Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

COMCAST vs Direct TVFollow

#77 Jan 08 2015 at 10:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Sounds easier than trying to explain to you what a "cow" is, so sure.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#78 Jan 09 2015 at 5:14 AM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
I was confused because we have a Farm and Fleet here in Michigan. Turns out the name covers multiple chains that offer similar goods and services across the U.S. Apparently the one in Michigan is really Tractir Supply Co. but I always heard it referred to as Quality Farm and Fleet.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#79 Jan 09 2015 at 6:49 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
Can you elaborate, because the way that reads to me is that the big 4 have allowed each other to have their own markets and are gouging customers. But the problem with that, is that if they're gouging people, then their profit margins are ridiculously high and thereby enticing other competitors to start up and offer competition.

In theory, yes. In practice the start up costs for a new provider are extremely high even for a small market. If you're Google that's not a big deal. If you're Jim and Bill's Cincinnati Internet Service, it's an enormous problem. Even if you get past that hurdle and are dedicated to competing in a market, Comcast or whomever can just lower prices until it destroys you even if they lose money for a while.

Collusion and price fixing are the natural state of lightly regulated markets for basic resources. The idea that "Free markets lead to competition" is just an abject lie.

I understand the start up costs aspect, I actually raised that point earlier in this thread I believe. While the costs are very high, there are companies that have the capital and resources to compete with Comcast/etc... and if the big providers are gouging at the levels you all seem to want to believe they are, then those companies wouldn't hesitate to enter the market. I just don't believe its as simple as gouging for the high prices we pay in NA.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#80 Jan 09 2015 at 6:56 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
In WI and MN (and elsewhere??) there are Fleet Farm stores. Same deal I imagine.

When I was a kid my Grandpa would occasionally drag us along to Fleet Farm to get farming supplies. That's all they sold. Now they're just another box store.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#81 Jan 09 2015 at 6:57 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
I understand the start up costs aspect, I actually raised that point earlier in this thread I believe. While the costs are very high, there are companies that have the capital and resources to compete with Comcast/etc... and if the big providers are gouging at the levels you all seem to want to believe they are, then those companies wouldn't hesitate to enter the market.

No, you're missing the point. The monopoly allows price gouging, it's not *required*. I'm Verizon. I own a bunch of infrastructure from when I was AT&T that I provision for internet service now. I charge $60/month. You're New Company Inc. You didn't used to be AT&T, you have n existing infrastructure built over decades than can be re-purposed. You have to start from scratch. Well, you think, still worth it since the margin on $60 internet service is so high! You build out infrastructure for the market you want to compete in, and start offering $45/month service indenting to take market share from me and recoup your investment in 10 years. I lower prices in just your market to $5/month taking a loss.

How much market share do you have now? Guess what, I have other markets where I still charge $60/month. Are you going to build out infrastructure in all of them and hemorrhage money while I wage a price war of attrition with you? Because we're talking 10 figure up front investment now, probably more *just to get started* with no guarantee you're going to win market share from me. If you do, you are doing it at lower margins.

Take that business plan to investors and see how far you get.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#82 Jan 09 2015 at 7:09 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
Ok, fair enough. You guys need more regulation. So do we.




____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#83 Jan 09 2015 at 7:57 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Ok, fair enough. You guys need more regulation. So do we.





I don't think we necessarily need more regulation, i think we just need better regulation...stuff that wasn't written by and for the giant communication corporations.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#84 Jan 09 2015 at 8:08 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
You're a terrible liberal. More more more!
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#85 Jan 09 2015 at 8:31 AM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
In the end though, "Better" regulation is more regulation. Maybe not "more" in the sense of counting some number of regulations but definitely in the sense that the industries would be more regulated.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#86 Jan 09 2015 at 8:52 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
TirithRR wrote:
In the end though, "Better" regulation is more regulation. Maybe not "more" in the sense of counting some number of regulations but definitely in the sense that the industries would be more regulated.

Not necessarily. Sure, if you amend anti-trust laws to better address reality, some companies will feel 'more' regulation. On the flip side, some might feel less.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#87 Jan 09 2015 at 8:56 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
You're a terrible liberal.
And you're Canuckian.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#88 Jan 09 2015 at 8:58 AM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Elinda wrote:
TirithRR wrote:
In the end though, "Better" regulation is more regulation. Maybe not "more" in the sense of counting some number of regulations but definitely in the sense that the industries would be more regulated.

