<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Economics of VOIP</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.markevanstech.com/2004/12/27/economics-of-voip/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.markevanstech.com/2004/12/27/economics-of-voip/</link>
	<description>A Canadian Take on the Web</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 03:05:38 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.markevanstech.com/2004/12/27/economics-of-voip/#comment-53</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:40:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://markevanstech.com/?p=188#comment-53</guid>
		<description>It is unreasonable to argue that companies without facilities should be allowed to "dominate the playing field" by utilizing the assets of others to generate their profits, while the owners of the assets are still required by law to maintain and even extend the assets.  (Yes, even though the facilities-based companies were once protected monopolies with guaranteed profits.)  This same flawed reasoning was eventually discredited in context of UNEP, and it won&#39;t stand in the VoIP arena either.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is unreasonable to argue that companies without facilities should be allowed to &#8220;dominate the playing field&#8221; by utilizing the assets of others to generate their profits, while the owners of the assets are still required by law to maintain and even extend the assets.  (Yes, even though the facilities-based companies were once protected monopolies with guaranteed profits.)  This same flawed reasoning was eventually discredited in context of UNEP, and it won&#39;t stand in the VoIP arena either.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.markevanstech.com/2004/12/27/economics-of-voip/#comment-52</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Dec 2004 05:48:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://markevanstech.com/?p=188#comment-52</guid>
		<description>When the big telcos and cablecos flip the switch and seriously offer VoIP (sometime in 2005), Vonage will get squeezed and eventually disappear. The holy grail for these monopolies is the "ultimate bundle" of landline, LD, mobile, and cable/satellite. We, the Canadian consumer, have apparently expressed a desire to get it all from one provider on one bill. They in turn are working feverishly to deliver it. I now pay more for communications than I ever have. There&#39;s still a lot of money to be made by Ma Bell.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When the big telcos and cablecos flip the switch and seriously offer VoIP (sometime in 2005), Vonage will get squeezed and eventually disappear. The holy grail for these monopolies is the &#8220;ultimate bundle&#8221; of landline, LD, mobile, and cable/satellite. We, the Canadian consumer, have apparently expressed a desire to get it all from one provider on one bill. They in turn are working feverishly to deliver it. I now pay more for communications than I ever have. There&#39;s still a lot of money to be made by Ma Bell.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
