Earlier quoted context omitted.
When you have a real or de-facto monopoly you just assume you can get away with poor/overpriced service. Most corporate bean counters making such decisions don't take into account the second-order effects you describe, until they materialize into a real problem.
At which point they choose lobbying to double down on monopolyship over caring.
Comcast has a lot to lose if municipal broadband takes off
41–50 of 131 posts
Re: Comcast has a lot to lose if municipal broadband takes off
#42My colleague argues that it's ok for Time Warner Spectrum/Comcast to control specific areas and districts because they laid the pipe and own the last mile (when they've decided to). I try and argue that it's anti-competitive and that I shouldn't be held to ransom by 'Rectum for $60/mo (their minimum) if I want reliable internet. I do see where he's coming from though but I don't know how to counter those arguments as…
Re: Comcast has a lot to lose if municipal broadband takes off
#43Best phone call I've made in the past few years was canceling my ~$100 Comcast internet plan in favor of my municipality's $50 gigabit plan. A year in and haven't had so much as a hiccup in service.
I have Comcast and I WFH and at least once per month I have a daytime outage of several hours. They're response is usually, "it'll be back up soon, goodbye." I would pay MORE to have municipal internet if I didn't have to put up with Comcast anymore.
Re: Comcast has a lot to lose if municipal broadband takes off
#44Re: Comcast has a lot to lose if municipal broadband takes off
#45My colleague argues that it's ok for Time Warner Spectrum/Comcast to control specific areas and districts because they laid the pipe and own the last mile (when they've decided to). I try and argue that it's anti-competitive and that I shouldn't be held to ransom by 'Rectum for $60/mo (their minimum) if I want reliable internet. I do see where he's coming from though but I don't know how to counter those arguments as…
It depends on who laid the fiber. In the context of cable companies like Comcast, almost all of the fiber was built with private money. Cable companies were historically not regulated as telecommunications carriers, which means they didn't get whatever subsidies were available for deploying telephone service to various places. In fact, the opposite is true. Municipalities generally treat cable-company contracts as a way to get freebies. A standard contract will require the company to pay 5% of gross revenues to the municipality, plus various goodies (wiring up municipal buildings with fiber, lump-sum contributions, etc.) That is on top of the rental fees paid to the power or telephone company for space on the poles.
That is very different from how, for example, water and sewer lines are built. In almost every county, water and sewer lines are paid for by mandatory fees paid to the county when you build a house. Most people don't realize it because it gets rolled into the price of the house. But in the county where I live, for example, the builder pays about $25,000 to the county in fees to hook up to the public water/sewer system.
Re: Comcast has a lot to lose if municipal broadband takes off
#46I think municipal fiber is great (we're doing it in rural parts of Maryland right now). That said, throwing around the word "competition" in the context of municipal broadband is disingenuous. Government-supported services don't "compete" with private services, they supplant them. Where municipalities offer water, sewer, or trash pickup, there is almost never any private "competition" for those services.
I wonder if cities could inspire more competition in the ISP market by making it easier for a new company to wire up a town. Another model would be for the city to provide fiber to each house as part of standard infrastructure that any ISP can provide data over. That way ISPs would be competing on price and service--not on who happens to own the wires running through your neighborhood.
Re: Comcast has a lot to lose if municipal broadband takes off
#47My colleague argues that it's ok for Time Warner Spectrum/Comcast to control specific areas and districts because they laid the pipe and own the last mile (when they've decided to). I try and argue that it's anti-competitive and that I shouldn't be held to ransom by 'Rectum for $60/mo (their minimum) if I want reliable internet. I do see where he's coming from though but I don't know how to counter those arguments as…
Pacific bell laid the cable. The Rockefellers dug the oil they sold for less than the competition could. The thing is none of these things happened in a vacuum. Everything has externalities. People enjoy considering other people as independent creatures but we're all working within the limitations of each other. We grow up in hives, learn in hives, go to work in hives, and eventually form hives we die in that we like…
Re: Comcast has a lot to lose if municipal broadband takes off
#48My colleague argues that it's ok for Time Warner Spectrum/Comcast to control specific areas and districts because they laid the pipe and own the last mile (when they've decided to). I try and argue that it's anti-competitive and that I shouldn't be held to ransom by 'Rectum for $60/mo (their minimum) if I want reliable internet. I do see where he's coming from though but I don't know how to counter those arguments as…
> I do see where he's coming from though but I don't know how to counter those arguments as I don't know the history of how all the fiber got laid and who actually "owns" any of it. It seems like the phone lines or water that it's a public good at this point. It depends on who laid the fiber. In the context of cable companies like Comcast, almost all of the fiber was built with private money. Cable companies were his…
Re: Comcast has a lot to lose if municipal broadband takes off
#49I researched it awhile back, whether the social benefit would outweigh the social harm by eliminating "competition" is the criteria used to decide if something should be a utility and with Internet it's a no brainer.
Re: Comcast has a lot to lose if municipal broadband takes off
#50Good. Internet access is more and more a utility like water and electricity. Municipal broadband in my town works great and is more than 100x the speed of comcast at a cheaper price. As another poster said, would you want Comcast providing water to your neighborhood?
I think people misunderstand Comcast. They're arguably more in the business of retailing/financial services than anything having to do with TCP/IP or DOCSIS. Americans as a whole are horrible at managing money. They don't pay their bills on time, have tons of credit card debt, etc. This isn't my opinion, it's cold hard reality: look at the subprime crisis, debt burden, charge-offs/delinquencies, etc. Frankly, the cro…