Robert, It is not a monopoly because in Texas, Verizon will not be the only franchisee. Time Warner has also applied. I imagine others may do the same. In my town, the municipaliity does not limit the number of MSOs to two. However, to get a franchise the MSO must agree to serve the entire town, not just the higher income and densely populated areas that are most profitable to serve. So far only two company's have been willing to make that financial commitment. When they do, they've got every right to try to earn as much profit as possible on that considerable investment.
Jim > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Schainbaum, Robert > Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 10:21 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; nycwireless@lists.nycwireless.net > Subject: Re: [nycwireless] Municipal Broadband - Must read! > > > How is the Texas franchise different other franchises? How is > it not in > its heart of hearts a monopoly? > > Re the situation in the place where you live, I don't know > how they've > worked it out, but even an agreement that allows you to select either > RCN or Comcast is still a duopoly and duopoly is considered just as > economically damaging as monopoly. > > DSL is an inferior solution as most people in this list will attest. > It's almost degrading to be driven to DSL. FTTH sizzles, but > it costs a > lot and it's only available on a limited basis. Oh, sorry, that's how > monopolies profit maximize: they restrict supply so that the market > clearing price is well above marginal cost. Some speculate > that Verizon > is only rolling out to the more affluent communities, i.e, > communities > that will pay and not cause account maintenance issues. Skimming the > cream. Going to where the market clearing price will involve > the least cost. > > It sounds that where your moving in a few months will reprise > the same > duopoly scenario that you have where you now live, although this time > the it will be Comcast and Service Electric in bed with each other. I > know that the Verizon offering sizzles, but it's a lot to pay just to > get close to what the South Koreans have. And I don't know whether at > the different price points that cable and Verizon FIOS are real > competitors. Then there are the other quasi-monopoly features of > Verizon's business practices. > > Your theory of the MSO is that the city strikes a devil's > bargain with > some private company and provides all sorts of goodies to entice the > private company to exercise monopoly control over its > business. In some > cases, there's really no choice but to have one company run > the cables, > or one company run the phone lines, or one company handle electric > transmission, etc. Again, I don't see why the city just doesn't grant > itself the franchise. And, again, I don't see that duopoly is a good > substitute for monopoly franchise, it's the same thing in practice. > > Jim Henry wrote: > > >Robert, > > Govt. video franchises are not always monopolies. That depends on > >the municipality or govt. entity granting it. In the case of > the Texas > >state-wide franchise it is not. In the community where I live, two > >cable companies, RCN and Comcast, have franchises so I have > my choice. > >For broadband I have even more choices if I opt to go for > DSL or FTTH. > >Where I am moving in about 6 months, about 40 miles from > here, again, I > >will have my choice of Comcast,Service Electric, or Verizon > for video, > >broadband and voice, plus numerous DSL resellers if I want > it. I know > >in the past in some communities municipalities would offer > monopolies > >because they could extort more out of the MSO but I do not > think that > >is legal anymore, at least not in PA. > > > >Jim > > > > > > -- > NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ > Un/Subscribe: > http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ > Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/ > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.14.14/222 - Release > Date: 1/5/2006 > > -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
