Over the past 9 years that I have been in telecom, Verizon has probably been in court at least once a month either suing the FCC over some rule or part of the Telecom Act or being sued for anti-trust. VZ has also sued for patent infringement. It has been sued often for billing disputes, since the ILECs make billing a profit center. And numerous states have taken VZ to task for awful customer service.
In addition, VZ spends millions on political campaigns and lobbyists. (We won't even discuss the billions in marketing and advertising!)
Couldn't they have put this effort into actually having a good company? Giving top quality customer service would have prevented some headaches and fines AND would have been positive marketing! Here they are locked in a losing battle with cable over residential triple-play. It's like the airline debate. To many consumers, they both suck so go with price.
I think about all the millions in legal fees, fines, etc. and I can't help but wonder what would have happened if VZ had spent that money either on building the network it promised Penn. (DS3 to every home was promised in 1998) or if it had done some R&D.
This post was brought on by the VZ versus Cable Appeal. VZ has been violating CPNI rules by marketing to customers that have put in a port order for thier phone lines. This has been illegal since TA96 first came into effect, because ILEC's have the unfair advantage of having to port the phone number for a move. So they can delay it (like many CLEC's do) or they can market to the customer - but it is forbidden by CPNI rules. Instead of just accepting the FC ruling, VZ has to go to court. What a load of crap. Why the judge doesn't throw this out as frivolous and disbar the attorney who filed it is beyond me.
Just so yo uknow, SBC, BellSouth, and Qwest are in similar boats. Multi-millions wasted. And they have tied up our court system for years with these cases.