| John Nelson 2005-05-22, 10:52 pm |
| In article <vl4291pgbevjuvrpfjk8ahmd3qksv0ocaq@4ax.com>, smakky@spam.com
says...
> On Sun, 22 May 2005 12:26:13 -0700, John Nelson
> <DieSpammerDie@njabl.org> wrote:
>
>
> Yes, this is of consequence to the VoIP providers. But the competitive
> telephone industry is so fluid that it seems to run in cycles.
Yes, with the Bell Co's always coming out on top. Hmmm.... 
> We'll see how this endures - and what will happen once the ILECs feel
> that piping broadband into everyone's home and replacing tip and ring
> with a line-powered modem and POTS interface better meets long term
> business. If that ever comes to fruition I've got to wonder what will
> come of the smaller VoIP companies.
It is coming, but the ILEC's are typically 1-3 years behind the market
in recognizing trends and adapting to changes. My observation is that
this is, more often than not, due to their reluctance to (what they see
as) canibalize their cash cows. For example, in our neck o' the woods,
Qwest took FOREVER to start selling DSL, despite the fact that there was
demonstrated demand for it. Demonstrated, for example, by the fact that
Covad was selling it hand-over-fist for eighteen months before Qwest
even started, in one particular area. Today, Covad is hanging on by
their fingernails.
> Don't get me wrong - I do appreciate the requirement to provide ANI/
> ALI information, however Congress should have assessed the impact to
> local governments in certain operating situations prior to turning
> loose another free rider.
Out of touch federal officials? You liberal malcontent, you.
|