City asks telco to deploy fiber network, telco refuses

[imported_Champ]

If there are no other internet or home phone providers in the area then the city should easily win based on a lack of competition in the market (can antitust laws apply?)

That is sad though,:disgust: there needs to be a government set standard for internet speed that will work like moore's law...so in 2 years i can be rocking 10mp/s🙂 and in 10 years have a 160mp/s connection😀

 

[paulxcook]

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Stiganator
God I hope they win, next step will be Minneapolis wide fiber....mmmmm fiber.

Telcoms were GIVEN billions in the 90s to install fiber. They did, but did not activate it. I think the government should ream them all. They are holding us back and quite literally stealing our money, since most areas only have one option.

Please stop spreading this rumor. The majority of broadband customers have a choice in broadband providers.

define "choice." I dont consider 1 cable offering and 1 DSL offering a choice since they differ a lot in speeds. I've lived in three towns in central NJ, all pretty densely populated, and none had more than one choice for cable internet. With FIOS, people will finally have an alternative to cable.

I agree. 1 cable and 1 DSL is not much of a choice at all.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Stiganator
God I hope they win, next step will be Minneapolis wide fiber....mmmmm fiber.

Telcoms were GIVEN billions in the 90s to install fiber. They did, but did not activate it. I think the government should ream them all. They are holding us back and quite literally stealing our money, since most areas only have one option.

Please stop spreading this rumor. The majority of broadband customers have a choice in broadband providers.

define "choice." I dont consider 1 cable offering and 1 DSL offering a choice since they differ a lot in speeds. I've lived in three towns in central NJ, all pretty densely populated, and none had more than one choice for cable internet. With FIOS, people will finally have an alternative to cable.

This is where Spidey posts a link to the site that lists "broadband" providers in your area that lists providers that aren't actually an option, wireless providers, and speeds that aren't considered broadband to the common user (they may technically meet the definition).

Funny thing is, the FCC is considering redefining the term "broadband" as a result of how ISPs market their offerings.

 

[spidey07]

BigJ,

I'm specifically referring to cable and telco. Not the FCC definition.

If you can't get cable or telco, you're not included. Sorry, you're just to far. The real world definition is greater than multimegabit (768k is included...dumb...I know) home services and that's the one I'm using, this would include wifi but no other wireless tech however that is changing.

I recall reading about this town years ago and applauded them for the effort. But in all seriousness the FCC will not let this kind of crap stand.

 

[Eli]

How fscked up and backwards is that? 😕

 

[ScottMac]

SO, who do you think the city will contract to put that fiber down?

Once the city finds out how much it *really* costs to operate s network, they will 1) raise more taxes, 2) contract someone else to operate the cable 3) either raise the rates or reduce service to fit the existing budget.

It's been done. You will have the same quality of service in networking from the city as you'd get from any other city service. Generally speaking, politicians don't know sh!t about accomplishing what they want done, and they either shoehorn something in, or (try to) screw-over the contractor, causing a serious mess.

But you, the citizen and / or customer will have to eat the cost, suffer the idiots, and have suck-ass service.

What in the wide, wide world of sports makes you think that a City (or other local government) can run networking infrastructure cheaper and/or more efficiently than a business? Are you friggin' nuts? I mean, really .... good grief.

 

[TheTony]

Originally posted by: ScottMac
SO, who do you think the city will contract to put that fiber down?

Once the city finds out how much it *really* costs to operate s network, they will 1) raise more taxes, 2) contract someone else to operate the cable 3) either raise the rates or reduce service to fit the existing budget.

It's been done. You will have the same quality of service in networking from the city as you'd get from any other city service. Generally speaking, politicians don't know sh!t about accomplishing what they want done, and they either shoehorn something in, or (try to) screw-over the contractor, causing a serious mess.

But you, the citizen and / or customer will have to eat the cost, suffer the idiots, and have suck-ass service.

What in the wide, wide world of sports makes you think that a City (or other local government) can run networking infrastructure cheaper and/or more efficiently than a business? Are you friggin' nuts? I mean, really .... good grief.

I'm not sure which example you're responding to with these questions, but the fiber network in question for Monticello is limited to the fiber and the interconnect facility of its own. ISPs can come in and link up to any fiber user who wants their service. The city maintains the lines and the connection facility, but doesn't need to become an ISP.