Not necessarily. Sure, if you amend anti-trust laws to better address reality, some companies will feel 'more' regulation. On the flip side, some might feel less.

No, those companies (Like Smash's Bill & Ted's Excellent Internet Adventures Co.) wouldn't feel it as less regulation. It'd just be regulations that help them as opposed to ones that hurt them.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#89 Jan 09 2015 at 9:03 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Uglysasquatch wrote:
You're a terrible liberal.
And you're Canuckian.
Am I supposed to find that offensive?
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#90 Jan 09 2015 at 9:04 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
TirithRR wrote:
Elinda wrote:
TirithRR wrote:
In the end though, "Better" regulation is more regulation. Maybe not "more" in the sense of counting some number of regulations but definitely in the sense that the industries would be more regulated.

Not necessarily. Sure, if you amend anti-trust laws to better address reality, some companies will feel 'more' regulation. On the flip side, some might feel less.

No, those companies (Like Smash's Bill & Ted's Excellent Internet Adventures Co.) wouldn't feel it as less regulation. It'd just be regulations that help them as opposed to ones that hurt them.

Then it's not more regulation. It's simply different outcomes for different companies since we already have anti-trust laws.

Do you have a point in all this?



____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#91 Jan 09 2015 at 9:06 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
Elinda wrote:
[Do you have a point in all this?
Of course he ....Look! A shiny!
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#92 Jan 09 2015 at 9:07 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Am I supposed to find that offensive?
This is the internet, you're supposed to find everything offensive.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#93 Jan 09 2015 at 9:08 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Am I supposed to find that offensive?
This is the internet, you're supposed to find everything offensive.
If it's not **** it's not offensive.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#94 Jan 09 2015 at 9:09 AM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Elinda wrote:
TirithRR wrote:
Elinda wrote:
TirithRR wrote:
In the end though, "Better" regulation is more regulation. Maybe not "more" in the sense of counting some number of regulations but definitely in the sense that the industries would be more regulated.

Not necessarily. Sure, if you amend anti-trust laws to better address reality, some companies will feel 'more' regulation. On the flip side, some might feel less.

No, those companies (Like Smash's Bill & Ted's Excellent Internet Adventures Co.) wouldn't feel it as less regulation. It'd just be regulations that help them as opposed to ones that hurt them.

Then it's not more regulation. It's simply different outcomes for different companies since we already have anti-trust laws.

Do you have a point in all this?


That it is more regulation. Even if it's "better" it's still more as opposed to when the existing companies were not forced to share existing infrastructure with competitors at fair prices to promote healthy competition.

The whole "we don't need more we need better" line is just word play to sell regulation to those opposed to the word itself.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#95 Jan 09 2015 at 9:11 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Am I supposed to find that offensive?
This is the internet, you're supposed to find everything offensive.
*****. I ******* phail at this internets thing.


Edited, Jan 9th 2015 11:13am by Uglysasquatch
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#96 Jan 09 2015 at 9:12 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
literally apparently.

Edited, Jan 9th 2015 11:12am by Uglysasquatch
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#97 Jan 09 2015 at 9:12 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
10,601 posts
That is an interesting filter there. don't put filtered words directly after a quote tag I guess.

Edited, Jan 9th 2015 9:12am by Xsarus
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#98 Jan 09 2015 at 9:14 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Quote:
The whole "we don't need more we need better" line is just word play to sell regulation to those opposed to the word itself.


I don't agree.

Better doesn't mean more in all cases. In fact, in my personal experience better regulation often translates to less resources spent in compliance for those companies that fall within the scope of any particular policy.



Edited, Jan 9th 2015 4:15pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#99 Jan 09 2015 at 9:39 AM Rating: Good
***
1,159 posts
Wow, congratulations to you two for having a tedious semantic debate without Alma or gbaji.
____________________________
Timelordwho wrote:
I'm not quite sure that scheming is an emotion.
#100 Jan 09 2015 at 10:08 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Kavekkk wrote:
Wow, congratulations to you two for having a tedious semantic debate without Alma or gbaji.

Thanks!

Did I do good?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#101 Jan 09 2015 at 12:13 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
Worked for me. Let's do it again, this time with more filtered words.

Smiley: popcorn
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 352 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (352)