Thanks for the reply, Doug. In hindsight I do see a reason behind allowing T to build out, and letting their investments have sufficient time to prove in. But if they're moving in what will predictably prove to be the wrong direction and have problems down the road with what is, and what is not sanctioned, the need for correctives should be made known at this time. Of course, some clairvoyance helps here, but T has some good meteorologists on board.
It boils down to their continued willingness to gamble as the stakes increase. I maintain that T knowingly took a huge gamble going in, and it is not working out entirely in their favor, as they very well knew going into this thing that the possibility existed that it wouldn't. I view the SLC trials from many angles. One of those angles I see is from the standpoint of permiting them some visibility in what the feasibility and costs would be in the event that they must open up to other ISPs down the road, in addition to fundamentally making life easier (increasing bandwidth share) for their regular multi-service users, in general.
Regards, Frank |
