 at issue here may have no economically realizable value to its owner, possession, control, and disposition are nonetheless valuable rights that inhere in the property" (Phillips V. Wash. Legal Found., 524 U.S. 156, 170 (1998), quoting United States V. Gen. Motors Corp., 323 U.S. 373, 378 (1945)). As will be discussed below in greater detail in Chapter 8, regulations that compel access to wireline telecommunications networks often require the placement of third-party equipment on the network owner's property. As a result, the shift from rate regulation to access regulation generates an equally fundamental shift in the constitutional analysis. Finding that a taking has occurred, however, is only the first step in the constitutional inquiry. 2. Determining Just Compensation Once a court determines that a taking has occurred, the constitutionality of the regulation in question depends on whether the government provides just compen- sation for the property taken. The Loretto Court did not address the question of compensation, remanding it for consideration by the state courts (458 U.S. at 441). In addition, most courts confronted with this issue held that it was not ripe for judicial consideration. ¹ 19 Loretto, 458 U.S. at 426, 436-37, 438 n. 16; Nollan, 483 U.S. at 831-32; Yee, 503 U.S. at 530; Lucas, 505 U.S. at 1015, 1028; Tahoe-Sierra, 535 U.S. at 322. See also Loretto, 458 U.S. at 437-38 n. 15. Verizon Commc'ns Inc. V. FCC, 535 U.S. 467, 524-25 (2002); Ill. Bell Tel. Co. V. FCC, 911 F.2d 776, 780 (D.C. Cir. 1990); Iowa Utils. Bd. V. FCC, 120 F.3d 753, 818 (8th Cir. 1997), rev'd & remanded in part on other grounds sub nom. AT&T V. Iowa Utils. Bd., 525 U.S. 366, 396 (1999); Gulf Power Networks in Telecommunications a. Market Value as the Preferred Measure of Just Compensation The Court often has averred that the guiding principle for determining just com- pensation is that the owner should be put ""in as good a position pecuniarily as if his property had not been taken.'"22 As a result, the Court established that