Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List
Could someone from Spectrum who deals with the HFC infrastructure in Southern California, specifically the legacy Time Warner Cable area, contact me off list ? Apparently the local infrastructure crew thinks it's OK to leave cable running between two cans in a residential neighborhood since at least July 2022. But it's OK, because they've cautioned them off with orange cones, right ? Multiple calls to regular customer service fall on deaf ears about a coax trunk cable run above ground on a street and sidewalk in the middle of a residential neighborhood. Customer service says, "We don't know what you're talking about, we don't have cables running on the street". Can't seem to get a hold of the right people to come out and get it buried and get rid of the eyesore and safety hazard ... [image: image1.jpg] [image: image2.jpg] Thanks, Gabe
On 1/31/23 2:33 PM, Gabriel Kuri via NANOG wrote:
Apparently the local infrastructure crew thinks it's OK to leave cable running between two cans in a residential neighborhood since at least July 2022. But it's OK, because they've cautioned them off with orange cones, right ?
Multiple calls to regular customer service fall on deaf ears about a coax trunk cable run above ground on a street and sidewalk in the middle of a residential neighborhood.
Customer service says, "We don't know what you're talking about, we don't have cables running on the street". Can't seem to get a hold of the right people to come out and get it buried and get rid of the eyesore and safety hazard ...
That all sounds familiar. I used to work with a guy who kept accidentally cutting a temporary cable from a pedestal in his yard running to his neighbor's house every couple of weeks for a year and a half. Both he and the neighbor were mad at the cable company and were trying to make the cable company fix things. The cable company would come fix / re-run the supposedly temporary cable within 36 hours of it being cut. This went on from late spring one year until mid summer the next year. FINALLY the cable company came out and buried (yet another) new cable. I think that it's really sad that it took that long for the cable company to do what they said they would do in less than two weeks from the original repair. -- Grant. . . . unix || die
Access to the right-of-way in most areas is granted through a CATV Franchise agreement with your municipality. This agreement will include a contact for disputes. As another avenue, contact the local government and ask them to deal with the safety issue in the public right of way and let them escalate with their contacts. On 1/31/23 15:33, Gabriel Kuri via NANOG wrote:
Could someone from Spectrum who deals with the HFC infrastructure in Southern California, specifically the legacy Time Warner Cable area, contact me off list ?
Apparently the local infrastructure crew thinks it's OK to leave cable running between two cans in a residential neighborhood since at least July 2022. But it's OK, because they've cautioned them off with orange cones, right ?
Multiple calls to regular customer service fall on deaf ears about a coax trunk cable run above ground on a street and sidewalk in the middle of a residential neighborhood.
Customer service says, "We don't know what you're talking about, we don't have cables running on the street". Can't seem to get a hold of the right people to come out and get it buried and get rid of the eyesore and safety hazard ...
image1.jpg
image2.jpg
Thanks, Gabe
All i can say is good luck. We see the 'trash-bag mod' on a lot of AT&T aerial boots and PEDs, as well as Charter/Spectrum/TWC gear. A lot of times, they don't even get that. Unless you know how to get in contact with a local tech, they will most likely not respond until the customer complains about their service being out. In which case, the same tech that ran the 'low-level' drop between PEDs will likely come back and do it again. -----Original Message----- From: "Andy Brezinsky" <andy@mbrez.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2023 5:27pm To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List Access to the right-of-way in most areas is granted through a CATV Franchise agreement with your municipality. This agreement will include a contact for disputes. As another avenue, contact the local government and ask them to deal with the safety issue in the public right of way and let them escalate with their contacts. On 1/31/23 15:33, Gabriel Kuri via NANOG wrote: Could someone from Spectrum who deals with the HFC infrastructure in Southern California, specifically the legacy Time Warner Cable area, contact me off list ? Apparently the local infrastructure crew thinks it's OK to leave cable running between two cans in a residential neighborhood since at least July 2022. But it's OK, because they've cautioned them off with orange cones, right ? Multiple calls to regular customer service fall on deaf ears about a coax trunk cable run above ground on a street and sidewalk in the middle of a residential neighborhood. Customer service says, "We don't know what you're talking about, we don't have cables running on the street". Can't seem to get a hold of the right people to come out and get it buried and get rid of the eyesore and safety hazard ... Thanks, Gabe
I think that this really says more about the race to the bottom in last mile residential operations. It seems inevitable that once a last mile residential broadband operator grows to a certain gargantuan size, the quality of the network suffers and nobody really cares to take ownership of specific local problems. I've seen it many times looking at infrastructure of probably a dozen different last mile operators in many different states and provinces. And do you know what's commonly found in the same places as stuff like garbage bag wrapped pedestals and coax temp-run between cans for months or years at a time? Employees who feel pressured to do cheap/shoddy/fast work and move on to the next ticket. Or workers doing these tasks who aren't employees at all but piece work 1099 workers under a subcontract or a subcontractor-of-a-contractor. It's not a good situation for the rank and file workers either. Go find the worker who eventually fixes that temp-run coax job and see if he's really happy with his job. I wish that the people running the networks at residential last mile operators with many hundreds of thousands up to dozens of millions of CPEs would push back against efforts from executives/management to participate in this race to the bottom of cost and network quality. It's too easy to hand wave away the problem and be like "oh, but the middle mile fiber aggregation router and core links in and out of this market look fine, that's somebody else's problem to deal with the field work...". On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 1:36 PM Gabriel Kuri via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> wrote:
Could someone from Spectrum who deals with the HFC infrastructure in Southern California, specifically the legacy Time Warner Cable area, contact me off list ?
