Insight Into The FCC's Triennial Review

TheReckoning writes "ISP Planet has an article by Alex Goldman about the FCC's policy review, happening now. To quote: 'The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is reviewing the rules that allow CLECs and ISPs access to incumbent phone companies' infrastructure. The FCC reviews rules every three years. This is the second triennial review since 1996, and the first under the new Republican administration.' It's a long read, but very educational."

Comments

this could jump start telecom spending

[DevilM]

If CLECs could no longer rent existing networks reasonable then they would likely have to build their own networks. For example, see this research note.

Re:this could jump start telecom spending

[/dev/trash]

Exactly. It's ging to hurt at first. Long distance prices are going to sky-rocket but competition, true competition will lower prices eventually.

Swing vote

[zobo]

Quoting from the article,

Kevin J. Martin was sworn in as an FCC commissioner on July 3, 2001. He was a Bush aide, serving as Special Assistant to the President for Economic Policy and also worked on the Bush campaign as Deputy General Counsel. He has an extensive legal background and is seen as the swing vote on the FCC

His recent comments ("Priority I: A Regulatory Environment that Encourages New Investment") imply that the deregulating the incumbents is largely a matter of degree: not "if" but "how much."

In the short term there will certainly be fallout as a result of this decision, as the marginal players benefiting from mandated low network access rates are squeezed out. In the longer term, I believe that this will spur innovation and create jobs at equipment suppliers (Alcatel, Lucent, ...) -- as the incumbents' capital expenditures begin to increase because they're confident of reaping the benefits of their investments.

Re:Swing vote

[zobo]

I'm sorry, are you kidding?

Of course not. I didn't claim that the Bells are paragons of virtue, and I'm well familiar with Isenberg's views (which have a lot of merit btw).

It seems that one's position in this debate is informed by the direction one looks in time. It used to be correct to characterize the Bells as monopolies; land-line telephony was effectively the only game in town, and this is why UNE-P was fitting in proper. But now there are more choices all the time and the incumbents are losing voice revenue left and right. Whether it's cable telephony, cellular/PCS, or even VoIP from your local fixed wireless ISP, consumers have choices. It's becoming clearer all the time that traditionally separate markets are rushing toward a common center: "the bits business." It doesn't matter what those bits represent. The FCC appears to be in agreement, correctly IMO. The satellite providers and MSO's are eating the incumbents' lunch and this rulemaking will at least give them a chance to fight back on a more level playing field.

great hardball playing

[zogger]

--good hardball playing man, you think a lot like I do when it comes to tactics. Reminded me of the great scene in the movie the untouchables, sean connery (local cop malone) saying to kevin costner (young elliot ness) of how to fight the mafia "If they pull a knife, you pull a gun; if they send one of your guys to hospital, you send one of theirs to the morgue."

works for me