Quoting andy at theasis.com (andy at theasis.com): > When Qwest started building infrastructure for DSL, SDSL wasn't available. > They chose their RADSL, which committed them to a whole lot of equipment > and other infrastructure aspects. Also, as someone else mentioned, they > had to bet on what people would be interested in, and ADSL offers the > ability to run voice & DSL on the same line. That will certainly make the > difference in selling it to most people in my area, and probably in > general. > > What makes you think Qwest can afford to stay in business if they willy > nilly go chasing after all these special interests who make up a very tiny > portion of their market (i.e., LUGers)? Isn't that what Covad did, and now > they're leaving those same customers out in the cold? Point taken. BUT considering over this quarter (Jan - Apr) we had to turn away more DSL customers then we signed up because of facility/distance issues, I think there is a great demmand for SDSL. Most of these lost clients are in the metro area INSIDE the 494, 694 loops. Maybe I'm not a great business person, but if you slice your market and say X percent of people in the metro cannot get RADSL and of that percent 10% of them want broadband. You should be able to come up with an ROI for your equipment. I think that there is money to be made. Problem with the other National DSL providers is that is all they did. They did not have any other revenue streams. Qwest can apply it's monopoly powers and rule this market. -- Bob Tanner <tanner at real-time.com> | Phone : (952)943-8700 http://www.mn-linux.org | Fax : (952)943-8500 Key fingerprint = 6C E9 51 4F D5 3E 4C 66 62 A9 10 E5 35 85 39 D9