Ma Bell Is The Latest To Mock Naked DSL Requirements
from the no-rules-on-price,-huh? dept
As the debate surrounding the telcos has lately been focused on net neutrality, another issue that is a result of the lack of competition in the space has slipped back under the radar: naked DSL. Most of the telcos (Qwest being a notable exception) require that any customer who wants a DSL line also has to buy phone service from them as well. This is what allows them to claim they charge only $15 or whatever for a DSL line, but if you add in the phone service and additional fees it tends to be much higher. It's never made much sense that the telcos are so against just offering plain old naked DSL without the phone service. After all, for people who just want to use a mobile phone and/or VoIP, isn't that only going to encourage them to go to the competition who won't force them to bundle an unwanted service? Oh... right. There isn't much competition, which is what allows the telcos to get away with the bundle. For quite some time, there's been some pressure on SBC/AT&T to offer naked DSL in California, but the company has resisted, claiming that no one wants it (which is laughable). However, as part of the SBC/AT&T merger, one of the requirements (and basic admission that the new company had monopoly powers in some areas) was that they offer naked DSL. Not surprisingly, they looked for loopholes. They didn't take the misleading route of Verizon in announcing they offered naked DSL when the fine print showed they they really didn't, but rather went with the strategy of (1) not telling anyone they actually offered naked DSL and (2) jacking up the prices of naked DSL so that it's only $1 less than if you ordered DSL and a phone line. Yes. One whole dollar. AT&T offers a bogus response to a reporter asking about this, claiming miraculously, that the naked price "accurately reflects the real cost of DSL." If that were true, it would mean the company is selling almost all of their DSL lines at a loss -- which is ridiculous for anyone who can do a bit of math.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I can't wait for AT&T to takeover Bellsouth
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why doesn't TechDIrt believe in open markets?
So if this is the case why is it that no one has come in and challenged AT&T and others on not offering naked DSL? Let me preempt the majority who always respond wiyh how the incumbents all received federal subsidiees. First that is BS for the most part. The teleco subsidies for copper do not appply to fiber and the cable companies are self financed for the most part. Next, and far more important, is that there are other options available. Take WildBlue for instance. If people only want naked DSL than why not go to an alternative provider like WB, and there are plenty of others, and order only that service? If that happens than the telcos would be forced to react, m ost likely prices will be cut and we could all see the power of a free markete economy. But it hasnt so therefore I dont see why there should be any other conculsion other than a bunch of blowholes like to write about this stuff to make a point that the actual consumers are unwilling to make on their own.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why doesn't TechDIrt believe in open markets?
This is great for those who can not get any access, but too many people are not going to be able to get this service for the same reason(s) they can not get satellite TV.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why doesn't TechDIrt believe in open markets?
there are only two choices in town for me, the cable company and the phone company. so until i can get tv service from the phone company there really isn't much of a choice for me.
this is the whole problem with telecommunications: there still isn't real competition.
yes, wild blue rocks, it rocks absolutely:
Get WildBlue Registration Form | Availability & Offers | Satisfaction Guarantee
Current Promotions | Standard Installation
We apologize, but due to overwhelming demand, we are not currently performing installations in your area. We hope to resume in the coming months. Please register and we will inform you as soon as installations resume in your area.
The Zip Code you entered: 41091
Search Another Zip Code
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why doesn't TechDIrt believe in open markets?
The issue is simply that the telco and cableco last-mile infrastructure was built for the benefit of the incumbent, old-line companies, and they control most of the internet access.
I would agree with you if there were anything resembling an orderly and open market for broadband internet service, but as far as I can tell, there is no open market at this time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why doesn't TechDIrt believe in open markets?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Why doesn't TechDIrt believe in open marke
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Why doesn't TechDIrt believe in open m
Actually it's regulations that usually jack up prices and reduce services. Competition needs to be brought into the market. Let's not forget that the reason there is a monopoly here is that the governement has granted it.
Ok, so who are you going to bring into the fray that has the money to set up shop? Yes, an open market with competition would improve the situation but let's face it, the big boys have it locked down too tight for there to be any newcomers. The only option left is to make sure the existing players "play fair," which means tons of regulation.
Think of it as the lawyer vs. the genie. The lawyer has to make a wish but he knows the genie is going to try to mess it up with a loophole so he has to plan out ahead to plug all the loopholes. If the FCC had any inkling of what a mess this would have become they would have plugged up the loopholes long ago.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why doesn't TechDIrt believe in open markets?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Open Markets?
I've been using DSL for years and until today, I didn't konw there was such a thing as naked DSL. You can call me an idiot, but in all truth, the telcos have always sold DSL as "internet access using your phone line".
As for the telcos and the cable access. It's hard to have sympathy for monopolies trying to split up the internet into a hierarchy with aristocrats getting the most access becaus they have the most dollars.
