Comcast/Verizon/AT&T/et al already have terrible reputations. They also have dominant local monopolies and the legislative power to defend them.

I disagree. Here in Florida, Verizon FIOS has an excellent reputation and the product is far superior to the other choices we have.

It's also the first place I've lived where I have choice (Brighthouse being the other player).

Time Warner and Comcast are definitely among the worst though, and I suspect that if the OP is correct, it won't be long until Verizon joins them.

I too have Verizon FIOS and have no issues to speak of, other than the cost. But I don't assume that everyone else has had similar experiences. Typically it works out that areas with choices tend to get better service while the experience degrades as customers have fewer choices.

Personally, I wish they'd quit trying to convince me to increase my bill by a significant amount by including TV, of which I've made it quite clear I do not want.

>Verizon FIOS has an excellent reputation and the product is far superior to the other choices we have.

Well, that's the crux of the problem, isn't it?

The shitty TWC service I pay for is probably far superior to the more expensive, 500kbps, line-of-sight based wireless network of the only other competitor I know of in the area. Not exactly a glowing testimonial though, is that?

Verizon FIOS is exactly the product the article was complaining about...

> I realized that the one thing in common between me and our president was that we both had FiOS internet service from Verizon.

Yes, but the reputation isn't going to deteriorate overnight. There's a reason why they both had it. It's a good product (or it was).

IN the perfect world of competition, true.

Unfortunately most people have very few ISP options.