CylonRed
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-06
Bloom County
| reply to yock
Re: And I DON'T want to see them
If all of the property is already owned then they can't do that very well and if they did buy from a current land owner then they have the same problems already mentioned - one landowner holding a neighborhood hostage being one.
To be economical - the company would need to pay one amount or else face plenty of litigation if owners ever found out they got paid a lot less then someone else.
Strategically - I would probably decide to do it the way they currently are - less total risk overall. |
|
Chainzz
Aka Snippy
join:2004-07-26
Amherstburg, ON
| reply to yock
said by yock  :Isn't the value of your real estate more important than data services? You're talking about a net loss to your property value so that others may reap the benefits. I'm thinking property values will suffer with no data access, I will never buy another lot or house without highspeed....damn they can throw a node in my yard along with some bushes or tree's. |
|
yock
TFTC
Premium
join:2000-11-21
Fairfield, OH
| reply to CylonRed
said by CylonRed :If all of the property is already owned then they can't do that very well and if they did buy from a current land owner then they have the same problems already mentioned - one landowner holding a neighborhood hostage being one. Indeed, and I should have prefaced my statement with that bit of knowledge. It was meant as hindsight, and a way to avoid these things in the future. Easements are not fair to the property owner.
To be economical - the company would need to pay one amount or else face plenty of litigation if owners ever found out they got paid a lot less then someone else.
Strategically - I would probably decide to do it the way they currently are - less total risk overall.
The utility company could always offer a flat rate for any property owners who would volunteer for the service. They could partner with home builders to arrange these things with regards to new development.
The problem I have here is that the local government is giving them permission to put something on property that they don't own. If we are to keep the system of easement in this country then we should demand that our local officials consult with property owners prior to granting easements. |
|
yock
TFTC
Premium
join:2000-11-21
Fairfield, OH
| reply to Chainzz
said by Chainzz :said by yock :Isn't the value of your real estate more important than data services? You're talking about a net loss to your property value so that others may reap the benefits. I'm thinking property values will suffer with no data access, I will never buy another lot or house without highspeed....damn they can throw a node in my yard along with some bushes or tree's. First of all, I don't think we're there yet, and it will never be universal. Depending on the property location, rural, urban, or suburban, property value may fluctuyate little or not at all if it doesn't have broadband access.
Secondly, AT&T isn't paying for the landscaping here. As the homeowner, it would be your responsibility to finance hundreds of dollars of landscaping, not to mention ongoing maintenance, to hide this stuff. You would then also assume liability for any damage that your landscaping caused to AT&T's boxes. Root encroachment, tool damage, you name it. Your homeowner's insurance would reflect this new liability too, also affecting the net change in property value. |
|
madmax2000
Premium
join:2007-04-25
Lookout, KY | reply to CylonRed
and this is why Canada is getting yanked by bell and throttling for people like you prevent competition. |
|
CylonRed
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-06
Bloom County | I wish i could follow your post but I can't... |
|
