Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Telecom stocks are down since Feb. 25
"You made a one-day observation in an attempt to mislead and I busted you with a trend line."
Actually you misquoted me, ignored 90% of the story, and then tried to pretend that very minor drops by two companies undergoing extensive merger reviews were linked to Title II's impact.
"It's actually too early to measure the impact of the White House's regulatory overreach just yet, frankly. That's what journalists are saying."
Ah, I see. We'll revisit this in a year's time then.
AT&T and Comcast are also seeking merger approvals that are highly uncertain, and Verizon is not. Also -- we're talking $1 to $2 declines? Surely the resounding devastation that was supposed to take place would see a more substantive reflection in stock performance?
Also, you're intentionally ignoring the entire central point of the article.
The only revenue being impacted here is the revenue that could potentially be generated by particularly ham-fisted examples of anti-competitive behavior. There's no rate regulations here, and most of the utility-style regulations haven't been applied in what's a "Title II Lite" approach.
That's the problem. Because they own so much of the nation's spectrum and dominate the special access market, AT&T and Verizon generally offer the best coverage and service, though T-Mobile is slowly but surely catching up.
I'm loathe to give Verizon my money, but I need a service where I can tether my phone for use as a modem in a lot of out-of-the-way locations, and I've found T-Mobile, even though I support their pro-consumer policies, isn't quite up to snuff yet.
That's the problem. Because they own so much of the nation's spectrum and dominate the special access market, AT&T and Verizon generally offer the best coverage and service, though T-Mobile is slowly but surely catching up.
I'm loathe to give Verizon my money, but I need a service where I can tether my phone for use as a modem in a lot of out-of-the-way locations, and I've found T-Mobile, even though I support their pro-consumer policies, isn't quite up to snuff yet.
Right! That logic of "you have to do THIS To exactly mirror the horrible experience nobody likes" seems like a failure of comparison logic at the outset.
Yes as the poster above notes, that Netflix "dominates 30% of peak traffic" (a metric usually used by the same crowd I'm talking about in the article) is a talking point used to somehow suggest Netflix isn't playing fair or is taking up more than their fair share of capacity. Except this is traffic generated by users demanding to use Netflix over connections both sides already pay for. It's also part of the "Netflix is a bogeyman" narrative.
I do think it 's fare to say they've taken rhetorical media warfare to the next level. They're masterful at what they do.
CNN and MSNBC are still awful, but in some notably different and far more clumsy ways. That said, I think anybody getting their news from cable TV is filling their noggin with hot air and bubbles.
And if you get enough people that don't know any better to accept this is all Netflix's fault, you "win" the discourse war by effectively modifying truth. Or at least muddying the water enough so that it becomes "debatable" over whether Netflix is a villain.
"Startups, nonprofits, and small ventures are always at a disadvantage in terms of marketing and other treatment."
So making it more so makes any coherent sense?
"While I don't like the effect this could have on the VC market, I don't think that banning zero rating deals is the right way to deal with it."
Well you're in luck, because the FCC agrees with you. Unfortunately allowing preferred content providers through what are already arbitrary usage caps spits in the face of net neutrality all the same.
"Why don't we just punish those hypothetical bad things when they actually if and when they come to pass?"
They are coming to pass.
I consider AT&T's sponsored data a "bad thing" and a horrible precedent in that it allows big companies to gain previously unobtainable leverage over smaller operators. And yet here we are with the FCC simply considering it a "creative" pricing model because it's just ambiguous enough to hide the anti-competitive intent below a layer of PR speak.
You're basically injecting a network gatekeeper right in the middle of a relatively healthy ecosystem, where they're suddenly letting companies with the deepest pockets obtain priority marketing and other treatment over small companies. This automatically disadvantages startups, nonprofits, or other smaller ventures and unnecessarily distorts the entire playing field.
"they truly are a leader of the broadband industry."Sometimes. They're pretty great on the engineering front when it comes to DNS security or IPV6 upgrades. But when it comes to customer service they're undeniably the worst not only in the telecom industry -- but according to rankings like the ACSI -- across ALL industries.
Trying to get even basic screw ups fixed can often wind up as a Kafka-esque multi-month nightmare. That's not exactly what I'd call leadership.
On the post: Despite Claims Title II Will Kill Investment, Comcast Launches Major New 2 Gigabit Deployment
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Telecom stocks are down since Feb. 25
Actually you misquoted me, ignored 90% of the story, and then tried to pretend that very minor drops by two companies undergoing extensive merger reviews were linked to Title II's impact.
Ah, I see. We'll revisit this in a year's time then.
