From: iln@cbnews.cb.att.com (i.niswander)
Newsgroups: alt.cable-tv.re-regulate
Subject: Re: >>>>>Cablevision lies
Keywords: cable tv regulation
Date: 13 Sep 92 14:47:55 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T

In article <1mPZqB7w165w@micro-c.mcds.com> speers@micro-c.mcds.com (Daniel E. Speers) writes:
>grad@sparky.drad.umn.edu (Jonathan Grad) writes:
>
>> In a previous article, someone wrote...
>> 
>> >>Of course prices won't go up -- the government (backed by people like
>> >>you) will point a gun at cable company owners and *force them* to
>> >>keep their prices down.
>> 
>> To which, someone responded
>> 
>> >If there are no market forces to keep prices down, then I believe
>> >the government should regulate them.  No gun is required, by the way.
>> >
>> Try starting a competing cable firm.  Within a short period of time
>> a government official will request that you desist from said activity.
>> Should you refuse, you will ultimately be greeting by gun toting police
>> officers, hence a gun and the threat of imprisonment is required and
>> employed.
>
>   If this did happen, it would go to court where the whole idea
>  of a local franchise (monopoly) would be challenged.  The BIGGEST
>  problem in such an undertaking is money - It would take alot to
>  put up such a challenge.  Has anyone talked to Ross Perot lately??
>


When I lived in San Antonio Texas, the city negotiated the contract 
with a cable company.  This was maybe 10 years ago.  There were articles
in the newspapers every day because cable was new to the area.
There were several negotiated provisions regarding how the cable company
would service the community including how they would build the system
and where (equal deployment to both rich and poor areas) and that they 
would permit two TV sets for the price of one.  Now that I live in a 
different part of the country, I find the price in San Antonio was
very reasonable too.  I have to admit that the city did a good job
in the negotiations.  I doubt that is the case in most areas.  But
it was a win-win situation in San Antonio.

A second cable company wanted to compete but since the first company
had a contract with the city, the second company was restricted
to the county.  The officials for the first company were upset because
they had to finish building their system in the city before they
could start in the county.  That would mean the second company could
saturate the county "unfairly". The second was upset because of their
restriction to the county.  I was on the board of a local homeowner's
association in the county and the second company tried to get us to
sign an exclusive contract with them.  We refused but we did allow
them and later the first company to enter the community.  

The result was that most people in the county had a choice.
The prices were similar because of the competition and because of
the city contract.  

At first we switched back and forth taking advantage of wars between
the two companies.  We would get free service for a couple of months.
Both companies had good service.  But the second company was under
ground and the picture was outstanding and didn't get knocked out
by storms and other problems.  So we began to ignore the war and
stayed with the second company.  But having that choice was great.
With both companies we got good service and a very nice selection on 
stations even on basic cable.