North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: SBC/AT&T + Verizon/MCI Peering Restrictions

  • From: Christian Kuhtz
  • Date: Wed Nov 02 09:33:17 2005

On Nov 2, 2005, at 8:04 AM, Randy Bush wrote:

the two year window is far too low given the sbc ceo's recent public
statements on the use of his wires by google and the like.

You can pretty much s/the sbc/rboc/g in this context.� Leadership seems to believe that because those who conduct business over 'their' infrastructure aren't paying them a transaction fee, there's somehow something wrong with that model.� Fact is, they _are_ getting paid for their pipes, and they've never been part of the transaction model (aka tax collectors).� If you want to be something else, dump the pipes r us business model.� But then you can't have your cake and eat it, too.��Somehow, I'm very reminded of how the music industry has acted when faced with a disruptor.� Very classic threat reponse of somebody thinking like a mono/duo/whateverpartitionedmarketpoly.� Sections in��have publically confirmed�similar thought patterns.� But then again, the CEO's of the companies mentioned here do look like twins separated at birth, with companies sharing very similar DNA (even though they all think they're very different).

So, my point being in response to what Randy wrote..� expect a lot more where that came from, especially as margins come under more pressure.� As long as they pretend disruption can be controlled or isn't happening, this will continue.� And one could argue that the recently approved mergers might fuel such attitudes.

Best regards,