On the post: Despite Claims Title II Will Kill Investment, Comcast Launches Major New 2 Gigabit Deployment
Re: Re: Re: Telecom stocks are down since Feb. 25
Two, you're still not actually addressing the fact that investment isn't utterly imploding like the industry (and I'm sure you yourself) claimed.
On the post: Despite Claims Title II Will Kill Investment, Comcast Launches Major New 2 Gigabit Deployment
Re: Telecom stocks are down since Feb. 25
Also, you're intentionally ignoring the entire central point of the article.
On the post: Despite Claims Title II Will Kill Investment, Comcast Launches Major New 2 Gigabit Deployment
Re:
On the post: Verizon CEO Pushing Congress For 'Bipartisan' Consensus That Government Should Never, Ever Stand Up To Broadband Duopolists
Re:
I'm loathe to give Verizon my money, but I need a service where I can tether my phone for use as a modem in a lot of out-of-the-way locations, and I've found T-Mobile, even though I support their pro-consumer policies, isn't quite up to snuff yet.
On the post: Verizon CEO Pushing Congress For 'Bipartisan' Consensus That Government Should Never, Ever Stand Up To Broadband Duopolists
Re:
I'm loathe to give Verizon my money, but I need a service where I can tether my phone for use as a modem in a lot of out-of-the-way locations, and I've found T-Mobile, even though I support their pro-consumer policies, isn't quite up to snuff yet.
On the post: When Analyzing Cord Cutting Options, Most TV Analysts Continue To Pretend Piracy Simply Doesn't Exist
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: When Analyzing Cord Cutting Options, Most TV Analysts Continue To Pretend Piracy Simply Doesn't Exist
Re:
I'm not suggesting they show people how to pirate. I just think it's absurd it's not mentioned AT ALL as if it's some sort of thought contagion.
On the post: When Analyzing Cord Cutting Options, Most TV Analysts Continue To Pretend Piracy Simply Doesn't Exist
Re:
On the post: When Analyzing Cord Cutting Options, Most TV Analysts Continue To Pretend Piracy Simply Doesn't Exist
Re:
On the post: When Analyzing Cord Cutting Options, Most TV Analysts Continue To Pretend Piracy Simply Doesn't Exist
Re:
On the post: A Growing Chorus Is Trying To Rewrite The History Of Net Neutrality -- And Blame Absolutely Everything On Netflix
Re: Seeking enlightenment
On the post: A Growing Chorus Is Trying To Rewrite The History Of Net Neutrality -- And Blame Absolutely Everything On Netflix
Re: Re: Re: Re:
CNN and MSNBC are still awful, but in some notably different and far more clumsy ways. That said, I think anybody getting their news from cable TV is filling their noggin with hot air and bubbles.
On the post: A Growing Chorus Is Trying To Rewrite The History Of Net Neutrality -- And Blame Absolutely Everything On Netflix
Re: Re: Re: Re: Corporate Circlejerk
On the post: A Growing Chorus Is Trying To Rewrite The History Of Net Neutrality -- And Blame Absolutely Everything On Netflix
Re: Re: Corporate Circlejerk
On the post: Showtime, HBO Working With ISPs To Make Their Streaming Services Cap Exempt
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not sure I oppose zero rating
So making it more so makes any coherent sense?
Well you're in luck, because the FCC agrees with you. Unfortunately allowing preferred content providers through what are already arbitrary usage caps spits in the face of net neutrality all the same.
On the post: Showtime, HBO Working With ISPs To Make Their Streaming Services Cap Exempt
Re: Re: Re: Not sure I oppose zero rating
They are coming to pass.
I consider AT&T's sponsored data a "bad thing" and a horrible precedent in that it allows big companies to gain previously unobtainable leverage over smaller operators. And yet here we are with the FCC simply considering it a "creative" pricing model because it's just ambiguous enough to hide the anti-competitive intent below a layer of PR speak.
On the post: Showtime, HBO Working With ISPs To Make Their Streaming Services Cap Exempt
Re: Re: Re: Not sure I oppose zero rating
http://avc.com/2014/01/vc-pitches-in-a-year-or-two/
You're basically injecting a network gatekeeper right in the middle of a relatively healthy ecosystem, where they're suddenly letting companies with the deepest pockets obtain priority marketing and other treatment over small companies. This automatically disadvantages startups, nonprofits, or other smaller ventures and unnecessarily distorts the entire playing field.
On the post: Apple's Attempt At A TV Revolution Runs Face First Into Comcast Corporation
Re: Re:
On the post: Apple's Attempt At A TV Revolution Runs Face First Into Comcast Corporation
Re: Re: Doomed from the start
Next >>