33 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
Copyright © 2015 E. William Horne. All Rights Reserved.
The Telecom Digest for Jun 9, 2015
|I'm not interested in the suburbs. The suburbs bore me. And I'm not interested in isolating myself. I feel good when I'm engaged in what I think are the core issues of the society, and those core issues to me are what's happening to poor folks in this society.|
|Barack Hussein Obama|
See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details.
|Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2015 23:28:26 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Exclusive: In 'year of Apple Pay', many top retailers remain skeptical Message-ID: <631D58C2-C928-4ABC-AF5A-986533AA427C@roscom.com> Exclusive: In 'year of Apple Pay', many top retailers remain skeptical In a January earnings call with investors, Apple Inc Chief Executive Tim Cook made a confident prediction: "2015 will be the year of Apple Pay," he said. Since then, the company has aggressively courted retailers - and claimed significant success. "We've spoken to all of the top 100 merchants in the U.S., and about half will accept Apple Pay this year, with many more the following year," a company spokesperson recently told Reuters. But interviews with analysts, merchants and others suggest that Apple's forecast may be too optimistic and that many retailers remain skeptical about the payment system. http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/05/us-apple-pay-idUSKBN0OL0CM20150605|
|Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2015 10:45:45 -0400 From: Fred Goldstein <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Re: Verizon FiOS coverage said to be "miserable" in New York Message-ID: <5575AA99.email@example.com> On 6/7/2015 7:32 PM, HAncock4 wrote: > On Sunday, June 7, 2015 at 3:31:23 PM UTC-4, Charles Jackson wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 7, 2015 at 3:20 AM, HAncock4 wrote: > >> The Philadelphia Inquirer reported that southern New Jersey also > >> suffers from poor FIOS availability despite an agreement with Verizon > >> in exchange for an exclusive franchise. > > > I read the article and did not find the word "exclusive". > > >From the article: > > "In New Jersey, meanwhile, Trenton lawmakers passed a law > in 2006 granting Verizon a _lucrative franchise_ to wire > hundreds of towns for FiOS." > > To me, a "lucrative franchise" meant an exclusive contract. > Otherwise, what would be so lucrative about the franchise? > > In any event, the post of the Inquirer article was to show > that other areas had trouble similar to the original post. As other have noted, the franchise was not exclusive. But back to Bruce Kushnick's point: Verizon had originally, in 1992, promised 100% fiber coverage of the state, in exchange for which the state move them from rate-of-return to price cap ("alternative form of") regulation (AFOR). Under AFOR, they are allowed to earn whatever profits they can, though basic residential rates may be capped, at least for a time. Based on historical documents Bruce & I have read, the original plan was fiber-to-the-node, with 45 Mbps copper drops around the neighborhood. Sort of like U-Verse. They never met the promise. They switched instead to providing DSL wherever it was convenient for them, and nothing elsewhere. A couple of years ago, two Cumberland County townships, Stow Creek and Greenwich, which had no broadband service, made a lot of noise at the BPUC and got Verizon to put in FiOS. The issue is that now the Christie-appointed BPUC is trying to vacate the original deal in its entirety, relieving Verizon of its obligations and basically turning it into an unregulated monopoly or (where there's cable competition) duopoly. And nobody is a common carrier any more, at least in the proper meaningful sense. -- Fred R. Goldstein k1io fred "at" ionary little-round-mark com Interisle Consulting Group +1 617 795 2701|
|Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2015 10:44:55 -0400 From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Verizon PA's Broadband Scandal - A Quadruple Bait-and-Switch Message-ID: <email@example.com> SUMMARY: Verizon PA's Broadband Scandal -- A Quadruple Bait-and-Switch by Bruce Kushnick Bait & Switch First Bait & Switch -- Instead of rolling out fiber optic services, Verizon deployed DSL over the old copper wires from 1996-2002. Second Bait & Switch -- Because of weasel room in the original law, Verizon was able to change the commitment from 45 Mbps in both directions to 1.5 Mbps in one direction. Third Bait & Switch -- In 2011, Verizon got the State to agree to let it use any technology including Verizon Wireless, to fulfill this obligation. Fourth Bait-&-Switch --As we uncovered in New York, in PA, the company appears to be cross-subsidizing its wireless networks with monies that should have been used for the wired networks. http://goo.gl/yaBH54 -- Bill Horne (Remove QRM from my address to write to me directly)|
|Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2015 10:58:24 -0400 From: Fred Goldstein <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: Opinion: Verizon gets a lot for little money in its deal for AOL Message-ID: <5575AD90.firstname.lastname@example.org> On 6/7/2015 10:54 PM, Bill Horne wrote: > By PHILIP VAN DOORN > > Maybe the worst thing about AOL Inc. is its name. > > It confuses the coverage of the deal announced today, in which Verizon > Inc. plans to acquire AOL Inc. for $4.4 billion in cash. > > The name "AOL" associates the current well-run company with one of the > worst corporate tie-ups ever. That was the $103.5 billion acquisition of > the old Time Warner by the old AOL in January 2001. The all-stock offer > made in January 2000 was for $164 billion, but AOL's shares declined > considerably before the deal was completed, as just about everyone > realized AOL's market advantage as a pioneering provider of dial-up > Internet service was going the way of the dodo. Conventional wisdom totally misses the point of the AOL-TW deal. From the AOL point of view, it was brilliant. A company whose value was hugely inflated by a bubble used that stock valuation to purchase an established company with real assets. So AOL shareholders ended up with TW. From TW shareholder's point of view, of course, it was an unmitigated disaster -- they sold more than half of the company for essentially nothing. TW's directors proved they have no place in the world of business. But of course this is America where the CEO class gets compensated richly for doing well and compensated richly for failing. -- Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein at ionary little-round-mark com|
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom- munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to Usenet, where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.
TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit educational service offered to the Internet by Bill Horne.
The Telecom Digest is moderated by Bill Horne.
43 Deerfield Road
Sharon MA 02067-2301
bill at horne dot net
This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Copyright © 2015 E. William Horne. All rights reserved.
Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself. Thank you!
All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization.