Friday, June 08, 2007


Excuse me for just a second while I talk shop.

I gave up listening to talk radio about six months ago and I havent missed it at all. Ive been spending my drive time listening to books on CD and much more educational and uplifting podcasts and music. Today a coworker turned up his radio today because our company was mentioned. In Atlanta we have a consumer reporter who always refers to our company as a monopoly local phone company. At last count AT&T had 35% of the market share for home voice-lines in the states we serve. Can you think of any other monopoly that only has 35% of the market share? In today rant he was talking about a cable company, a satellite company and AT&T competing for the video market. Apparently oblivious to the irony, he used the word monopoly to describe all three of the companies that are competing for the same market on a specific product. Considering this statement it really makes me wonder how he defines a monopoly.

I quit listening to talk radio primarily because the political talking heads were just pandering to their customer base to sell advertising regardless of the facts. I used to respect this consumer reporter, but now it seems obvious that he too is just using emotionally charged words like monopoly regardless of whether or not there are facts to support his claims.

1 comment:

  1. I have to agree with you that this really doesn't make any sense. You might be able to argue that because each of them has control over the specific medium of delivery (copper/fiber, coax, and satellite signal) they have a monopoly on that particular technology. But when all three are offering essentially the same thing, and have to adjust to market pressures for things such as price and customer service, then you really can't call it a monopoly anymore.