<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:go='http://ns.gigaom.com/'
xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: SBC Ready To Take on Local Governments</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/2005/05/08/sbc-ready-to-take-on-local-governments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/2005/05/08/sbc-ready-to-take-on-local-governments/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 02:07:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin Glunt</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2005/05/08/sbc-ready-to-take-on-local-governments/#comment-102913</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kevin Glunt]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 May 2005 19:39:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/05/08/sbc-ready-to-take-on-local-governments/#comment-102913</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The problem for the telcos is much more than just dealing with
10,000 bureaucracies.

Most communities have &quot;equal access&quot; rules that say you must provide
the TV service to the entire community and not just cherry-pick the
wealthier areas.

Since the fiber to the home/node strategies of SBC and Verizon are
based upon targetting the high demographic areas first, poor areas
may not get access to IPTV for years, if ever.

And what politician would allow a telco to offer sexy new services
to the rich people in town while consigning the lower income people
(who actually are a larger percentage of eligible voters) to
inferior services.

This was a battle the cable companies fought 30 years ago.

The telcos are just waking up to the problem.

And the cable companies are making sure that local communities are
aware of this. Comcast has already started making noise within the
communities where it already has been granted a franchise that the
telcos should be barred from offering IPTV unless they cover the
entire area.

This could be a MAJOR problem for telcos trying to offer a &quot;triple
play&quot; in competition to what the cable companies are offering.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem for the telcos is much more than just dealing with<br />
10,000 bureaucracies.</p>
<p>Most communities have &#8220;equal access&#8221; rules that say you must provide<br />
the TV service to the entire community and not just cherry-pick the<br />
wealthier areas.</p>
<p>Since the fiber to the home/node strategies of SBC and Verizon are<br />
based upon targetting the high demographic areas first, poor areas<br />
may not get access to IPTV for years, if ever.</p>
<p>And what politician would allow a telco to offer sexy new services<br />
to the rich people in town while consigning the lower income people<br />
(who actually are a larger percentage of eligible voters) to<br />
inferior services.</p>
<p>This was a battle the cable companies fought 30 years ago.</p>
<p>The telcos are just waking up to the problem.</p>
<p>And the cable companies are making sure that local communities are<br />
aware of this. Comcast has already started making noise within the<br />
communities where it already has been granted a franchise that the<br />
telcos should be barred from offering IPTV unless they cover the<br />
entire area.</p>
<p>This could be a MAJOR problem for telcos trying to offer a &#8220;triple<br />
play&#8221; in competition to what the cable companies are offering.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

