Comments on: Naked DSL or à la carte broadband

By: Noah Abrahamson

Noah Abrahamson — Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:50:46 +0000

I just ordered naked dsl from speakeasy. See here for more info. It's for my flat in the 94102 zip -- Hayes Valley in SF. I got them to drop the installation fees ($100) and the modem is free, plus he made my IP static; it's 1.5 Mbps down, 384 up (they offer 6 Mbps down). They also offer VoIP and other services.

By: Bob

Bob — Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:32:09 +0000

Heather, or anyone else with naked DSL, what taxes, fees or surcharges do you have to pay? I’m thinking about going to naked DSL w/VOiP, solely because the taxes etc. add 36% to my bill.

By: James Seng's Blog

James Seng's Blog — Sat, 26 Mar 2005 13:09:02 +0000

Naked DSL dilemma

I have been thinking about Naked DSL ever since the story about FCC is about to grant Bellsouth naked DSL petition broke a few days a

By: Electronic Cash News

Electronic Cash News — Mon, 21 Mar 2005 22:45:53 +0000

Phone Companies Force Bundling Of DSL Broadband And Home Phone Line

Did you know that your local phone company can technically provide you DSL broadband internet service without the expensive home phone service? The only conclusion that seems to fit this forced bundling by local

By: Heather

Heather — Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:18:12 +0000

I live in Midwest Illinois and luckly I’m able to get DSL with no landline phone. Granted, I’m paying $40 a month, but I’m getting DSL at 348kbs. I go thru a local phone company that offers DSL in my town and is working it’s way towards offering regular phone service in my town too. They’re a little backwards on services, but I’m not complaining. I don’t have Qwest in my area, but I’m a telemarketer and I call Qwest customers. I don’t agree with the price changes that Qwest is doing since it’s getting to the point that I can’t get anyone to change to the mew package since they would be getting less for more! Just thought I’d put my 2cents worth in!

By: Om Malik

Om Malik — Mon, 21 Mar 2005 15:54:53 +0000

stoic mark we are so jealous. i wish i could get comcast to take away TV and give me bband. actually someone emailed me from my building after reading the post, and told me that i could attach the cellphone to the intercom system if i had a local number. well time to think about that -

By: sedum_green

sedum_green — Mon, 21 Mar 2005 14:48:55 +0000

It’s all about the money, thats why SBC, Verizon, BellSouth won’te enable naked DSL. They force you to use their phone service in order to get their DSL service.

By: Terrence

Terrence — Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:26:05 +0000

Quest should definately come down to Louisiana. They'd clean up. People are sick of the lack of choice and poor customer service. Or at least that's my hope. I'm sick of it. They do what they want because they believe that customers don't know enough about how things work to figure out they are getting crapped all over.

Unfortunately, our words will go unheard and nothing will change. THOSE BASTARDS!!!

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:18:55 +0000

Up here in Canada we can get naked dsl, but it is so new they haven’t even announced it yet. Naked Cable has been available for years, witha $5 or $10CDN surcharge depending on speed of service. My last building had an intercom system tied to any phone number you gave them, so I had my intercom hooked up to my cell phone…I could buzz you in from thousands of miles away. ;)

By: Frank Muto

Frank Muto — Mon, 21 Mar 2005 02:33:12 +0000

As for bundling and if you apply the scope of it to apply, there is still a rule called Cross Subsidization - 47 C.F.R. § 64.901(c):

A telecommunications carrier may not use services that are not competitive to subsidize services subject to competition. Services included in the definition of universal service shall bear no more than a reasonable share of the joint and common costs of facilities used to provide those services.

So in forcing a customer to have basic phone service to get DSL, this could apply because the two services are under different classifications.

By: Om Malik

Om Malik — Sun, 20 Mar 2005 20:31:30 +0000

that’s a neat little scandal and way to get the money out of tennants. one of my favorite pet peeves. well one has to learn and live without an intercom system.

By: Jonathan Greene

Jonathan Greene — Sun, 20 Mar 2005 20:23:45 +0000

Om -

Since switching to VOIP via Cable, I lost my intercom system... no way other than a direct call to get to us.

If we had DSL (our building gets preferred pricing on both cable and DSL) I think it would be the same since I would not want to use the phone part of the connection.

By: Om Malik

Om Malik — Sun, 20 Mar 2005 14:57:06 +0000

Mark, in my mind there is no doubt that they own the local loop. i just want them to sell me the service i want, and not some bundle they think i should have.

By: mark grady

mark grady — Sun, 20 Mar 2005 11:32:49 +0000

If you view DSL or a cable modem as a 'service' beyond the utilities' base offering, then this becomes a more interesting discussion.

Covad, et al took the position that high frequency sharing for DSL should be at zero cost to them. It was an incremental cost to the telco. Now comes 'naked' DSL, and the demand that it be both available and (for cable modem service) at no higher retail price than service using incremental costing.

That leads to this question: Who and how are the local loop costs to be paid?

Have the outside plant and all associated maintence costs been reduced to incremental as well?

I don't buy Verizon or SBC's claim they 'can't do it' but something about this argument that there are no fixed and common costs associated with the loop and outside plant just doesn't make sense.

Side note: I don't know if it's online, (probably as a closed caption transcript) but Verizon and SBC were on CSPAN 2 on Tuesday giving HoR testimony about their mergers with MCI and AT&T. Naked DSL was on of the questions from the Wisconsin representative.

Interesting dancing around this topic by both Ivan and Ed.

By: Om Malik

Om Malik — Sun, 20 Mar 2005 02:56:54 +0000

damn… see i must be getting old. should have remembered that as well. thanks for letting me know again frank

By: Frank Muto

Frank Muto — Sun, 20 Mar 2005 00:54:05 +0000

Oh and by the way, all the others (SBC, Verizon and BellSouth) were asked the same thing as well. Why not sell it as a stand alone?