Re: [Fwd: RE: [nycwireless] Fwd: Multichannel News - Analysts Question BellInvestments]
Darrel, No I have not been sleepwalking. I have been working hard and reaping the rewards. Again, if you REALLY feel that Europe, even all nations combined, has a stronger economy than the U.S., then you are so disconnected from the facts that I don't think I could ever convince you otherwise. Korea does indeed have a strong economy, but it too is not equal to ours. Perhaps most telling is that you seem to equate the average speed of a residential connection to an ISP with the strength of a nation's economy. To that all I can say is Please re-read paragraph 2. Yes, our economy is changing. It has been changing since the beginning of our nation. Some people get lucky and get to stay in their same occupation for their 30-50 years but most don't. They either change with the times or fall behind. Twenty to thirty years ago I was a skilled tradesman in a good union job.It was good. I got triple time on Sunday,2 1/2 time on Saturday night, 1 1/2 time in the evenings, and good benefits. Then as the economy changed more of my work out-sourced, though back then the term was privatized. Every 3 years our contract got worse. I saw the writing on the wall and educated myself and changed careers. My co-workers from back then either did the same or stayed,but now they earn less than half what I do,and complain about the union. If the contracts had stayed the same, their employers would have gone out of business because they could not have competed any longer, and they would have no jobs at all. Nothing sinister in all this, it is just the way Economics works. Jim On Wed Mar 15 21:54:52 PST 2006, Darrel O'Pry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 2006-03-15 at 22:11 -0500, Ruben Safir wrote: Make the U.S. more competitive? Look around you! It is other nations who need to emulate us to attempt to compete with US. And as a relative measure against ourselves, by all the parameters used to measure the health of the U.S. economy (unemployment pct, cost of living, inflation, # people employed, home ownership, inflation, GDP, etc.) the U.S. economy has never been better or stronger. BTW this is rather insulting. Have you actually been sleepwalking through the last 6 years of the high tech economy? Lets see, 10Mbps+ connections to the home are common in europe. Korea can even bling bling a 25 megabit connection to the home... Jobs, well IBM is moving a big portion of their future software development to india(about 55k new jobs for india). Turning their US holdings in more 'customer facing' facilities. (America to be the worlds mall) I'd say billions in IT dollars are flowing out of the US economy. Our imports exceed our exports As a country we are deeply in debt, both private and public. A large portion of our manufacturing has moved overseas as well... We're left with a service and sales driven economy which is as shaky as the stock market when all is said and done... It will take a long time to recover, and it doesn't help that financially our country (not just the government) has been headed in the wrong direction riding a near unregulated free market where % are more important than concrete $ and goods That's my pessimistic luddite view... -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
RE: [nycwireless] Fwd: Multichannel News - Analysts Question BellInvestments
Rob, You need to re-read the article. That is NOT what it said. It said that Wall Street Analysts were concerned that the telcos would not reap a decent return on their investment. The telcos are not saying that, they are touting their investment as the right thing to do to support and maintain their share prices. And what is this subsidy? A while back Dustin made the allegation that Cable companies (not telcos) were given $200 billion dollars to provide broadband to the U.S. I asked twice for substantiation but he never provided it, for it just wasn't true. And as you can also read in this article, cable companies have invested $90 billion dollars in network upgrades. This was their shareholders money, no one else's. Do you have any idea how much money cable companies pay to individual communities in franchise fees just for the opportunity to build expensive network infrastructure and attempt to sell service to its residents? As to it not being about profit, I could not disagree more. Who is it supposedly making such a decision? Certainly no one in control of enough resources to make a substantial increase in broadband penetration. If so they'd be gone pretty quickly for fiscal incompetence. Make the U.S. more competitive? Look around you! It is other nations who need to emulate us to attempt to compete with US. And as a relative measure against ourselves, by all the parameters used to measure the health of the U.S. economy (unemployment pct, cost of living, inflation, # people employed, home ownership, inflation, GDP, etc.) the U.S. economy has never been better or stronger. So what was it you paid for and who did you pay it to? That said, of course we want to continue to improve! Respectfully, Jim -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob Kelley Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 6:29 PM To: nycwireless@lists.nycwireless.net Subject: Re: [nycwireless] Fwd: Multichannel News - Analysts Question BellInvestments Again, disingenuous. Fiber to the Home, aka the Broadband Scandal, used taxpayer dollars as its funding. So the telco's say now they may not get enough profits from the subsidy? The dream of fiber wasn't corporate profit. It was about making the US competitive in the new millennium. It was about consumers paying for and getting the infrastructure they needed. And we