The Rise Of The Rural Super Telco > Try a time machine!

said by Mr Matt:

If you take a ride back in a time machine to the 20's and 30's, you will find that most rural telephone service provided by Cooperatives! The Cooperatives were financed by low interest Rural Electrification Administration Loans.

With the Senate and Congress in the back pocket of the Broadband ISP's, I do not hold out to much hope for deployment of rural broadband soon.

said by me1212:

Ya know it makes me wonder how, WISPs can stay in business where it is not profitable enough for the big ISPs?

said by iansltx:

There's actually the $7.2B (beeeeeeelllllion) broadband grant in the ARA. So yes something like Rural Electrification for broadband could happen.

said by me1212:

Y can they not do something like that with broadband?

Ya know it makes me wonder how, WISPs can stay in business where it is not profitable enough for the big ISPs?

said by yaplej:

Rightfully so?! That's exactly how the phone companies got started! So it was OK to give a ton of money to build the phone companies networks, but now that we need another one to compete with them its not. Hmmm I can smell a double standard here.

said by d_l:

I think the taxpayer funding idea is an urban myth that some people just want to believe. They cling to it as if it is their religion.

said by NormanS:

Where do people come up with this stuff?

said by patcat88:

The USF "govt taxes" that are collected built those phone networks, or the PUC imposed universal service regulations, which allowed AT&T to justify price increases by putting that money into a internal fund towards universal service buildout.

said by patcat88:

I belive the USF was created as part of the 1984 divesture.

said by NormanS:

So my question still stands: "Where to people get this 'public taxpayer funded' nonsense about the deployment of the telephone infrastructure?"

said by NormanS:

In all, I'd wonder if even 10% of the telephone network was government funded; and none prior to 1949. It just seems so much like a "Red Herring".

said by openbox9:

If the local cooperatives involve taxpayer funds backing them, then yes, the cable and telephone companies would likely cry foul...and rightfully so IMO.

said by battleop:

The "last mile" for the Wisp is much cheaper than a land line company. For example, if you lived down a 1 mile road by your self the telco would have to either bury or string cable to your place. That would include pull boxes or telephone poles. The extra costs of labor and materials would be VERY expensive.

A Wisp only needs a good line of site (or NLOS for 900) to get you a connection. The cost of the install and equipment at your place would be well below $1,000 for every thing.

There are a few small rural Telcos using Wisp gear but very few. I am surprised that more are not using more wireless in their plant.

said by me1212:

Y can they not do something like that with broadband?

said by hottboiinnc:

What would make more sense is to form a Co-Op that would pick up these areas and rewire them.

Many co-ops around the country are laying FTTH and many have been a TV provider for years, long before ATT and VZ even thought about doing it : »www.horizontechnology.net/ . based in Ohio and has been offering TV for at least 5 years now.

said by hottboiinnc:

VZ, ATT and Qwest are also get money from the USF so i don't see what the big deal is.
~snip~

said by viperlmw:

The USF money the RBOCs get from USF is from E-Rate, not from the High Cost Fund. Independents/co-ops get both (this includes Frontier, CenturyTel, Windstream, etc.).