4 ms·
The question is are they doing it because it’s not cost effective and they don’t have the infrastructure to compete, or because of an internal agreement not to
by thegagne 5y ago
The question is are they doing it because it’s not cost effective and they don’t have the infrastructure to compete, or because of an internal agreement not to intrude on each others turf?
- inetknght 5y ago> The question is are they doing it because it’s not cost effective and they don’t have the infrastructure to compete If it's cost prohibitive then the solution is common carrier status to become like electrical distribution network. If it's not cost prohibitive that then the solution is criminal prosecution. It doesn't matter whether or not there's a formal internal agreement; there's clearly intent and informal collusion. Unfortunately I don't have the answer here. And it was 9 years ago so well beyond meaning other than an anecdote.