AT&T CEO confident Title II will be overturned by courts or Congress

That's why Title II isn't killing AT&T's fiber investment, he says.

Read the whole story

 

[WestCoastWillie]

aliasundercover[/url]":brsh836z]

Blue Adept[/url]":brsh836z]Talk is cheap.

And yet money is speech.

I finally get it!

Corporations have lots of Money
People are able to speak

ergo: Corporations are People!

Makes cents!

 

[imutau]

https://www.techdirt.com/blog/netneutra ... vior.shtml

More on AT&T.

 

[Aelinsaar]

Liquid Snake X[/url]":3vc56jsc]"Of course it'll be overturned, we've bribed too many public officials for it not to be!"

In that sense, he's an incredibly honest man, who just has a tendency to omit critical details. In another sense, he should wake up, sliding feet-first into a wood chipper.

 

[lewax00]

jeromeyers2[/url]":2rf6f65b]Ironically, technically speaking, he's in exactly the position he described he wouldn't be in. Specifically, he said "We can't go out and invest that kind of money deploying fiber to 100 cities not knowing under what rules those investments will be governed." But now those rules are known. He is now, however, "investing under the scenario that these rules will probably be changed". So, he is investing under a 'probably'.

A prime example of why you shouldn't believe a word that comes out of the mouths of CEOs of large corporations like these. I bet most of them have to wipe their mouths with toilet paper after these kinds of interviews...

 

[imutau]

Aelinsaar[/url]":1b033pr5]

Liquid Snake X[/url]":1b033pr5]"Of course it'll be overturned, we've bribed too many public officials for it not to be!"

In that sense, he's an incredibly honest man, who just has a tendency to omit critical details. In another sense, he should wake up, sliding feet-first into a wood chipper.

Which fails and gets jammed at chipping him up to his waist and just so happens to fall off of a cliff into a pit of poisonous snakes...It's always nice to let a guy have his family and friends around him before he kicks the bucket...

 

[djimnik]

AT&T still plans to spend $18 billion on capital expenditures this year, Stephenson said.

That's 10 billion to bride federal congressmen, 6 billion for state congressmen, 2 billion for fcc, and 1 dollar for new fiber expansion.

 

[Aelinsaar]

imutau[/url]":2muhy3ah]

Aelinsaar[/url]":2muhy3ah]

Liquid Snake X[/url]":2muhy3ah]"Of course it'll be overturned, we've bribed too many public officials for it not to be!"

In that sense, he's an incredibly honest man, who just has a tendency to omit critical details. In another sense, he should wake up, sliding feet-first into a wood chipper.

Which fails and gets jammed at chipping him up to his waist and just so happens to fall off of a cliff into a pit of poisonous snakes...It's always nice to let a guy have his family and friends around him before he kicks the bucket...

Listen, I'm not saying that some crazy person should do that, but I'll start a kickstarter to buy them an HD camera...

djimnik[/url]":2muhy3ah]AT&T still plans to spend $18 billion on capital expenditures this year, Stephenson said.

That's 10 billion to bride federal congressmen, 6 billion for state congressmen, 2 billion for fcc, and 1 dollar for new fiber expansion.

Plus $1.50 so the intern can have a Coke.

 

[vassago]

Just about everything Stephenson was quoted as saying in this article is directly at odds with reality...
I especially love the out of touch concept of needing to have TV/internet bundles to be competitive.

 

[Faustius23]

Funny how he's not threatening to pass on buying Direct TV due to all this "regulatory uncertainty", despite needing to fund the purchase with huge bond offerings.

 

[SixDegrees]

wahoospa2[/url]":36satoj5]And if he is wrong...

...he'll be several tens of millions of dollars richer by the time anyone figures it out.

 

[AlexisR200X]

Let's be real Randall, you were not planning of doing shit in the first place, your "investments" are the carrot you dangle in front of government when you want yet another law or government provided perk so you can buy another golden toilet for your mansion.

Since all you can do is whine an promise but not deliver, regulators were bound to do away with chasing the carrot and biting you instead. Don't be surprised if the governments next move is breaking up AT&T and their other conniving "competitors" into less unruly and more manageable chunks if you somehow manage to buy enough corrupt politicians to overturn net neutrality.

 

[lewax00]

vassago[/url]":11isukr1]Just about everything Stephenson was quoted as saying in this article is directly at odds with reality...
I especially love the out of touch concept of needing to have TV/internet bundles to be competitive.

Comcast seems to think their TV/internet bundles have to be competitive...with their own internet bundle. Because getting both is cheaper than just internet.

