I thought that MCI and some of the others were cherry picking AT&T before Greene's
decision.
Rob Schaap wrote:
> I'm left wondering ... if Greene had kept AT&T as was in'82 (regulated wire
> monopoly across local loops and long-distance), and the government had allowed
> providers of other delivery technologies into phone markets, competition from
> cable (the potential of which was already obvious), satellite
> (IBM/Aetna/Hughes's SBS Ku-band satellite had already showed its technical
> potential, if not any profitability in the moment - precisely because they
> weren't allowed to compete at the level of wire backbone), and microwave (MCI
> was on to this precisely because they weren't allowed to compete at the level
> of wire backbone) could have taken care of the innovation-inducing aspect of
> competition, without inviting nearly so many of the costs that attend
> competition (eg duplication of delivery technology, consumer confusion
> regarding long-distance calls, market-by-market litigation against RBOC local
> monopolies and, er, bankruptcy proceedings).
>
> Does that sound convincing at all?
>
> Cheers,
> Rob.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
