I don't think the likes of Google and Microsoft are small online companies. They like the "lite" touch comments. They are against "strong Title II. Just because they are old laws doesn't make them improper. The world found out the hard way with the "old" Glass-Stiegel being repealed and the resulting financial crisis that just about vapor locked the financial system. There is a problem. The cable and Telco cartel are trying to hijack the internet by charging a ransom from content providers using the interconnect.. The pathetic part is the cartel flailing around trying to pull the wool over the publics eyes. Free will is being protected by net neutrality. Capitalism is still alive with providing good bandwidth and reliable ISP connection. If the FCC didn't invoke Title II then the DOJ should charge the Cable and Telco lobby with operating a cartel using interconnection fees/throttling in an attempt to keep out new competition. Cartels are illegal under the Sherman Antitrust Act. That is an older law than 1933 but if that hadn't come to roost then we would be the United States of Rockefeller or United States of Carnegie.
Well written Jack. The ISPs most commonly are also pay TV bundlers as well. Expanding bandwidth bringing IP TV capability will put the hammer to their market moat. Their way to retain margin or moat is to try to force a ransom on pay TV competitors at the interconnect to make the profit or throttle data it turns the video into sub par quality giving their proprietary TV bundle a superior delivery. Part of the GOP for supposed net neutrality included a provision for "proprietary" fast lanes...hence we provide just enough bandwidth for good IP TV product to ourselves and everything else is delivered below 20 Mbps.
Net neutrality has regulated your phone land line since 1934. It requires both the government and providers to keep its hands off your content and ability to see the public content of other users. If you can figure out how to make government takeover out of a law that says "hands off", I would like to see how you do it.
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLC News letter June 2014. Published report by Pricewaterhouse. I don't have to provide squat when I talk T. You might demand it but I don't have to do squat. Still, I will give you supportive material that is published from a reputable firm.
Intangible property can qualify for a REIT if the licensing can be sourced to the location of use. FACT. Spectrum can be sourced to the location of use by the licensing of a spectrum block. There is no specific IRS ruling quoted on spectrum yet but a very strong case that I have not seen one published piece to the contrary and why the Telco's jumped big on Windstream REIT news as well as why Oppenheimer made a point to comment on such....but why VZ and T share price quickly dropped back off. Most suspect T and VZ would not want to open up their spectrum and infrastructure for competitor use. DISH on the other hand has no infrastructure....but has plenty of good spectrum. They can license blocks of spectrum. That spectrum can be sourced to the location of use. Fact. Sure, the IRS has not issued such a positive ruling specifically on spectrum but I find nobody that believes otherwise.
DTV=AOL rerun ;-) That has little to do with spectrum REIT. LTE-A, G.fast, and DOCSIS 3.1 coupled with net neutrality will turn DTV into an AOL rerun. Bandwidth expansion is upon us and Title II allows for the FCC to enforce net neutrality.
Yeah, stuff happens .. I almost sold at $39, then at $38 - but I didn't !!
I've just got better things to do than to publicly bash my stocks, or spend my days crying any "same ole tunes" over anything .. ya know ?
Stocks go UP .. and stocks go down - the key is to "BE there for the RIDE UP"
Little cooki_crumbs is just armchair quarterbacking his "coulda" .."woulda" .."shoulda" tripe pretending to be a big shot investor ... in diapers
........ " Heck you could have bought Verizon and DO [done] twice as good" ........
(sez da widdle cooki_moonster)
So apparently you didn't buy any VZ (?) ... since YOU cry about AT&T so much ?
So what would make you think I didn't, ya dufus ?? Didn't we go thru this once before ?
Of course I bought Verizon .. same time I bought AT&T ya dope ... and In 2010 Vz spun off ownership of their FTR Conn. "wireline", sending me free FTR stock !!
Seems you're the one that should LEARN some investing skills.. and don't "quit" your DAY-JOB (polishing hubcaps & collecting cans)
(poor little AT&T crybaby)
You pissant jackass!You don't have a clue what net neutrality is. It is the same thing that has been in effect since 1934 for your land line telephone. The first part specifically DENIES the government the right to interfere with who can contact who. It DENIES the government the right to interfere with your right to see the content you want to see. The second part denies greedy internet providers the right to do that, too. It requires the providers to be a simple, disinterested conduit between users.
OF COURSE internet providers don't like that! They want to be able to charge you even more than they overcharge you now in order to see popular content!
How do you plan on making a government or corporate takeover conspiracy out of that? Greedy providers WANT ignorant putzes like you to think it is something different than what it is so the can get more money from you.
so what are we to make of the FCC decision tomorrow? reading and viewing stories on the FCC antics during the time leading up to their vote, it seems the democrats on the FCC are being influenced by small online companies that are loud, but ignorant. And what is with one of the FCC directors being the daughter of a US Congressman? Impartial? Even Google and Facebook are NOW against the strong title 2 rules. Looks to me like we are set to jump off the cliff of free markets and fall down to the regulatory bureaucratic abyss of the 1933 monopoly rules. What a joke. There is no problem, but our socialist president BO is going to impose more controls so he and his cronies can influence decisions and grant favors for whatever (cash, donations, etc.) Makes me sad to see the USA slip non-stop to European socialism. The lack of informed decision making on this title 2 movement pushed onto the FCC by BO is just pathetic.
God save us from this mindless acquiescence to giving up capitalism and free will. Wake up America.
Heck you could have bought Verizon and do twice as good.
With your investment skills you better not quit your job.
They will sue but it is just a delay of the inevitable for net neutrality and a tax write off for legal expenses. Long term it is bad for AT&T looking to buy a pay TV bundler that will have its market moat crushed. DTV=AOL rerun. The question is does Stephenson still burn $68B to the ground after FCC renders its verdict for net neutrality which opens the door to pay TV competition. He does seem that ignorant at times. Very possible.
I've owned it longer than you, you have to be honest this has not been much of capital appreciation stock, if not for the juicy dividend it would really suck compared to the s&p.
Typical post from a stale ole crumbled up kookie that everyone left in the bottom of the jar
My AT&T is still perfectly fine - since 2009 !!
...cut him some slack
...you know how it is with T
...bulls go hungry
...bears get fat
...and dolts get slaughtered