The U.S. is already lagging behind in bandwidth availability when compared to other countries. Open markets is one thing. Tight control is another. Just my .02
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Open Market vs Monopoly Power
Second, it has been long established that allowing a company to sell a product at a loss is bad for the market place. Thus if the true cost of naked DSL is only $1 less then bundled, then the established company is selling at a loss to preent compitition. Not only does this lead to higher pricing in the long run, it also encourages corrupt organizations.
I think it is already time for a SEC investigation into ATT to determine if it is abusing its monopoly power.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Can anyone be believed anymore?
There IS a consumer demand for naked DSL, so one has to suspect that anyone posting a viewpoint suggesting there isn't is paid to write misinformation for vested interests.
not unlike the way some of tthe letters to the editor in papers are written by staffers of politicians
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I want naked DSL
So if they offered me the option of getting rid of it and its cost, I would jump at it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What's the point
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They need to polish and master customer service, one thing many cable companies have actually been very strong on lately...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Enter the World Code please
"The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Welcome to the human race"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why doesn't TechDIrt believe in open markets?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
HPA
I hope it works. My sis is only 8 miles from town and dial-up is the only thing available.
Competition. I lived in a small Kansas town when cable net rolled out. The local dial-up provider hurredly placed a wireless antenna on the water tower and advertised wireless net at like $50 or $75 a month plus the $300 or so to come hook it up. It was too little too late. That dial-up provider no longer exists. Dog eat dog.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Naked DSL
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why can't people understand...
They will lie, cheat, steal, and do as many unethical/immoral things (though maybe not illegal) as they can because no one holds them accountable.
As long as people continue to buy their services, and almost everyone can do without a phone or dsl...it's a personal choice to have them, just disconnect yourself from them completely.
After enough people do that, you won't have this problem anymore.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Two very common reasons people are raising more of a fuss is becuase 1) The big telcos are going out of their way to make sure the general public doesn't know about naked DSL. 2) People in heavily populated areas just assume there "is always another option. That is not so. I live on the eastern coast of NC and there is only one option for DSL, Sprint. No Roadrunner, No Verizon, no one else. The only other option would be satellite and most of the time the equipment setup for that is pretty expensive. (About 1 year ago Directv's satellelite DSL equipment costs $600 and that doesnt count the monthly DSL charge). And to add insult to injury Sprunt DSL has only been available in my area for about a year and its still not available to everyone here.
And about Wild Blue:
We are sorry but you happen to be in one of the very few zip codes where we are not able to offer service due to the reach of our satellite.
Please add your name to our registration form and we'll notify you when WildBlue service is available in your area.
The Zip Code you entered: 27824
Search Another Zip Code
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NIce to be Canadian
Tons and tons of fun.
And Add to the fact that we aren't americans.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
too bad
So Bellsouth lost out on my monthly fee because of their stupidity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think the monopoly/oligoby status the telephone companies have in the U.S. is awful, but in this case it's just counter-factual to say taht Verizon doesn't offer naked dsl, when it does in a lot of places these days.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Of course the lack of competition also has its roots in regulatory regimes and revenue-generating municipal franchises. I can't just go out and start laying cable to people's houses, can I?
My pipe dream is state and local laws mandating that any telco laying a network at all has to lay 3 cables, everywhere, right up to the house, for three providers to duke it out.
Meanwhile I'm about to move into an apartment complex that was stupid enough to sign a contract making AT&T it's single-source provider of phone, cable TV, and Internet. ("We're trying to get out of the contract...") So I won't even enjoy a duopoly any more.
I may really, really regret that! (But it's got a garage!)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
_Natural_ Monopolies
'Tain't so. Teleco is arguably a "natural monopoly." Natural monopolies certianly exist--think the water utility. Natural monopolies exist in any "market" where the cost of the infrastructure borne by the provider is so large and the cost of the "product" so low that there exists no credible possibility that a competitor could enter the market successfully. --The first to market could lower the price so low that the competitor couldn't pay for the new delivery infrastrucuture. Even if a new competitor could manage to build and survive it would simply nearly double the price of the product--In the water example the water itself is effectively free. Almost all the cost to the consumer comes from the pipes and treatment. Doubling all that equipment just drives up the price.
So water is a natural monopoly and you never see competing water companies. And if they existed they'd be bad for the communities in which they are found.
Really, we need to get over this shared religion that competition can solve all problems.
It can't -- that's basic economics --the consequences of the fact that competition isn't a universal solution can't be blamed on government regulations.
Sacreligously yours....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They also work with other local service providers on the line.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ATT . sbc dsl
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
satellite
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cut Your Service If You Only Want ATT DSL
1) Cancel ALL optional packages you might have, such as call forward, caller ID, etc: Saves $4-7 per service month
2) Cancel WirePro service: Saves $4 per month
3) Cancel long distance service: Saves $3 per month
4) Convert plan to Metro Plan ZUM 3: Saves $7 per month
Beat these corrupt, greedy, filty bastards who have bought off legislators at their own game.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Naked DSL
[ link to this | view in chronology ]