Telecommunications Act of 1996, The

Thomas R. Eisenmann; Daniel J. Green

Background Note | HBS Case Collection | January 2002

Telecommunications Act of 1996, The

by Thomas R. Eisenmann and Daniel J. Green

Abstract

Reed Hundt, former chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, reflects on the passage and implementation of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The act was intended to stimulate competition and innovation in the telecommunications sector. Its provisions were of great importance to industry participants and to society at large, which led to vigorous lobbying. This note provides background on the historic conflict between monopoly local phone companies and long-distance carriers, a description of the inner workings of the FCC and the political pressures confronting the commission, a description of key provisions of the act, an assessment of how well the act has met its objectives, and Hundt's reflections on the challenges that a regulator faces in seeking a balance between private interests and public responsibility.

Keywords: Laws and Statutes; Policy; Business Strategy; Telecommunications Industry; United States;

Format: Print

13 pages

Find at Harvard

Citation:

Eisenmann, Thomas R., and Daniel J. Green. "Telecommunications Act of 1996, The." Harvard Business School Background Note 802-144, January 2002.

Baroo CEO Lindsay Hyde was facing unrest from the board of her pet services startup in August 2017. One board member (and lead investor) was alarmed that Baroo’s growth was slowing while its appetite for funding was accelerating. Hyde wanted to hit the gas and continue expanding to new cities, which meant she needed to raise venture capital. How could she convince the board and potential investors that the business opportunities were too good to pass up and an infusion of capital could help her steer Baroo through the speed bumps?

Baroo CEO Lindsay Hyde must secure venture capital funding if she wants to save her pet services startup. If she is unable to finance a series A, she will need to sell or shut down.

In 2016, senior management at Moz, a venture capital-backed startup providing software tools for digital marketing professionals, must decide how to address a looming cash flow crisis precipitated by failed efforts to broaden its product line. Seattle-based Moz had originally focused only on search engine optimization (SEO) software. Aiming to accelerate growth, over the past three years the startup had launched products targeted at content marketers, social media marketers, and small local businesses. Adoption of these new products had been disappointing, and the resource drain and distraction of launching them had reduced the growth of Moz's core SEO product. Management was wrestling with whether to either: 1) shut down or sell the new products; or 2) double down on the new products, funding further investment in them by selling the core SEO business or milking it as a "cash cow."

Faculty & Research

Telecommunications Act of 1996, The

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author