Browsing October 29th, 2007

Golden Gate Bridge Sponsorships: Oh, the Iron-y

October 29, 2007 1:59 pm : Comments 000

Cable cars (and Rice-a-Roni) aside, two of the first things that come to mind when most people think about San Francisco are the stunning vistas and, of course, the Golden Gate Bridge. I was delighted to read yesterday that the board controlling the engineering landmark has unanimously rejected proposals to sell corporate sponsorships to help finance the bridge’s operating budget, which is pretty cash-starved these days. While corporate dollars may have brought some financial relief, the posting of sponsors’ ads and logos surely would have blighted the “International Orange” bridge, even if they were limited to the property adjacent to the span. I applaud the board for getting their priorities straight.

According to what I’ve read, a non-profit called “San Francisco Beautiful” was instrumental in getting the proposals defeated. While I commend them for their efforts to preserve the San Francisco landscape that I know and love, I cannot help but note the irony of San Francisco Beautiful having sold corporate sponsorships for its “2007 Beautification Awards Dinner” earlier in the month. Indeed, the logos of Citigroup and Parkmerced, a huge residential apartment complex that was once part of Leona Helmsley’s empire, grace San Francisco Beautiful’s home page.

While it is tempting to say something off-the-cuff and snarky about them pooh-poohing corporate sponsorships in one corner while gladly taking them in another, I’m more inclined to admire them for not kowtowing to the presumed preferences of their benefactors on the Bridge sponsorship issue. San Francisco Beautiful clearly put their constituents’ preferences first, and has earned my respect and admiration for it.

Share This Post

Cable Industry Oligopoly To Get Its Just Deserts?

11:54 am : Comments 000

The biggest advantage for any company with a monopoly is the freedom to pretty much throw out the customer service manual. Sure, you may have to do a dog-and-pony show to appease regulators every now and then, but at the end of the day you pretty much have free rein to dictate the rules of pricing and service, consumer be damned. AT&T Corp. before its court-ordered breakup in 1984 serves as a textbook example of the hazards when a company is allowed absolute domination of a market. That company’s attitude was best captured in a bumper sticker bearing the Bell logo and the following caption: “We don’t care. We don’t have to. We’re the phone company.”

Cable companies until just recently enjoyed such monopolistic freedoms, though their industry is probably better defined as an oligopoly. Individual cable providers long-enjoyed exclusive contracts to provide service to entire communities and apartment buildings, which has allowed them to raise prices more than a whopping 90 percent over the past 10 years. The ensuing monopolistic mindset is best reflected by their rigid pricing approach and broadly bundled channels, uniformly bad customer service, and appalling practice of expecting their customers to put up with a three- or four-hour time estimate of when a technician will be on-site to provide installation or maintenance service. Imagine a restaurant or your local pizzeria delivery joint trying to get away with that approach…

The Federal Communications Commission appears poised to serve the cable industry its just desserts. The New York Times reports today that the agency is preparing to invalidate all contracts that give individual cable companies exclusive rights to provide service in apartment buildings. The decision will likely prove to be a big boon for consumers, as studies show that when an alternative cable service is made available, prices can drop as much as 30 percent.

Verizon Communications and the new AT&T (not to be confused with the old, “Ma Bell” monopolistic one) are still in the process of rolling out their fiber optic services, but they do seem inclined to make an aggressive play for marketshare. Unfortunately for consumers, these two companies are also notorious for bad customer service, so I doubt we’ll find much relief on that front. But hey, if the increased competition drives down service costs across the field, that will be a small victory enough.

The cable industry has signaled it will challenge the FCC’s rule in court. No doubt the hearings will be scheduled to start sometime between 1 p.m. and 4 p.m.

Share This Post