Apparently the local infrastructure crew thinks it's OK to leave cable running between two cans in a residential neighborhood since at least July 2022. But it's OK, because they've cautioned them off with orange cones, right ?
Multiple calls to regular customer service fall on deaf ears about a coax trunk cable run above ground on a street and sidewalk in the middle of a residential neighborhood.
Customer service says, "We don't know what you're talking about, we don't have cables running on the street". Can't seem to get a hold of the right people to come out and get it buried and get rid of the eyesore and safety hazard ...
[image: image1.jpg]
[image: image2.jpg]
Thanks, Gabe
I selfishly hope they don't because that's where independent operators will succeed. ;-) ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Kuhnke" <eric.kuhnke@gmail.com> To: "Gabriel Kuri" <gkuri@ieee.org> Cc: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Wednesday, February 1, 2023 4:18:46 PM Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List I think that this really says more about the race to the bottom in last mile residential operations. It seems inevitable that once a last mile residential broadband operator grows to a certain gargantuan size, the quality of the network suffers and nobody really cares to take ownership of specific local problems. I've seen it many times looking at infrastructure of probably a dozen different last mile operators in many different states and provinces. And do you know what's commonly found in the same places as stuff like garbage bag wrapped pedestals and coax temp-run between cans for months or years at a time? Employees who feel pressured to do cheap/shoddy/fast work and move on to the next ticket. Or workers doing these tasks who aren't employees at all but piece work 1099 workers under a subcontract or a subcontractor-of-a-contractor. It's not a good situation for the rank and file workers either. Go find the worker who eventually fixes that temp-run coax job and see if he's really happy with his job. I wish that the people running the networks at residential last mile operators with many hundreds of thousands up to dozens of millions of CPEs would push back against efforts from executives/management to participate in this race to the bottom of cost and network quality. It's too easy to hand wave away the problem and be like "oh, but the middle mile fiber aggregation router and core links in and out of this market look fine, that's somebody else's problem to deal with the field work...". On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 1:36 PM Gabriel Kuri via NANOG < nanog@nanog.org > wrote: Could someone from Spectrum who deals with the HFC infrastructure in Southern California, specifically the legacy Time Warner Cable area, contact me off list ? Apparently the local infrastructure crew thinks it's OK to leave cable running between two cans in a residential neighborhood since at least July 2022. But it's OK, because they've cautioned them off with orange cones, right ? Multiple calls to regular customer service fall on deaf ears about a coax trunk cable run above ground on a street and sidewalk in the middle of a residential neighborhood. Customer service says, "We don't know what you're talking about, we don't have cables running on the street". Can't seem to get a hold of the right people to come out and get it buried and get rid of the eyesore and safety hazard ... image1.jpg image2.jpg Thanks, Gabe
Mike Hammett wrote:
I selfishly hope they don't because that's where independent operators will succeed. ;-)
Because of natural regional monopoly at physical layer (cabling cost for a certain region is same between competitors but their revenues are proportional to their regional market shares), they can't succeed unless the physical layer is regulated to be unbundled, which is hard with PON. But, in US where regional telephone network has been operated by, unlike Europe/Japan, a private company enjoying natural regional monopoly, economic situation today should be no worse than that at that time. Masataka Ohta
The cost to build physical layer in much of the suburban and somewhat rural US is low enough anymore that lots of smaller, independent, ISPs are overbuilding the incumbent with fiber and taking a big chunk of their customer base because they are local and care. And making money while doing it. On Thu, Feb 2, 2023, 8:22 AM Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:
Mike Hammett wrote:
I selfishly hope they don't because that's where independent operators will succeed. ;-)
Because of natural regional monopoly at physical layer (cabling cost for a certain region is same between competitors but their revenues are proportional to their regional market shares), they can't succeed unless the physical layer is regulated to be unbundled, which is hard with PON.