 

[Vapur9]

If AT&T doesn't want to invest, good. Let someone else pick up their slack. We need more competition anyway.

 

[Bengie25]

Deploying fiber? He's about 15 years late with that promise. We already paid him for a fiber deployment, I think we should sue for all of our money back.

 

[Rookie_MIB]

Legislation would provide "a more sustainable path to get net neutrality than Title II," he said.

He obviously misspoke, I think he meant a more 'purchaseable' path considering how easily our government can be bought. (Tom Wheeler excepted of course)...

 

[WherestheRabbit]

DwightJ[/url]":3buaabb3]The only reason AT&T is running fiber now is they are now FORCED to compete. They know that if Title II stands there will be, or could be, more competition kicking their POS DSL to the curb.

Who are they actually competing with now, that they hadn't before?

 

[Cogmatix]

WherestheRabbit[/url]":31n72pg5]

DwightJ[/url]":31n72pg5]The only reason AT&T is running fiber now is they are now FORCED to compete. They know that if Title II stands there will be, or could be, more competition kicking their POS DSL to the curb.

Who are they actually competing with now, that they hadn't before?

In my city, Google. TWC and AT&T had a pretty good deal going in Austin for a long time, it was pretty much "You can have this, or you can have that. Both options are overpriced, underserved, and not what you're looking for. Also, we know it. But hey, what are you going to do about it?"

Less than a week after Google announced that they were coming to Austin I began being inundated by offers for better service at lower rates than either TWC or AT&T had EVER offered. In fact, TWC actually FORCED me to upgrade (for free) to a higher tier of service. Basically doubled my speed for free.

I still signed up for Google's service. Fuck both those companies right in their ears.

 

[Allthecheese]

That has got to be one of the slimiest responses from one of the corporations opposing the ruling. I feel dirty just reading it.

 

[CraigJ ✅]

I believe him. It's all in how you classify "investments" In this case, I think investments = bribes, er, campaign contributions and donations. Yeah, that's it, donations.

 

[Liquid Snake X]

Aelinsaar[/url]":sz7szlk3]

Liquid Snake X[/url]":sz7szlk3]"Of course it'll be overturned, we've bribed too many public officials for it not to be!"

In that sense, he's an incredibly honest man, who just has a tendency to omit critical details. In another sense, he should wake up, sliding feet-first into a wood chipper.

As much as I recognise how much of an irredeemable cunt he is, violence in response to non-violent crimes is wrong... and not nearly ironic enough of a punishment.

Instead, he should be banished to a surface habitat on the far side of the moon, with nothing for entertainment but a wireless internet connection that only gets signal when the satellite is orbiting overhead, and throttles everything but ads down to 56k.

Continual promises to upgrade the connection or bring him back should be made, but never actually followed through on. Additionally, it should all be 24/7 live-streamed via Twitch, in light of how he happily sold out the citizenry to government surveillance.

 

[Jobot]

if you want to gain broadband share you have to have a viable TV product

This is a big problem with broadband in America. I don't want your bundles, AT&T. I want faster internet service.

 

[cgalyon]

I just can't help but see the guy from Office Space. "Yeaahhh... We're going to need you to overturn that policy..."

 

[sir1963nz]

trekologer[/url]":wh1z4z3d]

THavoc[/url]":wh1z4z3d]

AT&T has claimed to be considering fiber deployments in up to 100 cities, but it never revealed an exact number, making it difficult to determine whether AT&T's actual construction matches the company's internal plans.

I've claimed to be considering rolling out Fiber to every major city too and I'm sure AT&T's claim is just as valid as mine is.

0 still falls within the "up to 100" range.

 

[gigaplex]

and if you want to gain broadband share you have to have a viable TV product

Alternatively you could increase coverage to overlap with the competitors. A TV product won't help your service if it's just flat out not available.

 

[arkiel]

You know who takes a court verdict for granted? Especially one where the burden of proof they have to overcome is 'arbitrary and capricious'?

A fucking idiot, that's who. I would dump AT&T stock after hearing that blithering dumbass drop that rationale.

 

[IrishMonkee]

When any of the douchebags running the telecoms or cable or what not speak or appear on tv, this is what I see or hear

 

[Deleted member 192806]

Title II, which has been used to regulate telecommunications since the 1930s, is the wrong statute to apply to "an industry that is changing really, really fast [and] attracting a lot of investment," Stephenson said.

Take the Pepsi AT&T challenge. In what way is the broadband industry changing "really, really fast"? DOCSIS 3.1 is still an incremental improvement, and fiber's kind of stalled.

 

[radzero]

No wonder their logo looks like the Death Star. CEO Randall Stephenson, Sith lord.

