Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (14673)	4/18/2006 11:57:28 PM
From: ftth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 46821

Yep, it's one thing to get them to disclose their operating parameters today. Entirely different to set/mandate a new and increasing bar that they must operate the networks under, while at the same time not allowing price discrimination (rather than app discrimination) to prevent that greater capability from ever taking hold in the marketplace. There are soooo many way the incumbents can game the system. Layers and layers of ways. But the trouble is this crazy belief they will not behave badly, and no action is required until there is "evidence." History is the evidence. They don't know any other way. I'd like to see the evidence of them behaving like companies in a truly competitive marketplace. We had 3Mbps cable broadband for $45/mo in 1998, and we're back at about that level now, after a few stops in between of LESS bandwidth for MORE money, and a lot of dead startup challengers along the way. Eight freaking years...5 cycles of Moore's Law, several generations of new technologies in every competitive market. But, ignoring the grand speeches by incumbent CEO's, broadband is still circa-1998 in the US, while the rest of the world is up to date and continuing to move ahead. What do we get for "advanced" broadband bragging rights? Verizon's obsolete broadcast TV architecture applied to fiber, and based on a 12 year old standard. As long as they and the cablecos mouth the words about 100Mbps internet in the future, everybody actually trusts that they intend to pursue it. Say the word "fiber" and everyone thinks it MUST be great. Nope. They don't want a business where infrastructure has to grow in capabilities on a continuous basis. They want to build the network once and milk it for a few decades with monthly service revenue. TV and phone fit the bill. Open bandwidth does not. Open bandwidth aligns more closely with computing capabiltiies, and that sets off all kinds of alarms in an incumbent's head. Ain't gonna happen. If they were the least bit interested in going that path, we'd be well down it already, starting years ago. They just don't want to be in that business. How many more years of more of the same is it going to take before enough is enough? ...OK I feel better now. Haven't done a good incumbent "withholders of technology" rant in a while.