But, in US where regional telephone network has been operated by, unlike Europe/Japan, a private company enjoying natural regional monopoly, economic situation today should be no worse than that at that time.
Masataka Ohta
It might look low cost until you look at a post-1980s suburb in the USA or Canada where 100% of the utilities are underground. There may be no fiber or duct routes. Just old coax used for DOCSIS3 owned/run by the local cable incumbent and copper POTS wiring belonging to the ILEC. The cost to retrofit such a neighborhood and reach every house with a fiber architecture can be quite high in construction and labor. On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 9:14 AM Forrest Christian (List Account) < lists@packetflux.com> wrote:
The cost to build physical layer in much of the suburban and somewhat rural US is low enough anymore that lots of smaller, independent, ISPs are overbuilding the incumbent with fiber and taking a big chunk of their customer base because they are local and care. And making money while doing it.
On Thu, Feb 2, 2023, 8:22 AM Masataka Ohta < mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:
Mike Hammett wrote:
I selfishly hope they don't because that's where independent operators will succeed. ;-)
Because of natural regional monopoly at physical layer (cabling cost for a certain region is same between competitors but their revenues are proportional to their regional market shares), they can't succeed unless the physical layer is regulated to be unbundled, which is hard with PON.
But, in US where regional telephone network has been operated by, unlike Europe/Japan, a private company enjoying natural regional monopoly, economic situation today should be no worse than that at that time.
Masataka Ohta
Yet the independents are doing it anyway. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Kuhnke" <eric.kuhnke@gmail.com> To: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" <lists@packetflux.com> Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 6:46:01 PM Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List It might look low cost until you look at a post-1980s suburb in the USA or Canada where 100% of the utilities are underground. There may be no fiber or duct routes. Just old coax used for DOCSIS3 owned/run by the local cable incumbent and copper POTS wiring belonging to the ILEC. The cost to retrofit such a neighborhood and reach every house with a fiber architecture can be quite high in construction and labor. On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 9:14 AM Forrest Christian (List Account) < lists@packetflux.com > wrote: The cost to build physical layer in much of the suburban and somewhat rural US is low enough anymore that lots of smaller, independent, ISPs are overbuilding the incumbent with fiber and taking a big chunk of their customer base because they are local and care. And making money while doing it. On Thu, Feb 2, 2023, 8:22 AM Masataka Ohta < mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp > wrote: <blockquote> Mike Hammett wrote:
I selfishly hope they don't because that's where independent operators will succeed. ;-)
Because of natural regional monopoly at physical layer (cabling cost for a certain region is same between competitors but their revenues are proportional to their regional market shares), they can't succeed unless the physical layer is regulated to be unbundled, which is hard with PON. But, in US where regional telephone network has been operated by, unlike Europe/Japan, a private company enjoying natural regional monopoly, economic situation today should be no worse than that at that time. Masataka Ohta </blockquote>
Mike Hammett wrote:
Yet the independents are doing it anyway.
Petit bubble caused by quantitative easing, perhaps. Masataka Ohta
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions
Midwest Internet Exchange
The Brothers WISP
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Kuhnke" <eric.kuhnke@gmail.com> To: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" <lists@packetflux.com> Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 6:46:01 PM Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List
It might look low cost until you look at a post-1980s suburb in the USA or Canada where 100% of the utilities are underground. There may be no fiber or duct routes. Just old coax used for DOCSIS3 owned/run by the local cable incumbent and copper POTS wiring belonging to the ILEC. The cost to retrofit such a neighborhood and reach every house with a fiber architecture can be quite high in construction and labor.
On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 9:14 AM Forrest Christian (List Account) < lists@packetflux.com > wrote:
The cost to build physical layer in much of the suburban and somewhat rural US is low enough anymore that lots of smaller, independent, ISPs are overbuilding the incumbent with fiber and taking a big chunk of their customer base because they are local and care. And making money while doing it.
On Thu, Feb 2, 2023, 8:22 AM Masataka Ohta < mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp > wrote:
<blockquote> Mike Hammett wrote:
I selfishly hope they don't because that's where independent operators will succeed. ;-)
Because of natural regional monopoly at physical layer (cabling cost for a certain region is same between competitors but their revenues are proportional to their regional market shares), they can't succeed unless the physical layer is regulated to be unbundled, which is hard with PON.
