Re: cr> alternative delivery systems


Sender: Arun Mehta <•••@••.•••>

Richard said:

AG> but if the
AG> majors do gobble up the spectrum, it's not at all obvious that
AG> their business strategy will be to offer the lowest possible
AG> prices.

I think we will have a dog-eat-dog, something like what happened in
airlines. Only difference is, the entry barrier is a lot lower than for
someone wishing to start a new airline. Prices, in my estimation, should
fall *a lot*. I think we could discuss this till we go blue in the face,
as I said before, we are all reading tea-leaves or equivalent.

The Telecom Regulation Act is now law, with wide bipartisan support. I
don't see anyone attempting a major rollback, only relatively peripheral
issues (with respect to the central issue of deregulation) such as the
CDA. So, instead of getting nostalgic over the old system, shouldn't we
be looking at the new law to see how we might make the best of it?

Arun Mehta, B-69 Lajpat Nagar-I, New Delhi-24, India. Phone 6841172,6849103
•••@••.••• •••@••.••• •••@••.•••
"There is enough in the world for man's need, but not for his greed"--Gandhi


Sender: •••@••.••• (Jay Michlin)
Subject: Re: cr> Telecom Regimes

>Sender: •••@••.••• (Richard K. Moore)
>        I may have an advantage over some of you, in that I've lived
>through most of the changes I've been describing...
>        It is at a visceral level that I respond to the naked power-grab
>represented by the Telcom bill...

With some reluctance, I'll jump into this one. Richard's remark about a
visceral level of response got my attention. Seems to me that much of the
laissez-faire-vs.-regulation debate is exactly that: visceral. On both
sides. And that's a dangerous way to make public policy. Reason and factual
debate are much better.

When in doubt, I tend to be on the laissez-faire side. I don't share
Richard's visceral fear of business monoliths. The data shows that they
bungle and blunder and eventually wound themselves. Remember when IBM was
invincible? Remember when GM held 55% market share? Remember what happened?

Yes, the large telecom companies are in a frenzy of expansion and
intermarriage.  But internally, they know they're in great danger in this
open, competitive environment. They don't know the future and know all too
well that it is a time of jeopardy. They have to bet billions on each
possible outcome. Pac Tel bet wrong, and will now likely vanish in a
merger. The ultimate price, I think.

One need not search for evil and malice when stupidity and human frailty
explain behavior just as well. Corporations are made of humans too. That's
why free markets work in the long run.  -jm

 Posted by Andrew Oram  - •••@••.••• - Moderator: CYBER-RIGHTS (CPSR)
   CyberJournal:  (WWW or FTP) -->
 Materials may be reposted in their _entirety_ for non-commercial use.