Lightwave has a nice article [1] on recent comments by vz and t to the FCC about what should make up our national broadband plan, i.e. how to spend the stimulus and promote broadband penetration. I recommend a read. However, it can be hard to read such policy statements without having an allergic response to the extremely high levels of buzzword density. Therefore, I’m going to offer a bit of, err, translation. Here the 8 elements AT&T offers as central to the right plan:
- embrace the diversity of broadband – Translation: Copper is good enough. We’ll do FTTH when we feel like it so leave us alone.
- engage all broadband stakeholders – Translation: Let’s all submit recommendations, counter-recommendations, open letters, and other meaningless pieces of paper to the FCC for the next 10 years, while we finish milking the cash out of our copper.
- promote broadband innovation, investment, deployment and jobs Translation: Duh…
- provide targeted government support for broadband deployment where needed – Translation: If it’s competing with us, it’s not needed so bugger off.
- remove impediments to broadband adoption – Translation: Marketing is expensive, so please do it for us.
- encourage maximum utilization Translation: Except for P2P, over the top video, Skype on the iPhone, or anything else that might congest our networks.
- enhance cybersecurity and online safety. Translation: We don’t know how either, but it’s a hot potato and yes you’re now the one holding it.
There ya go. Glad to be of service. 😀
6 Comments To "AT&T’s Ideas for the National Broadband Plan"
#1 Comment By Dave On June 11, 2009 @ 12:32 am
Very well said!
#2 Comment By Dave On June 11, 2009 @ 12:39 am
I wonder how much did it cost VZ and T to have their lawyers craft these words for them, review them, and then publish them. They must have an army of spin doctors in the waiting to come up with these utterly useless recommendations. The 10 recommendations from VZ are even more stupid. My favorite has to be #10:
effective implementation of stimulus programs
Translation: We want our own stimulus money for these billions of dollars we are spending on FIOS.
#3 Comment By carlk On June 11, 2009 @ 1:15 am
The embedded costs these monopolists are passing along to end users in the form of the regulatory body itself ($75 per hour), as a result of a regulatory scheme with inefficient checks and balances to monitor happenstance filings, are quite alarming to say the least. When will the “end run” play finally occur which loosens the internet from the hands of mis-managers adding unnecessary costs, as well as non-commensurate increases versus factual costs to deliver services, to their underlying users?
[2]
#4 Comment By Brendan On June 11, 2009 @ 3:29 am
Sprint and Level 3? Rob what is going on?
#5 Comment By ES On June 11, 2009 @ 5:27 am
I’ll take a stab….WSJ saying Sprint long haul is $6.1B(which seems high) in revs; According to the sellside, Qwest’s assets was trying to keep 15% of its long haul revenues(whose margins were under 10%). If you assume the same from Sprint on revenue retention and arguably worse margins, the revenues for sale would be 5.2B at a 7-8%, the ebitda would be $388M. At a ~6-7x industry valuation it would equate to ~$2.5Bn. The structure maybe looks frontier communications and Sprint retains a 30% stake?
#6 Comment By Dave Rusin On June 12, 2009 @ 1:08 am
Anything AT&T is positioning for, you are better off heading in the opposite direction.
This is a company that tried to put Humpty-Dumpty back together again (Ma Bell) and since CA 1996 dominated all aspects of the FCC and Congress in regulatory matters via litigation.
Sorry, I don’t buy the let’s be pretty together rhetoric.
The language reminds me of legislation whenever it comes to education funding … “it’s for the children.”
My opinion, AT&T is not out and interested in whats good for America called our National interests – they are playing a card similar to “it’s for the children.”