But, in US where regional telephone network has been operated by, unlike Europe/Japan, a private company enjoying natural regional monopoly, economic situation today should be no worse than that at that time.
Masataka Ohta
</blockquote>
Maybe, maybe not. Maybe it's not as hard as everyone says? Maybe people have different goals in mind? Maybe there are enough people enough upset with the status quo that they'll spend their money elsewhere? -----Mike HammettIntelligent Computing SolutionsMidwest Internet ExchangeThe Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Sat, 04 Feb 2023 02:14:30 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List Mike Hammett wrote:
Yet the independents are doing it anyway.
Petit bubble caused by quantitative easing, perhaps. Masataka Ohta
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions
Midwest Internet Exchange
The Brothers WISP
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Kuhnke" <eric.kuhnke@gmail.com> To: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" <lists@packetflux.com> Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 6:46:01 PM Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List
It might look low cost until you look at a post-1980s suburb in the USA or Canada where 100% of the utilities are underground. There may be no fiber or duct routes. Just old coax used for DOCSIS3 owned/run by the local cable incumbent and copper POTS wiring belonging to the ILEC. The cost to retrofit such a neighborhood and reach every house with a fiber architecture can be quite high in construction and labor.
On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 9:14 AM Forrest Christian (List Account) < lists@packetflux.com > wrote:
The cost to build physical layer in much of the suburban and somewhat rural US is low enough anymore that lots of smaller, independent, ISPs are overbuilding the incumbent with fiber and taking a big chunk of their customer base because they are local and care. And making money while doing it.
On Thu, Feb 2, 2023, 8:22 AM Masataka Ohta < mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp > wrote:
<blockquote> Mike Hammett wrote:
I selfishly hope they don't because that's where independent operators will succeed. ;-)
Because of natural regional monopoly at physical layer (cabling cost for a certain region is same between competitors but their revenues are proportional to their regional market shares), they can't succeed unless the physical layer is regulated to be unbundled, which is hard with PON.
But, in US where regional telephone network has been operated by, unlike Europe/Japan, a private company enjoying natural regional monopoly, economic situation today should be no worse than that at that time.
Masataka Ohta
</blockquote>
Mike Hammett wrote:
Maybe it's not as hard as everyone says?
That's exactly the way of thinking by investors during bubble. It should be noted that corona virus not only caused depression against which QE policy was chosen but also forced people stay at home. As such, investing on internet access seemed promising and some money was also invested on high speed inexpensive satellite internet, even though satellite internet must be low speed or expensive. Masataka Ohta
Except there are literally thousands of independent ISPs in the US, many 10+ years old that aren't likely to be going anywhere and they are moving to constructing their own wireline. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Masataka Ohta" <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Sunday, February 5, 2023 6:56:02 PM Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List Mike Hammett wrote:
Maybe it's not as hard as everyone says?
That's exactly the way of thinking by investors during bubble. It should be noted that corona virus not only caused depression against which QE policy was chosen but also forced people stay at home. As such, investing on internet access seemed promising and some money was also invested on high speed inexpensive satellite internet, even though satellite internet must be low speed or expensive. Masataka Ohta
Mike Hammett wrote:
Except there are literally thousands of independent ISPs in the US, many 10+ years old that aren't likely to be going anywhere and they are moving to constructing their own wireline.
Many ILECs enjoying regional monopoly should be 100+ years old: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incumbent_local_exchange_carrier Various regional independents also held incumbent monopolies in their respective regions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_telephone_company By 1903 while the Bell system had 1,278,000 subscribers on 1,514 main exchanges, the independents, excluding non-profit rural cooperatives, claimed about 2 million subscribers on 6,150 exchanges.[1] The size ranged from small mom and pop companies run by a husband and wife team, to large independent companies, many of which should now be PON operators still enjoying regional monopoly. So? Masataka Ohta
Where did you think that condensation was going to get you in this conversation? ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Sun, 05 Feb 2023 20:24:08 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List Mike Hammett wrote:
Except there are literally thousands of independent ISPs in the US, many 10+ years old that aren't likely to be going anywhere and they are moving to constructing their own wireline.
Many ILECs enjoying regional monopoly should be 100+ years old: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incumbent_local_exchange_carrier Various regional independents also held incumbent monopolies in their respective regions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_telephone_company By 1903 while the Bell system had 1,278,000 subscribers on 1,514 main exchanges, the independents, excluding non-profit rural cooperatives, claimed about 2 million subscribers on 6,150 exchanges.[1] The size ranged from small mom and pop companies run by a husband and wife team, to large independent companies, many of which should now be PON operators still enjoying regional monopoly. So? Masataka Ohta
Mike Hammett wrote:
Where did you think that condensation was going to get you in this conversation?
