re: Speakeasy is a premium provider
  I already have SpeakEasy and am considering switching to naked DSL with them. Speakeasy offered to lower my montly rate by $20 for two months to help offset the installation charge. Since I'm paying $30/month to Verizon for a phone I don't use, this will pay for itself quickly.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]