Google uses low frequency brain stimulation.. Whenever you use their
browser and the volume isn't turned off.
On 10/6/20 7:15 AM, Adam Moffett wrote:
Messaging is king of all I suppose.
If you were Google, people would believe that you magically give it
away for free. Since you're not Google they'll assume some kind of
robbery or graft. I don't know how Google pulls off that kind of
public relations coup.
On 10/6/2020 10:06 AM, Chuck McCown via AF wrote:
But it is free! Comes with HOA dues. Such a deal.
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 6, 2020, at 7:58 AM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote:
If I was in charge of laws, they wouldn't be so legalistic.
You don't have exclusivity per se, but in de facto nobody will buy
anything else when they're already forced to pay you whether they
like it or not. They'd have to actively hate you before they'll
even consider something else. You'd have to steal their birthdays
before they consider another option, and you'd have to violate their
daughters before they're willing to pay what the installation of the
other option will actually cost.
.....that doesn't make it a bad deal for you, of course. Competitors
will cry foul because you can make money and they can't, but that
doesn't mean they wouldn't do the same thing if they could.
On 10/5/2020 8:05 PM, [email protected] wrote:
We don’t have exclusivity, we just have a service included in HOA
fees. They can have any service provider they want.
But the service provider will have to do an overbuild into a
saturated area. I would bet they will not do it.
*From:* Mark Radabaugh
*Sent:* Monday, October 5, 2020 5:52 PM
*To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT Royalty deal
https://www.keglerbrown.com/publications/mdus-vs-the-fcc-exclusivity-service-agreements-with-cable-and-internet-providers/
https://www.nexttv.com/news/fcc-bans-exclusive-mdu-deals-296566
FCC Bans Exclusivity Contracts — HOA Law Blog — February
...www.hoalawblog.com › fcc_bans_exclusivity_contracts
<https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjak-670p7sAhUVHM0KHcR5D74QFjACegQIBxAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.hoalawblog.com%2Ffcc_bans_exclusivity_contracts%2F&usg=AOvVaw1IWC6vbyFt33Un5wLgPWSa>
Pay your money and take your chances
Mark
On Oct 5, 2020, at 4:52 PM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote:
Lots of companies doing these deals. MDU, subdivisions. What
would be illegal about it? The homeowners are free to go after
any service they want, but they are locked into my service. This
has been litigated at the CATV level years ago and was found legal.
On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 2:28 PM Mark Radabaugh <[email protected]> wrote:
I think you are going to find that arrangement is highly
illegal from an FCC standpoint. When the deal gets blown out
by the next company that sues you and the HOA over it, is it
going to be worth your time and investment?
Mark
On Oct 5, 2020, at 4:20 PM, [email protected] wrote:
I am getting some traction with developers for my fiber.
They want me to come in, they will put the subscription to my
service as part of the HOA fees. They will not let others in
the ditch. All for 10% of the gross. So I get 100% take
rate. I am not unhappy with the deal. But I am wondering
about agreeing to a perpetual royalty. Anyone else done one
of these deals?
--
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