I was involved in this thread because of your totally wrong statement of: : I selfishly hope they don't because that's where independent : operators will succeed. ;-) First of all, "Spectrum (legacy TWC)" is not a small company. Moreover, as is stated in wikipedia that:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incumbent_local_exchange_carrier Various regional independents also held incumbent monopolies in their respective regions.
many independent operators are keep succeeding for 100+ years not because they unreasonably cut maintenance cost but because they have archived regional monopoly. Masataka Ohta
In no way is what I said wrong. Incumbent operators (coax or copper pairs) screw things up constantly (whether technically or in the business side of things), prompting a sea of independent operators to overbuild them (or fill in where they haven't). I was responding specifically to what Eric said, "I wish that the people running the networks at residential last mile operators with many hundreds of thousands up to dozens of millions of CPEs would push back against efforts from executives/management to participate in this race to the bottom of cost and network quality." I don't mean non-RBOC ILECs. I mean WISPs, regional fiber operators, Bob from down the street that retired and built a fiber company to serve his small town. I mean companies with less than 10,000 customers and are younger than 20 years. There are literally thousands of them in the US and they're only getting more formidable in the face of lousy incumbents. Oh, and I just noticed that spell check moved me away from condescension, rather than closer to it. Oops. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Masataka Ohta" <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Monday, February 6, 2023 8:27:07 AM Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List Mike Hammett wrote:
Where did you think that condensation was going to get you in this conversation?
I was involved in this thread because of your totally wrong statement of: : I selfishly hope they don't because that's where independent : operators will succeed. ;-) First of all, "Spectrum (legacy TWC)" is not a small company. Moreover, as is stated in wikipedia that:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incumbent_local_exchange_carrier Various regional independents also held incumbent monopolies in their respective regions.
many independent operators are keep succeeding for 100+ years not because they unreasonably cut maintenance cost but because they have archived regional monopoly. Masataka Ohta
Mike Hammett wrote:
In no way is what I said wrong. Incumbent operators (coax or copper pairs) screw things up constantly (whether technically or in the business side of things), prompting a sea of independent operators to overbuild them (or fill in where they haven't).
See below: : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incumbent_local_exchange_carrier : Various regional independents also held incumbent monopolies : in their respective regions. to know many independent operators are incumbent operators.
I don't mean non-RBOC ILECs. I mean WISPs, regional fiber operators,
I'm afraid "non-RBOC" is a synonym of "independent". Anyway, ILECs including both RBOCs and thousands of non-RBOC ones should be the regional fiber operators, as I already wrote: : Many ILECs enjoying regional monopoly should be 100+ years old: : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_telephone_company : By 1903 while the Bell system had 1,278,000 subscribers on : 1,514 main exchanges, the independents, excluding non-profit : rural cooperatives, claimed about 2 million subscribers on : 6,150 exchanges.[1] : The size ranged from small mom and pop companies run by a : husband and wife team, to large independent companies, : many of which should now be PON operators still enjoying regional : monopoly.
Bob from down the street that retired and built a fiber company to serve his small town. I mean companies with less than 10,000 customers and are younger than 20 years. There are literally thousands of them in the US and they're only getting more formidable in the face of lousy incumbents.
See above: : The size ranged from small mom and pop companies run by a : husband and wife team Thousands of Bobs from down the street retired and built telephone companies, now recognized as non-RBOC ILECs, to serve their small towns 100+ years ago. Newly coming Bobs can survive as regional fiber operators only in regions not served by ILECs as PON providers. Masataka Ohta
Where did you think that condensation was going to get you in this conversation? ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Sun, 05 Feb 2023 20:24:08 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List Mike Hammett wrote:
Except there are literally thousands of independent ISPs in the US, many 10+ years old that aren't likely to be going anywhere and they are moving to constructing their own wireline.
Many ILECs enjoying regional monopoly should be 100+ years old: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incumbent_local_exchange_carrier Various regional independents also held incumbent monopolies in their respective regions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_telephone_company By 1903 while the Bell system had 1,278,000 subscribers on 1,514 main exchanges, the independents, excluding non-profit rural cooperatives, claimed about 2 million subscribers on 6,150 exchanges.[1] The size ranged from small mom and pop companies run by a husband and wife team, to large independent companies, many of which should now be PON operators still enjoying regional monopoly. So? Masataka Ohta
participants (8)
-
Andy Brezinsky -
Eric Kuhnke -
Forrest Christian (List Account) -
Gabriel Kuri -
Grant Taylor -
Masataka Ohta -
Mike Hammett -
Shawn L