Comments on: BellSouth's IPTV strategy may pay off

Company's execs may not thump their chests about it, but analysts say the local phone carrier is well-positioned.

Bellsouth

Now I understand why Bellsouth services are so despicable. Instead of ironing out their current problems, this company spends their resources in strategizing ways to enter in new markets. Meanwhile, their current customers suffer with lack of knowledgeable and speedy customer services to handle the innumerous and regular outages of Bellsouth services, billing discrepancies, ?special? offers with the intent to trap customers into tricky contracts and the list is long. It seems to me that Bellsouth?s executives would profit more if they spent their expensive time in strategizing ways to fix their current problems and repair their disgraceful reputation as a service provider, instead of inventing new ways to delude consumers into using their despicable services. The level of consumer dissatisfaction with Bellsouth services is way too high for anyone to consider venturing in this company?s new ideas of services. Bellsouth has a shameful credibility in Florida and I personally would never use them no matter how appealing.

BellSouth comment from Christina B.

I absolutely agree with Christina B. regarding to BellSouth services and Customer Service Reps. Their policy is unfair, if not illegal to the residents of Florida.

I have been charged almost $2,000 in calls not made from my phone number, so I've disputed the charges and asked BellSouth to try identify from where the phone calls were made.

No acknowlegment or contact was made regarding my claims and BellSouth is still sending me the same letter over and over, asking me if I have to dispute the charges it should have to be made in a thirty day period, which it was.

I always respond their letter disputing the charges. They simply ignore me. I even told them if I would receive a proof that the charges belong to me, I would pay it. No response except for the same standard letter.

You need competion BellSouth, so you can start to care about your current customers and fight for their business. Gina C.

Bellsouth

Now I understand why Bellsouth services are so despicable. Instead of ironing out their current problems, this company spends their resources in strategizing ways to enter in new markets. Meanwhile, their current customers suffer with lack of knowledgeable and speedy customer services to handle the innumerous and regular outages of Bellsouth services, billing discrepancies, ?special? offers with the intent to trap customers into tricky contracts and the list is long. It seems to me that Bellsouth?s executives would profit more if they spent their expensive time in strategizing ways to fix their current problems and repair their disgraceful reputation as a service provider, instead of inventing new ways to delude consumers into using their despicable services. The level of consumer dissatisfaction with Bellsouth services is way too high for anyone to consider venturing in this company?s new ideas of services. Bellsouth has a shameful credibility in Florida and I personally would never use them no matter how appealing.

BellSouth comment from Christina B.

I absolutely agree with Christina B. regarding to BellSouth services and Customer Service Reps. Their policy is unfair, if not illegal to the residents of Florida.

I have been charged almost $2,000 in calls not made from my phone number, so I've disputed the charges and asked BellSouth to try identify from where the phone calls were made.

No acknowlegment or contact was made regarding my claims and BellSouth is still sending me the same letter over and over, asking me if I have to dispute the charges it should have to be made in a thirty day period, which it was.

I always respond their letter disputing the charges. They simply ignore me. I even told them if I would receive a proof that the charges belong to me, I would pay it. No response except for the same standard letter.

You need competion BellSouth, so you can start to care about your current customers and fight for their business. Gina C.

[jacomo]

Fiber to the Node will not float

BS did not take a risk when they elected to deploy fiber. What they did was simple and logical at the time. They already had copper to their homes and all they needed to do was extend fiber to the neighborhood and terminate on a DSLAM and tap into existing copper.This was a low cost alternative to what was really risky in Fiber to the Premise.
The risk they took and which will bite them big time in the next few years is :
1.betting that they can deliver 100Mbps plus over copper. The real world 30-40 Mbps max they will realize will not be enough to compete with Fiber to the Premise and future WiMAX based products.
2.Even more important that that and apparently under the analysts radar is the high OPEX cost of supporting Node based Electronics vs a PON infrastructure deployed in FTT Premise.

Watch what they end up doing in Greenfield deployments. I will bet they will end up going with FTTPremise either directly with Ethernet or with a PON (GPON) system.

OPEX folks is where it is at if these boys want to compete with the MSO who have minimal OPEX to deliver their Voice and VOD services.

Let's get soem analysts to really look into this and report back some real facts.
What si the cost of OPEX ona FTTNode vs FTTPremise over a 7 year period.

Jacomo
Jacomo

You sound pretty knowledgeable, but...

If and WHEN they need to convert to FTTP, it will be magnitudes cheaper than it is now. They will have other carriers, namely Verizon, to thank for that.

I think that they will go with a WIMAX solution before they dig for FTTP. It will be alot cheaper and easier to maintain and support.

[jacomo]

Fiber to the Node will not float

BS did not take a risk when they elected to deploy fiber. What they did was simple and logical at the time. They already had copper to their homes and all they needed to do was extend fiber to the neighborhood and terminate on a DSLAM and tap into existing copper.This was a low cost alternative to what was really risky in Fiber to the Premise.
The risk they took and which will bite them big time in the next few years is :
1.betting that they can deliver 100Mbps plus over copper. The real world 30-40 Mbps max they will realize will not be enough to compete with Fiber to the Premise and future WiMAX based products.
2.Even more important that that and apparently under the analysts radar is the high OPEX cost of supporting Node based Electronics vs a PON infrastructure deployed in FTT Premise.

Watch what they end up doing in Greenfield deployments. I will bet they will end up going with FTTPremise either directly with Ethernet or with a PON (GPON) system.

OPEX folks is where it is at if these boys want to compete with the MSO who have minimal OPEX to deliver their Voice and VOD services.

Let's get soem analysts to really look into this and report back some real facts.
What si the cost of OPEX ona FTTNode vs FTTPremise over a 7 year period.

Jacomo
Jacomo

You sound pretty knowledgeable, but...

If and WHEN they need to convert to FTTP, it will be magnitudes cheaper than it is now. They will have other carriers, namely Verizon, to thank for that.

I think that they will go with a WIMAX solution before they dig for FTTP. It will be alot cheaper and easier to maintain and support.