still haven't gotten all we paid for. What have we paid for? Fast. Ubiquitous. Affordable. Open. Rob --- Jim Henry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's another good one on the wisdom of the telcos on-going FTTH investments, the ROI cable is getting onthe $90 billion they have already invested,and the possible effects net neutrality could have on them. Thought provoking. Jim Analysts Question Bell Investments Read the full article at: http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6316081.html?display=Bre aking+Newsreferral=SUPP Analysts Question Bell Investments -- -- By Ted Hearn 3/14/2006 7:54:00 PMWall Street analysts told a Senate committee Tuesday that the billions of dollars being spent by ATT Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. to compete with cable might not produce a profit. There is a high degree of skepticism that the substantial investment underway at the [phone companies] to deliver broadband networks to the home will deliver a satisfactory return on the incremental investment, said Luke Szymczak, vice president of JPMorgan Asset Management. ATT and Verizon are installing high-capacity fiber lines to rapidly deliver voice, video and data in a high-stakes battle with cable. The costs of these networks are far beyond what the returns of the new services can provide, said Craig Moffett, VP and senior analyst of U.S. cable and satellite broadcasting at Sanford C. Bernstein Co. The two analysts appeared before the Senate Commerce Committee, which is expected to vote on a bill next month that would ease phone-company entry into cable markets and perhaps include network-neutrality safeguards. The battle between cable and the phone giants has put sharp pressure on the stocks of both industries. Aryeh Bourkoff, managing director at UBS Warburg LLC, expressed concern about the regulatory climate facing cable after the industry invested more than $90 billion on network upgrades to roll out digital TV and high-speed-Internet access. He referred to possible network-neutrality and a la carte programming mandates, as well as less burdensome franchising requirements on phone companies, as negatives for cable. As media consumption over the Internet develops at a rapid pace, I believe it is too early to introduce regulation on key issues such as a la carte pricing and packaging and on net
RE: [nycwireless] Fwd: Multichannel News - Analysts Question BellInvestments
As to it not being about profit, I could not disagree more. Who is it supposedly making such a decision? Certainly no one in control of enough resources to make a substantial increase in broadband penetration. If so they'd be gone pretty quickly for fiscal incompetence. And this is where the lie is. The ability to provide broadband has been built into the telco system since the late 1970's and the franchise fees are the public access channels which provide exclusive monopolies to cable and telco to the last mile into the home. This resource should NOT be treated as a property of Cable or Telco providers. It is, by definition, 100% a public trust. WHO GIVES A RATS @$$ if every cable company and telco company goes belly up in the morning. The economy won't even BLINK, and it would free up billions of dollars of public investment. The current way that common carrier access is handled is exactly as if the roads and highways where sold lock stock and barrel to FedEx. Rather than the roads being a MEANS of competition for serves, they are being used to squash innovation. PERIOD. Those franchise fees that your complaining about, that is CHEAP stuff for the cable companies and something that they wouldn't want tampered with, THAT IS FOR SURE. If your such a genius about business, look up the term Gas House Gangs. There was a darn good reason the St Louis Cardinals were named after them. Just remember, not EVERYONE everywhere is stupid enough to swallow this BS which falls under the file of What is good for GM is Good for America Blahhh. It makes me vomit. Ruben Make the U.S. more competitive? Look around you! It is other nations who need to emulate us to attempt to compete with US. And as a relative measure against ourselves, by all the parameters used to measure the health of the U.S. economy (unemployment pct, cost of living, inflation, # people employed, home ownership, inflation, GDP, etc.) the U.S. economy has never been better or stronger. So what was it you paid for and who did you pay it to? That said, of course we want to continue to improve! Respectfully, Jim -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob Kelley Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 6:29 PM To: nycwireless@lists.nycwireless.net Subject: Re: [nycwireless] Fwd: Multichannel News - Analysts Question BellInvestments Again, disingenuous. Fiber to the Home, aka the Broadband Scandal, used taxpayer dollars as its funding. So the telco's say now they may not get enough profits from the subsidy? The dream of fiber wasn't corporate profit. It was about making the US competitive in the new millennium. It was about consumers paying for and getting the infrastructure they needed. And we still haven't gotten all we paid for. What have we paid for? Fast. Ubiquitous. Affordable. Open. Rob --- Jim Henry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's another good one on the wisdom of the telcos on-going FTTH investments, the ROI cable is getting onthe $90 billion they have already invested,and the possible effects net neutrality could have on them. Thought provoking. Jim Analysts Question Bell Investments Read the full article at: http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6316081.html?display=Bre aking+Newsreferral=SUPP Analysts Question Bell Investments -- -- By