 

[ric1287]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Stiganator
God I hope they win, next step will be Minneapolis wide fiber....mmmmm fiber.

Telcoms were GIVEN billions in the 90s to install fiber. They did, but did not activate it. I think the government should ream them all. They are holding us back and quite literally stealing our money, since most areas only have one option.

Please stop spreading this rumor. The majority of broadband customers have a choice in broadband providers.

If by "choice" you mean overpriced cable or 56k ver. 2.0 in dsl.

"Choice" should mean that one company (TWC, Comcrap, etc) doesn't have a fucking monopoly on the market. Break that shit up and franchise it out so we might actually get quality service/CS

 

[AlienCraft]

Keep this in mind for the next time somebody says"Government should be run like a business..." .

 

[God Mode]

The only isp available to my address is TWC. $60 a month for internet only. If I could switch to a cheaper ISP, I wouldve done so 2 years ago. Sucks that a few blocks away, verizon fios and dsl is available.

 

[imported_Flimflam]

Who is this wow in IN/OH/IL? My town has a local company that offers fios, but I've never heard of any wow (aside from world of warcraft), and I live in IN.

 

[GeekDrew]

WOW = Wide Open West

I've seen them in a few select areas of Columbus, OH, and from what I've seen, they could fairly accurately be described as having horrible service quality.

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Stiganator
God I hope they win, next step will be Minneapolis wide fiber....mmmmm fiber.

Telcoms were GIVEN billions in the 90s to install fiber. They did, but did not activate it. I think the government should ream them all. They are holding us back and quite literally stealing our money, since most areas only have one option.

Please stop spreading this rumor. The majority of broadband customers have a choice in broadband providers.

its not really a rumor, ive lived in quite a few places, many very populated and its alwats been the same

there has been 1 over priced high speed Cable co (comcast TWC ...) 1 slow ass DLS provider (ATT, VZ) and then dial up

that is NOT a choice, a choice would be having 3-4 cos offering the same exact thing, not 1 person selling you a porsche, 1 selling a Ford and the last selling a yugo


where i currently live its Time Warner or dial up, thats it no other options

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Stiganator
God I hope they win, next step will be Minneapolis wide fiber....mmmmm fiber.

Telcoms were GIVEN billions in the 90s to install fiber. They did, but did not activate it. I think the government should ream them all. They are holding us back and quite literally stealing our money, since most areas only have one option.

Please stop spreading this rumor. The majority of broadband customers have a choice in broadband providers.

its not really a rumor, ive lived in quite a few places, many very populated and its alwats been the same

there has been 1 over priced high speed Cable co (comcast TWC ...) 1 slow ass DLS provider (ATT, VZ) and then dial up

that is NOT a choice, a choice would be having 3-4 cos offering the same exact thing, not 1 person selling you a porsche, 1 selling a Ford and the last selling a yugo


where i currently live its Time Warner or dial up, thats it no other options

Except a porsche is desireable.

 

[ScottMac]

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Stiganator
God I hope they win, next step will be Minneapolis wide fiber....mmmmm fiber.

Telcoms were GIVEN billions in the 90s to install fiber. They did, but did not activate it. I think the government should ream them all. They are holding us back and quite literally stealing our money, since most areas only have one option.

Please stop spreading this rumor. The majority of broadband customers have a choice in broadband providers.

its not really a rumor, ive lived in quite a few places, many very populated and its alwats been the same

there has been 1 over priced high speed Cable co (comcast TWC ...) 1 slow ass DLS provider (ATT, VZ) and then dial up

that is NOT a choice, a choice would be having 3-4 cos offering the same exact thing, not 1 person selling you a porsche, 1 selling a Ford and the last selling a yugo


where i currently live its Time Warner or dial up, thats it no other options

You wouldn't see the sky through all the overhead cables ... there ain't enough dirt to plant that much media ... copper or fiber.

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: ScottMac

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Stiganator
God I hope they win, next step will be Minneapolis wide fiber....mmmmm fiber.

Telcoms were GIVEN billions in the 90s to install fiber. They did, but did not activate it. I think the government should ream them all. They are holding us back and quite literally stealing our money, since most areas only have one option.

