On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 10:52:56 -0400, George
wrote:

mm wrote:


So that's why it would matter! Isn't it obvious that most people (all
people?) want to pay less for something if it is just as good. If I
have a temporary need for FIOS for tv or internet, I shouldn't allow
them to trick me (by meanss of some bundle or package the consequences
of which I don't understand) into FIOS for phone if that means that I
won't be able to go back to copper phone. Or if I have a permanent
need for high speed, it means that if I move out and rent or sell my
house, I will either have to hide this from a prospective renter (and
antagonize him in the process) or buyer, or I'll have to tell him and
risk losing the rental or sale when he finds out he'll have to pay for
FIOS, and that without paying an electrician can never get anything
cheaper, even though the people next door on both sides of him are
paying a lot less for phone.


I seriously doubt anyone would even think twice about how the
phone/data/TV service arrived into their apartment or house.

Maybe you are out of touch with people who have less money than you
do. We have millions, maybe 10's of millions of home buyers who
learned what happens when the interest on their mortgage goes up, and
learned that they can't buy as big a home that they might want, or
spend another 500 dollars a year on this, and 500 on that, and on
that.

I heard other study on the radio a day or two ago, that when Pell
grants are lowered just 100 or 200, that one can notice the students
who drop out of college, because they and their parents have already
stetched to the limit to come up with the money they are spending for
college with the full Pell grant.

This is not special to to house buying or college. My brother makes a
good living, thank God, and what he does is buy whatever he needs and
puts the rest in a savings account. When he has enough, he buys a
stock or a bond. But most people have a budget, even a written
budget, and they try to stick to it.

And all of those people have a price point. A price above which they
will not buy. Regardless of how low or high it is, even if it is
higher than it should be for their income, they have one.

If someone here was buying a home and all they considered was how much
money they had to put down, everyone here would ridicule them. They
have to consider the mortage, insurance, taxes, upkeep, AND utilities.

Of course not every buyer will be disuaded by another 200 or 500 a
year, but some of those people will feel, Why should I pay 200 for
FIOS when I have no interest in it, when I can buy the other house,
and for the same 200 extra, get that extra tree, or the

Car dealers and other vendors know that "throwing in" some little
cheap almost worthless feature can make a sale. Maybe not as common,
but insisting on selling the buyer an undesirer feature can queer a
sale.


I don't
understand what you mean "pay for FiOS". Wouldn't they need to "pay for
cable" or "pay for phone service" if they wanted it regardless of the
provider?

You just agreed in your previous reply to me that FIOS costs a lot
more. So I don't understand the point of your question. It's like
asking, wouldn't a woman need to pay for a dress to wear to a wedding,
so why should she object to paying 3 times as much as she paid for her
previous dress?


but if they don't do it they will be out of business. The cable

That's not going to be for years and it's speculation in that there
are lots of ways to make money. For example, by advertising or by
normal demand they might get everyone to want FIOS, so that few or
none want to move backwards. Although I still have a dial phone
connected, I don't object to them taking out dial-capabilities now, or
even 10 years ago if it costs more than a trivial amount of money to
maintain.

You are completely missing the big picture. You have to plan far out
into the future for this kind of stuff.

They have to plan, not me. I have to worry about paying my expenses
and those of people who depend on me, and saving money for retirement.

The phone company can't simply
sit on its hands and then one day wake up and realize that they lost 85%

I never suggested they sit on their hands. They can install as many
Fios lines as they want. That doesn't mean they have to take out the
copper and especially not by tricking me. And what if I move for
another job and rent my home, and the tenant puts in Fios and has no
idea they'll be taking out the copper, or doesn't appreciate the
consequencs. Then when I get back, I get the shaft. A friend of mine
got a job in another city for a year and rented his house to a tenant,
and moved back in a year later, when he got a better job in his home
town. Another friend kept his house as an investment when he got
married and bought a bigger house with his wife. When he got divorced,
it was coincidentally just as the lease on the rental was expiring,
and he moved back into his original house. Neither of these tenants
screwed anything up,

of their customers to the cable companies. My buddy works for one of the
big cable companies and they can't even come close to addressing the
demand for their phone service. And the cable company install is about
5% (or less) of the complexity of a FiOS install.

