Dodge
Premium
join:2002-11-27
clubs:  | A whole institute huh?
How about just send a memo to Verizon and Comcast and ask how much they want to wire the missing areas? No matter how much they say it will still be less than running an "institute" |
|
SierraRob
join:2007-01-10
Prather, CA
 ·Unwired Broadband ..
| Sure, and then Verizon and Comcast will gleefully take the money, and drag their feet, and never actually build out to the underserved areas, and make all sorts of excuses why they can't, and things will stay just as they are.
Public corporations run by Wall Street cannot be counted on to solve this problem. |
|
viperlmw
Premium
join:2005-01-25
 ·Qwest.net
| said by SierraRob  :Sure, and then Verizon and Comcast will gleefully take the money, and drag their feet, and never actually build out to the underserved areas, and make all sorts of excuses why they can't, and things will stay just as they are. Public corporations run by Wall Street cannot be counted on to solve this problem. I would disagree with your first point. The State of Idaho contracted Qwest and a WISP (I can't remember who) to install Broadband in numerous cities/towns with no service. The deal was, the state picks up the tab for 1/2 the cost, and the carriers were under commercial contract to meet certain milestones/completion at certain time intervals. The WISP was contracted because Verizon would not agree to those terms in their old GTE/ConTel areas. Qwest, however, jumped all over that money, installed new fiber mux's and DSLAMS in numerous areas. Total time, about 18 months from conception to completion. Idaho is now pretty well wired, with every Qwest CO serving DSL. And Idaho is about as rural as it gets. Some DSLAMS were installed in towns no bigger than 500 people. So it can be done with the proper incentives. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
| reply to Dodge
This new "Broadband Institute" just replaces one Massachusetts already had called the "Wireless and Broadband Development Fund", which accomplished nothing. All they did was up the money set aside for that fund from $25,000,000 to $40,000,00 in the new bill and transfer the money and obligations of the original fund to the new fund.
See here for the details:
»www.mass.gov/legis/bills/senate/···2796.pdf
the Massachusetts Technology Park Corporation, established pursuant to section 3 of chapter 40J of the General Laws, shall transfer the balance of the Wireless and Broadband Development Fund to the Massachusetts Broadband Incentive Fund. And here is where the government drones hand out the pork to the party faithful:
The institute may provide and pay for such advisory services and technical assistance as may be necessary or desired to carry out its purposes.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? |
|
neil0311
join:2005-07-24
Marietta, GA
| reply to Dodge
Re: A whole institute huh?
said by Dodge :How about just send a memo to Verizon and Comcast and ask how much they want to wire the missing areas? No matter how much they say it will still be less than running an "institute" That's MA. Nothing worth doing isn't worth spending taxpayer dollars to do, along with as many hacks and relatives of the legislators can be hired.
We didn't get broadband in Leominster until 2003, when the Comcast-ATT Broadband merger went into effect. I agree, wouldn't it be more cost effective to see what the blockers are for the major providers like Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon to provide access, and then provide tax incentives and direct subsidies to allow those providers to connect. Seems much easier than another drain on taxpayers. |
|
ninjatutle
Premium
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA | reply to SierraRob
Didn't Verizon do something like this in Pennsylvania? I remember people here whinnying and whiny about it. I thought I would never hear the end of it but I guess I have. |
|
Cabal
Premium
join:2007-01-21
Boston, MA | reply to Dodge
Yet another epic waste of tax dollars in Massachusetts. Who'da thunk it? |
|
Josey Whales
@embarqhsd.net | reply to ninjatutle
PA set a mandate for its largest telcom providers that they must have 100% broadband coverage 1.5Mb/s. Verizon and Embarq by 2010, others by 2011. They gave tax breaks = to the cost in 2006 to finance it. |
|
PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
| reply to viperlmw
Qwest has done a good job of deploying rural DSL here, too. We have both Verizon and Qwest territory here, and the boundary between Qwest and Verizon is very interesting: you see those mini-DSLAMs that Qwest uses, installed along the roads in their territory. On the Verizon side of the line (ex-GTE), as in Idaho, Verizon has told them to go pound sand.
In D.C., Verizon's lobbyists have been saying that they want USF-type money before deploying further, so subscribers in their lower-ROI rural areas are essentially being used as leverage to get more gov't $$$.
The biggest problem with the small-town areas in Massachusetts is that they have the misfortunre of being in Verizon terrority. |
|