Please stop spreading this rumor. The majority of broadband customers have a choice in broadband providers.

its not really a rumor, ive lived in quite a few places, many very populated and its alwats been the same

there has been 1 over priced high speed Cable co (comcast TWC ...) 1 slow ass DLS provider (ATT, VZ) and then dial up

that is NOT a choice, a choice would be having 3-4 cos offering the same exact thing, not 1 person selling you a porsche, 1 selling a Ford and the last selling a yugo


where i currently live its Time Warner or dial up, thats it no other options

You wouldn't see the sky through all the overhead cables ... there ain't enough dirt to plant that much media ... copper or fiber.

they run alot of it underground

 

[Stiganator]

All 5 places I've lived in Minneapolis have set regions. Comcast gets certain blocks, Time Warner gets others, Qwest gets others. If go to an apartment they will tell you the only options. My brother only has one option at his place too. So, not a rumor or misinformaiton.

 

[KK]

I don't like the thoughts of government handling anything as they will find a way to fuck it up. With this case, if it's against minnesota law to fund it they way they were trying to, then one of two things need to happen. 1, they need to change the minnesota law to now allow it, or 2 find another way to fund it.

 

[JS80]

Why doesn't the govt lay the cable then lease it to ISPs to administer?

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: JS80
Why doesn't the govt lay the cable then lease it to ISPs to administer?

Thats usually the business model they follow. ISPs don't like it because then they have to compete. In this example, the telco was unwilling to offer service...when some one else came in and offered it their response was too sue. What exactly are they losing? They didn't want anything to do with this market 45 seconds ago.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: KK
I don't like the thoughts of government handling anything as they will find a way to fuck it up. With this case, if it's against minnesota law to fund it they way they were trying to, then one of two things need to happen. 1, they need to change the minnesota law to now allow it, or 2 find another way to fund it.

But Minnesota law does allow it. It's being set up as like a utility or a public convenience which allows for the use of bonds. Plus, the town doesn't want to be an ISP, they're just putting up the infrastructure and will rent space on the lines to ISPs that will offer service.

Plus, the whole "government will fuck it up" bullshit - it was either nothing or have the government put something into place since the "almighty market" could handle it on its own.

 

[frostedflakes]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: KK
I don't like the thoughts of government handling anything as they will find a way to fuck it up. With this case, if it's against minnesota law to fund it they way they were trying to, then one of two things need to happen. 1, they need to change the minnesota law to now allow it, or 2 find another way to fund it.

But Minnesota law does allow it. It's being set up as like a utility or a public convenience which allows for the use of bonds. Plus, the town doesn't want to be an ISP, they're just putting up the infrastructure and will rent space on the lines to ISPs that will offer service.

Plus, the whole "government will fuck it up" bullshit - it was either nothing or have the government put something into place since the "almighty market" could handle it on its own.

I didn't realize the city wasn't going to act as the service provider. Why is the teclo against this? Are they afraid another company is going to come in, lease the lines, and put them out of business? If that's the case, why don't they lease the lines themselves?

EDIT: Are you sure about this? It sounds to me like the city is laying the infrastructure and providing telephone, cable, and internet services with the fiber. No mention about leasing the lines to anybody else.

 

[Steve]

I remember reading years ago about Glasgow, KY becoming its own ISP and deploying its own broadband. Did they ever go through this?

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: KK
I don't like the thoughts of government handling anything as they will find a way to fuck it up. With this case, if it's against minnesota law to fund it they way they were trying to, then one of two things need to happen. 1, they need to change the minnesota law to now allow it, or 2 find another way to fund it.

But Minnesota law does allow it. It's being set up as like a utility or a public convenience which allows for the use of bonds. Plus, the town doesn't want to be an ISP, they're just putting up the infrastructure and will rent space on the lines to ISPs that will offer service.

Plus, the whole "government will fuck it up" bullshit - it was either nothing or have the government put something into place since the "almighty market" could handle it on its own.

I didn't realize the city wasn't going to act as the service provider. Why is the teclo against this? Are they afraid another company is going to come in, lease the lines, and put them out of business? If that's the case, why don't they lease the lines themselves?

Is that a joke? They have a virtual monopoly right now. The city is building infrastructure that will force them to compete fairly.

 

[CountZero]

Can someone explain the logic behind not letting the government compete? As one person already pointed the government is typically less efficient. I assume there is (or was) a good reason to bother putting such a thing on the books but it isn't clear to me what it is.