31–40 of 86 posts
Would it make sense for the municipality to own the pipes that run in the city ? Like some cities own the sewer pipes. Could it be an infrastructure that the city builds, owns, maintains and rents to ISP ? The city would have a full control on how many houses are connected. That is the type of investments that a city is suited for (i.e. large upfront cost financed by bonds). AT&T, Charter, Comcast, they have no incen…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine that: company gets free money from the government to do such-and-such thing but isn't strictly required to do it, then they take the free money and don't do the thing. It's almost like corporations are self-interested and un-altruistic.
I don't know why you'd be railing against the company here for acting in it's best interest (exactly as you'd expect) rather than the state for giving away money with no strings attached. A private business sure as hell wouldn't be so foolish as to sign such a contract.
I previously had Comcast/Xfinity, which was reliable, but felt absolutely scammy due to constantly changing pricing with multi-year contracts. Talking to a human for basic tasks like upgrading or canceling service was nearly impossible. Apparently their chatbot is capable of these tasks, but I could never get it to work.
> despite billions in tax breaks, regulatory favors, and subsidies, companies like AT&T have long refused to upgrade low-income and minority Cleveland neighborhoods to fiber. There is a very easy solution to this. Electric utilities should be required to lay fiber along with electric. They can choose to offer internet (better) or offer fiber with a choice of carriers. EPB in Chattanooga has been providing fiber to ho…
If the municipality owns the poles and the power company this is comparatively easier. In places that own both, like Traverse City in Michigan, Chattanooga TN, or Longmont CO, this model can be incredibly effective. The problem, at least in my part of the world (Michigan) is that most municipalities do not own the poles or the power company. The power company is instead a large publicly traded corporation, albeit wit…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep. It's messed up.
I'd love to hear the rationalization for this one
"a public entity may provide telecommunication services within its boundaries after issuing a request for competitive sealed bids to provide telecommunication services and receiving less than 3 qualified bids from private providers."
If you get enough bids, the assumption is that the price is competitive and therefore it's cheaper to use a private company and not have the gov't itself do the infrastructure work.
I just moved back to Cleveland, and I signed up for Cleveland Broadband (clevelandbroadband.com), which is incredible! I pay $50/mo for 1 Gb/s download and upload speeds with no contract or temporary introductory pricing. The best part is the customer service, which I've only had to use twice while initially setting it up, but it's a direct line to a person who physically came to my place within an hour and was super…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the municipality owns the poles and the power company this is comparatively easier. In places that own both, like Traverse City in Michigan, Chattanooga TN, or Longmont CO, this model can be incredibly effective. The problem, at least in my part of the world (Michigan) is that most municipalities do not own the poles or the power company. The power company is instead a large publicly traded corporation, albeit wit…
In Michigan only telecommunications companies, power companies, cable companies, and municipalities can be on the poles. So, an Internet only company is excluded. Michigan also has one of the most unique laws here. A municipality needs to put out an RFP to build the broadband network. If it gets three or more qualified bids it cannot proceed.
Would it make sense for the municipality to own the pipes that run in the city ? Like some cities own the sewer pipes. Could it be an infrastructure that the city builds, owns, maintains and rents to ISP ? The city would have a full control on how many houses are connected. That is the type of investments that a city is suited for (i.e. large upfront cost financed by bonds). AT&T, Charter, Comcast, they have no incen…
Would it make sense for the municipality to own the pipes that run in the city ? Like some cities own the sewer pipes. Could it be an infrastructure that the city builds, owns, maintains and rents to ISP ? The city would have a full control on how many houses are connected. That is the type of investments that a city is suited for (i.e. large upfront cost financed by bonds). AT&T, Charter, Comcast, they have no incen…
Of course, that doesn't stop Comcast, Centurylink, Google Fiber, etc. from running their own networks, and UTOPIA's coverage generally doesn't overlap where these other ISPs already have infrastructure.
Would it make sense for the municipality to own the pipes that run in the city ? Like some cities own the sewer pipes. Could it be an infrastructure that the city builds, owns, maintains and rents to ISP ? The city would have a full control on how many houses are connected. That is the type of investments that a city is suited for (i.e. large upfront cost financed by bonds). AT&T, Charter, Comcast, they have no incen…
When I say installing fiber ducts, I mean trenches with ducts that have exits on every address. And the microfibers are blown through those and you have a fiber optic cable to your door.