Qwest had a forbearance petition in at the FCC for the Phoenix metro area. It was denied by the FCC last week. It was denied in 2008 by Martin's commission as well.

Qwest claims that cable, VoIP and cellular are stealing all the market share. I don't know what the market breakdown is because Qwest did not share that data with the FCC or the public. (Hence, the denial).

Why is it that every time the FCC rules against an ILEC, the response is the same: "Ultimately, the FCC's decision will undermine competition in Phoenix instead of promoting it."

Can someone explain that statement from Qwest to me? How does continued regulation of Qwest undermine competition?

If we have learned anything it is that Duopoly is NOT competition. And forbearance would have meant duopoly like it did in Omaha in 2005.

Qwest's two biggest problems are that they do not have a cellular division and they can't get out of the monopoly mindset.

Not having a fiber play in Phoenix like FTTN or FTTH means that their triple-play is weak compared to cable. DSL speeds and DirecTV means less revenue for Qwest.

If I had to run Qwest and lost this forbearance petition, I would be mad. Mad at the previous CEO's for selfish, short-sighted policies that drove the USWest-Qwest ship into the arms of a CenturyLink take over. All those fiber routes and data centers without a clear strategy on how to be profitable long-term in a data-centric landscape where cloud, CDN and collocation are booming. Maybe Sprint and Qwest execs can lament together on the number of ships that left the dock that they missed out on.