FCC Mandates that AT&T and Verizon Allow Data Roaming
Lame FCC
If any agreement is reached then just give them 10kbps speed while on roaming.
Without trying to sounds like a commie, Verizon/ATT need to realize that spectrum is a national resource. They are the ones that dont invest in the rural areas because they know there is no demand or money. Rural carriers take up that burden of niche markets while ATT and Verizon are just worried on increasing their margins in highly profit...
(continues)
glinc said:
It's not VZW or AT&T fault that these local carriers don't want to invest in building towers around the country. There's a reason why these big 2 spend the money to expand in order to be #1.
If any agreement is reached then just give them 10kbps speed while on roaming.
Well, smaller carriers only have networks established in their own markets. For example, U.S. Cellular just can't start building cell cites and towers in Florida because they feel like it. They'd have to have that spectrum available to do so... To launch a new network in any area is a HUGE investment. And due to Verizon and AT&T's soon to be duopoly, it's almost impossible for smaller carriers to be competitive. I think...
(continues)
T Bone said:
So what you are saying is that the large carriers have some kind of moral responsibility to lose money? Because that is exactly what the end result of mandatory one sided roaming agreements is going to be.
If its mandatory one sided roam agreement, on that I do agree with you. But remember the rural's aren't going to be able to roam on LTE free of charge. What would be even better is what VZW proposed, you can built out on our spectrum in your service area's, we just get to use it. This is really not a heavy burden on either side. I'm sure some kind of financial deal can be worked out. I'm also sure there aren't going to be an overwhelming amount of VZW or AT&T users using these towers i...
(continues)
Versed said:
If its mandatory one sided roam agreement, on that I do agree with you. But remember the rural's aren't going to be able to roam on LTE free of charge. What would be even better is what VZW proposed, you can built out on our spectrum in your service area's, we just get to use it. This is really not a heavy burden on either side. I'm sure some kind of financial deal can be worked out. I'm also sure there aren't going to be an overwhelming amount of VZW or AT&T users using these towers in Goat Vomit Arkansas.
They already have a program like that in place and I think at least 5 carriers have already participated including Bluegrass Wireless.
Hitur Petar said:
Thats true. In other words, they have no problem with this type of agreement when it benefits them, but they don't wanna play by the rules when it doesn't.
Duh, they're in business to make a profit. Unelected bureaucrats should not be able to wield this kind of power over private enterprise.
What if the FCC regulates your wireless carrier out of business? What will you say then?
If our wireless communications are going to be controlled primarily by two super carriers, I prefer to have these carriers highly regulated.
The oil, gas and electric industry is highly regulated and we still have to deal with instabilities with pricing. Imagine if these industries weren't regulated. I don't want our communications operating like our utilities. A hurricane in Florida causes everyone's cell bills to spike the following month. No thank you.
I'm teetering on this FCC move. While I feel it may be a step over the line, Data is the next Voice plan. The smaller carriers w...
(continues)
Which is why I AM in favor of them nixing the AT&T takeover T-Mobile. It has to be extreme for me to support government power infringing on how a business is run, but clearly even Stevie Wonder can see the wrong in the AT&T/T-Mobile hook up. But this is just wrong. If ever those *Bleepards* spent a wise dollar on a lawyer it should be to fight this. Price mandated by the Feds? Hell, that is one step from a takeover.
What if the FCC regulates your wireless carrier out of business? What will you say then?"__
This would be a short sighted view. Who will regulate pricing if the government does not use this power? Competition is quickly dissolving. I do not want the last remaining megacarriers controlling the pricing.
John B.
I have to disagree. The financial burden on these small carriers is enormous. The last I checked, To strap an antenna to an existing structure, is a minimal 150,000 dollars. I believe I'm being conservative on that figure. To erect a tower and network gear, running back haul to the towers could easily approach or surpass half a million dollars. This is just one site.
VZW escapes the building of these networks. Yet who will reap the benefits once these carriers fail to meet the financial expectations? I don't like this initiative. It is an ambush.
John B.
Azeron said:
The more I think about this the more I realize that those of us shelling out the ducats to Verizon and AT&T should put together our voices because WE will be negatively impacted by carpetbagging roamers congesting the networks that WE are paying for.
Not likely. Native users always get priority access over roamers.
This forum is closed.