---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <20180121040906.GA30355@telecom.csail.mit.edu> Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2018 23:09:06 -0500 From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> Subject: Judge Indicates Shutdown Won't Delay AT&T-Time Warner Antitrust Case By Ted Johnson WASHINGTON - A federal judge told Justice Department lawyers that he would not be inclined to delay a pending antitrust case against AT&T and Time Warner in the event of a government shutdown. U.S. District Judge Richard Leon cited the urgency of the case, set to go to a trial on March 19. http://variety.com/2018/biz/news/att-time-warner-doj-suit-government-shutdown-1202670132/ -- Bill Horne (Remove QRM from my email address to write to me directly) ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20180121031625.GA30095@telecom.csail.mit.edu> Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2018 22:16:25 -0500 From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> Subject: CenturyLink Again Makes it Clear Rural Upgrades not a Priority by Karl Bode Like most second-tier telcos, CenturyLink's failure to upgrade its network at any real scale has resulted in it losing DSL customers to cable providers, who are now starting to more broadly deliver gigabit speeds. That's especially true across the second and third tier cities and smaller towns and rural markets these telcos simply don't think are worth upgrading. But while CenturyLink's PR department has been making numerous promises that these users will be upgraded, the company continues to tell a different story to investors. Speaking at an investor conference this week, CenturyLink CFO Sunit Patel once again made it clear that CenturyLink doesn't have much of an interest in the countless rural customers it serves. Or in getting those users closer to the FCC's actual definition of broadband (25 Mbps down, 3 Mbps up). http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/CenturyLink-Again-Makes-it-Clear-Rural-Upgrades-not-a-Priority-141045 -- Bill Horne (Remove QRM from my email address to write to me directly) ------------------------------ Message-ID: <edb8ab5d-ee13-4e0e-bb92-4f782f8572b3@googlegroups.com> Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 13:53:51 -0800 (PST) From: HAncock4 <withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org> Subject: Re: This Week in Comcast: Can municipal broadband save customers money? On Wednesday, January 17, 2018 at 11:45:06 AM UTC-5, Monty Solomon wrote: > It makes sense then, that the company would throw its support behind > organizations fighting to block municipalities' efforts to create > their own public broadband systems and argue that the infrastructure > costs are too much of a burden for taxpayers to bear. > > https://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/news/2018/01/16/comcast-cmcsa-municipal-broadband-cheaper-isp.html Municipal ownership of utilities has been around for ages. It has been a mixed blessing. For instance, the City of Philadelphia has owned the Gas Works for many years. Until the 1970s, day-to-day operation was contracted out to the United Gas Improvement Co. (UGI) who did an excellent job. But then, for purely idiotic political reasons, the mayor had the city take it over. PGW's service quality and efficient got terrible. This leads to point #1--sometimes politics gets in the way of efficient operation of a publicly owned utility. (Politics can and do screw up private utilities, too, but not as much.) The article mentions a key point--Comcast rates are very difficult to figure out due to 'teaser' intro rates. But overall, I'd say Comcast rates are too high given they have increases every year that are higher than inflation, and, they are very flush with cash. Point #2--sometimes a private utility will exploit its monopoly power and charge too much. Note that Comcast owns NBC/Universal. In the old days, the courts ruled that exhibitors and producers had to be separate companies. NBC and Universal are each big and profitable enough to stand on their own individually, there is no need for Comcast to own them as well. ------------------------------ ********************************************* End of telecom Digest Sun, 21 Jan 2018