 

[Joe Villanova]

doesn't AT&T (like Verizon) want to exit the wireline business?

If that's the case, then Randall Stephenson SHOULD sell the company's copper network to other ISPs such as sonic.net or Frontier.

 

[HisDivineOrder]

He just doesn't want to seem like he's a backtracking fool in denial. So he is waving his hands all the harder to keep from facing reality the way it is.

Though he's probably not wrong that Congress will try to change the FCC and hope for a "more agreeable president" in the future.

 

[deckeda]

AT&T is laying new fiber in my neighborhood this week, 9 years after buying BellSouth, and has placed a GigaFiber flyer on the door. I already knew they'd by pushing TV hard, likely only offering their fastest Internet service with it, just because.

AT&T buying one of the 2 satellite companies is dangerously shortsighted and worse than if Comcast bought TWC, because doing so ... leaves only one satellite name in the U.S. Let's just mandate Verizon buy the other one and then be truly happy about television.

Meanwhile, I'm more or less "OK" with my 30Mbps Comcast connection, although $65 is expensive for that. They came a few years back, door to door offering a good intro deal. But what I like best about it is that I'm IP-only; I do not subscribe to TV (from anyone). Viva la antenna.

This prevents them from counting me when negotiating for content, market share or anything having to do with TV, which is exactly the consumer hook that got our nation into this stupid mess in the first place.

 

[darkangel666]

They need to find some very corrupt judge to overturn the FCC decision. Texas comes to mind as a home to many corrupt judges.

The end purpose of these providers is to serve simple people, like you and me. And so far I didn't see any single person who would complain about the FCC decision. So how is that that AT&T believes that this should be overturned? What possible basis can there be? Well, Texas is their big hope, I know.

 

[Aelinsaar]

Liquid Snake X[/url]":hrayx7z0]

Aelinsaar[/url]":hrayx7z0]

Liquid Snake X[/url]":hrayx7z0]"Of course it'll be overturned, we've bribed too many public officials for it not to be!"

In that sense, he's an incredibly honest man, who just has a tendency to omit critical details. In another sense, he should wake up, sliding feet-first into a wood chipper.

As much as I recognise how much of an irredeemable cunt he is, violence in response to non-violent crimes is wrong... and not nearly ironic enough of a punishment.

Instead, he should be banished to a surface habitat on the far side of the moon, with nothing for entertainment but a wireless internet connection that only gets signal when the satellite is orbiting overhead, and throttles everything but ads down to 56k.

Continual promises to upgrade the connection or bring him back should be made, but never actually followed through on. Additionally, it should all be 24/7 live-streamed via Twitch, in light of how he happily sold out the citizenry to government surveillance.

Yep, it is, that's why you and I would never commit that kind of act. There are people who would however, and I'd argue that their irrepressible negative energies could be better directed.

Or we could do your way...

...plus a little waterboarding.

 

[noanoxan]

aliasundercover[/url]":c4a6zhhe]

Blue Adept[/url]":c4a6zhhe]Talk is cheap.

And yet money is speech.

But money isn't cheap..

Wait, what?

 

[iEvolution2]

mrnoglue[/url]":3e3pfitx]If I could count the number of congressmen and judges in my pocket, I too would be confident.

This guy doesn't even need to count.

 

[Seraphiel]

That's why Title II isn't killing AT&T's fiber investment, he says.

You can't really kill something that mostly doesn't exist anyway.

That is not dead which can eternal lie.

 

[rmm200]

More CEOs should be treated as enemies of the state. They don't work for our national interests, or the interests of the people they serve.

 

[Garst]

Sounds like the AT&T/DirecTV merger should be killed if AT&T plans to halt infrastructure expansion. And let's not forget that AT&T just bought two Mexican cellular companies, so we should ever assume any improvements will be in the US. Not that anyone ever actually believes AT&T's promises or contractual obligations any more anyways.

 

[Garst]

noanoxan[/url]":3b17fhfh]

aliasundercover[/url]":3b17fhfh]

Blue Adept[/url]":3b17fhfh]Talk is cheap.

And yet money is speech.

But money isn't cheap..

Wait, what?

Money is cheap when you can fraudulently charge people bogus fees and barely pay a fraction of it in fines after you're caught.

 

[Chemical Tribe]

Joe Villanova[/url]"y4cqw25]doesn't AT&T (like Verizon) want to exit the wireline business?

If that's the case, then Randall Stephenson SHOULD sell the company's copper network to other ISPs such as sonic.net or Frontier.

In some areas they did that, or another company other than att did it.

It got worse, way worse.