Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!wuarchive!texbell!vector!telecom-gateway
From: westmark!dave@uunet.uu.net (Dave Levenson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: LEC Monopoly and Cable TV
Message-ID: 
Date: 12 Aug 89 17:59:44 GMT
Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US
Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA
Lines: 56
Approved: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us
X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 294, message 10 of 10

In article , asuvax!gtephx!ellisond@
ncar.ucar.edu (Dell Ellison) writes:
> In article , jackson@ttidca.tti.com
> (Dick Jackson) writes:
> > Is anyone else in this group interested in the *future* of the telephone
> > system?
 ...
> > An example of the LEC's bid for more revenue is their request to be
> > allowed to operate cable TV, i.e. to deliver entertainment to the home.
 ...
> > [Moderator's Note: I am not quite clear on your use of the abbreviation
> > 'LEC'. Would you explain the abbreviation, please?
 ...
LEC usually refers to the Local Exchange Carrier
 ...
> Actually, I would like to see the phone company provide cable TV, etc...
> Because:

>    1.  The Cable TV companies in many cases are 'trampling' on the
>        consumers, because they have no competition (many times) in
>        a particular area.  Many times they have little selection,
>        poor service and high prices.  This solution would provide
>        some competition for them.

>    2.  I am very much in favor in the development of new technologies
>        and higher efficiency.  This would be a much more efficient
>        and feature-rich system.  (Not to mention the great benefits
>        of direct digital connections to our home computers.)

> I would like to see this happen.  (This would also bring picture
> phones a lot closer to reality.)



I'm a bit curious:  Why do you think that replacing the existing
Cable TV monopoly with the local Telco monopoly is going to change
anything?  Or are you suggesting that the local cable company could
continue to do business in the face of competition from the local
telco?


I would expect to see the telco undercut the cable company through
cross-subsidization from telephone rate-payers, until there's only
one utility left, providing both TV and phone service.


If you _really_ want to make it competitive, let's discuss allowing
the present Cable TV companies offer point-to-point voice
communication -:) !


--
Dave Levenson                Voice: (201) 647 0900
Westmark, Inc.               Internet: dave@westmark.uu.net
Warren, NJ, USA              UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
[The Man in the Mooney]      AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave