I assume Northport got what they needed or else they would have kept
blogging about the injustice.
Verbal site access has always made me nervous. Especially verbal barter
deals. It seems like one party or the other ends up feeling like they
got the worse end of the barter at some point.
The most common thing that seems to happen with verbal deals is
employees change at one company or the other and then nobody knows what
the deal was anymore, or enough time goes by and they just forget.
Sometimes one party remembers details the other doesn't. Then an
employee goes to the site one day and gets interrogated...."you're from
where? Why do you have a key to our building?" etc.
On 10/21/2015 10:28 AM, Chuck McCown wrote:
So, what is the rest of this story?
*From:* Eric Kuhnke <mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Tuesday, October 20, 2015 9:02 PM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* [AFMUG] Cautionary tale on leasing and access agreements
Why handshake deals for tower sites/POPs are a bad idea, why
month-to-month is bad, and why it's necessary to have an ironclad
access agreement or lease that will survive sale or transfer of the
underlying property.
http://northportproject.com/2011/11/07/ecliptixnet-broadband-provides-the-story-behind-the-threat-of-northport-losing-internet-service-commissioner-response-to-a-residents-e-mail/
