<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://telecompetitor.com" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>MDU</title>
 <link>http://telecompetitor.com/taxonomy/term/412/feed</link>
 <description>The taxonomy view with a depth of 0.</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>FCC Bans Exclusive Telecom Deals with Apartment Buildings</title>
 <link>http://telecompetitor.com/node/568</link>
 <description>&lt;div class=&quot;inline_left&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.telecompetitor.com/images/fcc.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&quot; title=&quot;&quot; class=&quot;image thumbnail&quot; height=&quot;140&quot; width=&quot;139&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://www.fcc.gov&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;FCC&lt;/a&gt; has &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280908A1.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;banned exclusive agreements with apartment building property owners and telecom carriers&lt;/a&gt;. These agreements have been common and basically allow a carrier to become the exclusive provider for telecom services in places like apartment buildings, providing a huge barrier to entry for competitors. The order also claims to rescind any existing exclusivity agreements. The FCC issued a similar order for cable television agreements back in 2007.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It’s too early to get a reaction from the industry, but consensus is they won’t be happy. This new order affects both telecom and cable companies, since they both now provide telecom services. In fact the cable industry will probably be more upset because they have been more active with apartment building exclusivity deals, especially with triple play bundles. The next few days and weeks will surely see less than favorable reaction.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <comments>http://telecompetitor.com/node/568#comment</comments>
 <category domain="http://telecompetitor.com/taxonomy/term/32">FCC</category>
 <category domain="http://telecompetitor.com/taxonomy/term/412">MDU</category>
 <category domain="http://telecompetitor.com/taxonomy/term/485">Regulatory</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 09:34:39 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Bernie</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">568 at http://telecompetitor.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>MDU Exclusivity Days are Over</title>
 <link>http://telecompetitor.com/node/370</link>
 <description>&lt;div class=&quot;inline_left&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://l.b5z.net/i/u/6066418/i/Telecompetitor/Web images/partyover.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&quot; title=&quot;&quot; class=&quot;image thumbnail&quot; height=&quot;94&quot; width=&quot;98&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277763A1.doc&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;FCC ended exclusive contracts&lt;/a&gt; between video operators and multi-dwelling unit (MDU) properties today. These exclusivity agreements allowed video operators to be the sole choice for multichannel video service within MDUs, effectively denying any competiton. The ruling is seen as a blow to the cable industry, whose operators maintained the overwhelming majority of these agreements. Telecom operators with video operations may benefit from the ruling because they conceivably gain access to these previously inaccessible properties to market their video offerings. But before telcos get too happy, odds are this ruling will be challenged in court. These exclusive agreements are just too lucrative to give up without a fight.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <comments>http://telecompetitor.com/node/370#comment</comments>
 <category domain="http://telecompetitor.com/taxonomy/term/413">Exclusivity</category>
 <category domain="http://telecompetitor.com/taxonomy/term/32">FCC</category>
 <category domain="http://telecompetitor.com/taxonomy/term/412">MDU</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2007 22:14:31 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Bernie</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">370 at http://telecompetitor.com</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
