Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

still_one

(92,433 posts)
Sat Feb 28, 2015, 08:19 AM Feb 2015

Wall Street Journal Upset Because Title II Didn't Hurt Stocks

Wall Street got that message loud and clear, and when the FCC yesterday announced tougher net neutrality rules (and its assault on protectionist state laws, for that matter), ISP valuations and Wall Street as a whole barely batted an eye. This apparently greatly annoyed Wall Street Journal author Miriam Gottfried, who demanded that Wall Street immediately become...more outraged:
quote:
After years of fearing it like the boogeyman, Wall Street may have gotten a bit too comfortable with the government’s latest version of net neutrality...Investors were cheering the chairman’s assurance that the commission wouldn’t invoke the Title II power to regulate prices. But investors, beware: Broadband’s new status opens the door to the possibility of a future that is far less lucrative and more uncertain for the companies that provide it.

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Wall-Street-Journal-Upset-Because-Title-II-Didnt-Hurt-Stocks-132789

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

onenote

(42,778 posts)
2. Gottfried just proved she's unqualified to report on the market or telecommunications
Sat Feb 28, 2015, 08:41 AM
Feb 2015

First, its not as if investors woke up yesterday and discovered net neutrality rules had been adopted by surprise. Investors -- Gottfried, who is paid to follow the market and telecommunications -- must be a dunce of the first order to not understand that investors would already have taken the adoption of the rules into account over the past several weeks (if not months) as their adoption became inevitable. Moreover, the fact that the market over the past few weeks hasn't reacted in any significant way to these rules is consistent with the fact that, at least in the short run, despite the sky is falling rhetoric of those opposed to the rules, they won't really have a significant impact on ISPs bottom lines.

The fact that Gottfried seems not to understand either of these points reveals her to be utterly unqualified as the provider of advice about telecommunications or the stock market.

still_one

(92,433 posts)
4. It is the same garbage how the ACA was going to destroy jobs and hurt the economy that they were
Sat Feb 28, 2015, 12:20 PM
Feb 2015

spewing about.

You are absolutely correct how events and actions are always factored into the market, and they have determined the impact will not have short term effect on profits.

 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
3. The ruling was quite clear that, while the internet will be a "public utility" or whatever,
Sat Feb 28, 2015, 11:12 AM
Feb 2015

providers will not be regulated as far as rates are concerned. Telling a few municipalities that they can go ahead and create their own infrastructure didn't hurt as much as if the FCC had gone ahead and given that option to everyone. And, yeah, not such a surprise.

former9thward

(32,093 posts)
5. Investors have not reacted one way or the other for two reasons.
Sat Feb 28, 2015, 12:28 PM
Feb 2015

1) the regulations have not been released to the public yet so no one knows exactly what is in them and 2) whatever they are will be challenged by lawsuits and so will not go into effect for years.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Wall Street Journal Upset...