Why does any of this mean they should take the copper out of house
that has it, when they install Fios, and why does any of this mean I
should cooperate?

I think when you talk about high demand, you are arguing against your
own point. If they have high demand, they ARE making money, and it
won't be necessary to take out the copper when eventually everyone
wants FIOS. Even if it is only 90% who have ordered it voluntarily,
I'm not saying they can't phase out copper when usage on a street is
90% FIOS, or when it costs too much or they need the space at the
central station. But that is not the situation we're talking about.

But it is never going to cost them anything to let the copper sit in
someone's house and in the yard leading to the house, and it's not
costing them anything now to keep the rest of the copper supply system
(switches and whatever accessories are required) , becuase they can't
provide FIOS for more than a few percent of customers anyhow, and
haven't convinced more than 1 or 2 percent to buy it.

I'm not an enemy of corporations. I don't have as much money as my
brother, but I have stock in corporations and have had since my father
left me stocks when he died when I was 8. My mother lived off that
money, the income from mine and my brother's and hers plus part of the
principal for 20 years. (My father set it up, as well he should have,
that no money went to my brother or me until my mother died, unless my
mother requested part of the principal for special expenses.) I know
that corporations are supposed to make profits and when they follow
proper practices, I'm in favor of it.

We already know that VErizon isn't big on full disclosure, and without
full disclosure in advance, the company IMO isn't honest**. I've
referring to the 20 dollar connection and shipping charge they tacked
on after I was 90% done signing up, when they bragged in advance in
detail about *every*thing that they gave me "Free". The installation
charge (for work done at their office, since I did the work here) cost
more that the "First Month Free" that they bragged about everywhere.

**That's why the 20 dollars bothered me so much. It's not the 20
dollars so much as I think they weren't honest.



As to going out of business, that's their problem a lot more than it
is my problem. As long as they sell the cheap, original version of
phone service, then people should know and protect themselves from
company policies. Where this applies, everyone should realize that
their intention will be to remove the copper if they put in FIOS for
everything.that's what I'm going to buy, and and if putting in FIOS
will cause them to

Maybe this policy should be regulated by law. Don't forget that the
phone company is a public utility. Don't let conservatives convince
you that nothing should be regulated. If they had their way, some
would want to remove all the building codes and let people build
anything they wanted, regardless of the fires, disease, and collapses
that resulted.

companies are deploying VoIP and essentially becoming phone companies.

Not removing copper doesn't change the equation. If FIOS is a better
product, enough people will want it that the phone company will do
fine.

If VOIP is better (which aiui, it's not) why is wrong if it wins?

You may not realize it but you are using VoIP pretty much every time you
use your telephone that is connected via copper lines. Pretty much all
signaling after the CO and sometimes before is digital.

So that's fine. It reinforces my question. Not removing the copper
doesn't change t he equation, and if FIOS can't compete with VOIP, is
more expensive or does less well or customers don't like it, why is it
wrong if VOIP wins and Fios losses?


Since they can do it over their existing cable plant they can offer it
for a lower cost because they don't need to install a new cable system
to do it. So it doesn't cost them a lot to become a competitive phone
service provider. If the phone companies don't respond with similar
bundled services they need to prepare for eventual shutdown.

That is their problem. I don't have to subvert my interests to
promote them.


Obviously it is their problem. If they don't promote FiOS and loose most
of their customers how much do you think a plain copper line might cost?

It costs them NOTHING now. They have the wire in place adn they have
the central station equipment in place as long as anyone at the local
station is using copper.

I think it might be quite expensive if only 10% of the people on a block
have one .

We're at 98% now. When we get down to 20% we can make plans.


mm
the case of DSL you are buying broadband data. Why would it matter to
you if it came via DSL on copper or over fiber?
I think DSL probably works better on fiber, but there wouldn't be any
improvement for voice phone calls.

If fios isn't more expensive, there is still the bit about power
failures. Why would one want to have to have a UPS to power fios,
even if it worked, when a copper wired phone requires no electicity
except what the phone company provides? It's nice when the power is
out and you can't watch tv and your UPS isn't big enough to spend more
than 10 minutes on the computer, to talk on the phone all night.