26) In March 1988, the district court modified the decree to permit the transmission of information services generated by others but retained the prohibition on the generation or production of information by the RBOCs in their regulated areas.
Accordingly, it would seem as if the RBOCs cannot be barred from entering competitive industries.
The district court's function is to remove restrictions on the RBOCs if they cannot restrict output or raise price in the markets to be entered.
Judge Greene was concerned about its possible use by the RBOCs.
The current trend toward use of incentive regulation and price caps provides the RBOCs with much greater incentive to cut costs, thereby adding to profits, rather than expanding the rate base to increase profits.
43) Similar reasoning is applicable with respect to the entry of RBOCs into the alarm industry.
The nexus between the RBOCs and the alarm companies
The RBOCs would seem to have far better alternative investment opportunities, including overseas communications, new phone networks in the countries emerging from behind the Iron Curtain, and domestic cellular, among others.
In the lessening of competition scenario, the question still remains as to why the RBOCs might want to enter the electronic security industry.
In summary, although the RBOCs now can enter information services, there seems to be little incentive to enter the alarm industry nor a significant net gain to society from their entry.
1)The topic is particularly timely since the Bryant (House)/DeConcini (Senate) bill would explicitly exclude the RBOCs from security alarm monitoring.
23)Of course, the RBOCs would have to make their mailing lists available to alarm companies at the same price at which they would be offered to their own subsidiary.