Ted Hearn 3/14/2006 7:54:00 PMWall Street analysts told a Senate committee Tuesday that the billions of dollars being spent by ATT Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. to compete with cable might not produce a profit. There is a high degree of skepticism that the substantial investment underway at the [phone companies] to deliver broadband networks to the home will deliver a satisfactory return on the incremental investment, said Luke Szymczak, vice president of JPMorgan Asset Management. ATT and Verizon are installing high-capacity fiber lines to rapidly deliver voice, video and data in a high-stakes battle with cable. The costs of these networks are far beyond what the returns of the new services can provide, said Craig Moffett, VP and senior analyst of U.S. cable and satellite broadcasting at Sanford C. Bernstein Co. The two analysts appeared before the Senate Commerce Committee, which is expected to vote on a bill next month that would ease phone-company entry into cable markets and perhaps include network-neutrality safeguards. The battle between cable and the phone giants has put sharp pressure on the stocks of both industries. Aryeh Bourkoff, managing director at UBS Warburg LLC, expressed concern about the regulatory climate facing cable after the industry invested more
RE: [nycwireless] Fwd: Multichannel News - Analysts Question BellInvestments
Make the U.S. more competitive? Look around you! It is other nations who need to emulate us to attempt to compete with US. And as a relative measure against ourselves, by all the parameters used to measure the health of the U.S. economy (unemployment pct, cost of living, inflation, # people employed, home ownership, inflation, GDP, etc.) the U.S. economy has never been better or stronger. BTW this is rather insulting. Have you actually been sleepwalking through the last 6 years of the high tech economy? -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
[Fwd: RE: [nycwireless] Fwd: Multichannel News - Analysts Question BellInvestments]
On Wed, 2006-03-15 at 22:11 -0500, Ruben Safir wrote: Make the U.S. more competitive? Look around you! It is other nations who need to emulate us to attempt to compete with US. And as a relative measure against ourselves, by all the parameters used to measure the health of the U.S. economy (unemployment pct, cost of living, inflation, # people employed, home ownership, inflation, GDP, etc.) the U.S. economy has never been better or stronger. BTW this is rather insulting. Have you actually been sleepwalking through the last 6 years of the high tech economy? Lets see, 10Mbps+ connections to the home are common in europe. Korea can even bling bling a 25 megabit connection to the home... Jobs, well IBM is moving a big portion of their future software development to india(about 55k new jobs for india). Turning their US holdings in more 'customer facing' facilities. (America to be the worlds mall) I'd say billions in IT dollars are flowing out of the US economy. Our imports exceed our exports As a country we are deeply in debt, both private and public. A large portion of our manufacturing has moved overseas as well... We're left with a service and sales driven economy which is as shaky as the stock market when all is said and done... It will take a long time to recover, and it doesn't help that financially our country (not just the government) has been headed in the wrong direction riding a near unregulated free market where % are more important than concrete $ and goods That's my pessimistic luddite view... -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
RE: [nycwireless] Fwd: Multichannel News - Analysts Question BellInvestments
Darrel brings up some good points regarding the offshoring of IT functions. Everyone's aware of the top tier system and software companies moving RD and manufacturing overseas. I think some folks here would be very surprised, however, in this day of concerns over port security that, the nation's top financial institutions and manufacturing concerns have also shipped their mainframe and network surveillance and change control functions to Bombay and other South Asian cities, as well. Remote and vitual management functions were perfected here, but they can be, and in actuality they are now being executed anywhere in the world where there is a suitable communications connection. Indian companies, btw, now constitute the single largest block of owners of submarine fiber optic cables in the world. -- Frank A. Coluccio DTI Consulting Inc. 212-587-8150 Office 347-526-6788 Mobile -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
Re: [nycwireless] Fwd: Multichannel News - Analysts Question BellInvestments
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 12:26:19AM -0600, Frank Coluccio wrote: snip Remote and vitual management functions were perfected here, but they can be, and in actuality they are now being executed anywhere in the world where there is a suitable communications connection. Indian companies, btw, now constitute the single largest block of owners of submarine fiber optic cables in the world. Hi Frank, that great big fiber represent the large drain of money, jobs and technology being sucked out. at least they know to invest in fiber and to benefit from it. Cheers, Kev - -- | .''`. == Debian GNU/Linux == | my web site: | | : :' : The Universal | debian.home.pipeline.com | | `. `' Operating System| go to counter.li.org and | | `-http://www.debian.org/ |be counted! #238656 | | my keysever: pgp.mit.edu | my NPO: cfsg.org | -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEGRbov8UcC1qRZVMRAiDdAJ9K0O9269QkHw9m3DwjkgX8Rwz9RgCdH3m1 7KLAwZLbmj5SfjB/nffc5zo= =79f6 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
