🚀 go-pugleaf

On Fri, 16 Feb 1996, B.MacDonald wrote:

> In article <MARWOOD.96Feb16084303@dec3300.cuug.ab.ca>, David Marwood
> <marwood@cuug.ab.ca> writes
> >AGT can offer a *lot* that the small ISPs can't... Further, they have
> access to modem pool size, usage patterns, phone configuration, and
> other information about their competitors that the small ISPs don't.
> >
> Good Grief! Am I wrong or did a phone company just admit (in writing)
> that they are mis-using their monopoly as a telephone utility to gather
> information on their competitors in the Internet service spin-off
> business?? And why can't independant have access to the same
> information? This sounds like an issue that the CRTC should undertake to
> create a more level playing field. That is, if the CRTC can be persuaded
> to objectively by a small ISP against a institutionalized phomne
> company.
> -- 
> B.MacDonald

Well, first, look back at the attributions and you'll see it wasn't the 
phone company, it was just a private poster.
But I don't get it, why is it mis-use for a private company like AGT to 
keep good statistics on the use of their equipment? And why do other 
private companies have the right to see the data?
I wish the CRTC would just stay out of it and let the competition run its 
course. Its true that a local service monopoly needs to have its rates 
regulated but there is no way this business or any other is a level 
playing field. Big companies have advantages of scale and disadvantages 
of inertia and large admin costs. Small companies have low capital but 
can move quickly. Everyone loves to root for the little guy until he is 
successful, then critisize because he is too big.
Now we see the same thing happening with cable internet access. The cable 
companies were given monopolistic areas but they are still private 
companies with shareholders. They are the ones who invested millions in 
capital costs to lay the cable grid, now everyone who can buy a business 
license thinks they should have free access to it to compete on a level 
playing field. What kind of level field is it when one company has to 
make all the investment and the others can piggyback for token cost?

If it wasn't for the original CRTC monopolies given the phone and cable 
companies, this wouldn't be an issue at all, it would just be free 
enterprise at work. Reality (at least in my opinion) is that with our 
small geographically dispersed population these monopolies were necessary 
or we wouldn't have the service at all. Now it has created a problem. I 
don't have the answers but I don't think its more regulations from the 
CRTC. Local phone companies already can't hope to compete with long 
distance carriers because their whole rate structure is controlled and 
they have to maintain the infrastructure for everyone else. To truely 
create the level field that burden has to be recognized. Maybe more 
regulation IS the answer, in the form of realistic charges for access to 
that infrastructure that recognize all the previous risk capital. 

I wish I had the solution. The CRTC has a role in ensuring we all get a 
quality basic service and that enough competition exists to ensure 
technical advances and fair prices. But I think they have to let go of 
the notion that the monopolies they created are evil and must be forced 
to give away thier advantage to all comers. 

I'm sure I'll be called a big business puppet mouthpiece but I get a 
little bored of the one sided big business bashing that dominates 
sometimes. I wish Bill and Ted's Excellent Telephone and Internet Company
all the success but I don't personally want to have to rely on them.

Brian