AT&T yields to objections from FCC — Does anyone think that the reformation of AT&T like this is a little peculiar? Why was it busted up in the first place? There were good reasons, but apparently everyone forgot them.
In its latest filing, AT&T agreed to provide $10 broadband service to new customers in its territory. It also pledged to provide 100 percent broadband access to its entire service area and to give free broadband modems to customers.
The company also mentioned network neutrality, or requiring AT&T to carry Internet traffic without charging customers more for different services or applications.
Looks like they’ll just promise anything. Of course once the deal goes through they will just do what they want. The FCC can’t even stop slamming, overbilling or anything. The public pays the price and stays mum.
I just got set up with fiber this week, 8 Mbps in both directions, through my electric co-op’s ISP division. If I didn’t have satellite receivers and an alarm system that require an analog line, I’d get rid of Ma Bell altogether.
AT&T agreed to provide $10 broadband service to new customers in its territory
Broadband being what? 128kbps? 😉
This is to say that these folks werent all unser 1 controling group in the first place, as they were originally…
I’m waiting for the at&t and bellsouth and verizon to merge,
Why should they have to make all these concessions?
The world is very different than ’70s and ’80s when Ma Bell was broken up. I live in NYC where I have three different physical medium choices to have phone service (standard phone, cell phone, cable), and many choices of companies between all of them. The same goes for broadband (add WiFi) and TV (add Satellite). Bottom line, for the majority of households in this country, there is competition, and it is working.
That being said, there are rural areas where such competition does not exist, and may very well be extensive in Bell South’s territory. So the decison may not be good for Atlanta (which is probably wired like New York, if not more), but may be very good for rural Georgia, whose only two-way communications are through a phone line.
Regardless of AT&T and BellSouth, for the people of the region there are both winners and losers in this (re)merger.
#6,
well, we dont have those choices in the RESt of the USA…
why dont a few of you look up WHO the SBA is…then YAHOO, and so forth..
These companies have been buying out each other, and selling back and forth EVER SENCE the 70’s and 80’s…There is NO difference between them except that we are STILL useing their OLD equipment, and paying for Telephone poles that are 40+ years old…
BACK TO THE FUTURE…
Can you say Mergers & Acquisitions? This is BIG money for the Wall Street firms involved. They merge, acquire, and swap corporations in multi-billion dollar deals the way kids swap trading cards. A lot of hands are in this $80 billion pot. The only loser in this whole charade is the consumer.
http://www.tommcmahon.net/2005/11/baby_bells.html has the story in graphic form, which I will need to update now.
AT&T owns what used to be –
-AT&T long-distance
-Southwestern Bell
-Pacific Telesis (except cellular service)
-Ameritech
-Prodigy
-McCaw Cellular
-Cellular One
-Cingular (Bell South + Southwestern Bell cellular)
Verizon owns what used to be –
-Bell Atlantic
-NYNEX
-Pacific Telesis cellular (AirTouch)
-Ameritech cellular service
-GTE
-WorldCom
-MCI
-UUNet
-MFS
-former AOL and CompuServe backbone
So I guess you guys are OK with extortion by government officials if it’s towards policies you like.
As opposed to extortion by monopolies, Frank — you betcha.
This isn’t really AT&T any more. One of the Baby Bells took over the parent.
All it is is a card shuffle..
Who owns whom, and who will buy whom next…
Its just a confusion game, and to make things harder to read and tax…
After you figure you are being taxed for the same things, HOW many times, Cable, Cell, Phone, sat, Long distance, Phone features, Cell features, and more…and you are paying the Same tax, 1-2-4-10 times over??
Low cost, low speed DSL is good value for many customers. For those that just wants to surf the net and email it’s fine. I’ve had broadband for years. Last Spring I had to use dialup for the first time in several years at a very rural location. It was unbelievable frustrating. I just shut the laptop down and enjoyed the view.
I have never really understood what folks get so upset about when these mergers happen. The fact of the matter is that competition has NEVER existed since AT&T was broken up in the first place. When it was busted up, it was busted into regional companies that continued to have a monopoly on the region they served. A BellSouth customer couldn’t get service from Ameritech, NYNEX or anyone else — they were locked to BellSouth.
The only place that competition has EVER existed was in the long distance market. MCI wanted in and they couldn’t get in. They filed the lawsuit that lead to the original breakup. Long distance prices fell and that was a good thing. However, for the most part the price of local service did not change at all.
So, now all the local providers are getting back together and folks are getting upset. I just don’t get it. Who really cares if you are served by a local monopoly or a national one? Either way, you still only have the one provider to choose from that you have always had.
At any rate, as has already been mentioned, will cellular, voip, and cable the whole point is moot now anyway.
Mike T
WELL,
for high speed access, the USA is way behind. Somehting like 8th…
Because corps dont pay for ANYTHING, they make us/we pay for every single upgrade.
The Tech is there, has been for at least 10 years.
the land is there, the towers installed.