Reviews:
 ·Optimum Online
 ·Verizon FiOS
| core reasons at&t, comcast, century tel block any competition
polticians sell monopolies to the highest bidder
municipalities seem to think that being rural and getting away from it all includes no broadband and/or cell phone service is something that's "cool" and a selling point-- good luck with that. |
|
|
|
 baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI
·Comcast
 ·magicjack.com
| said by tmc8080:at&t, comcast, century tel block any competition
polticians sell monopolies to the highest bidder
municipalities seem to think that being rural and getting away from it all includes no broadband and/or cell phone service is something that's "cool" and a selling point-- good luck with that.
This might be the lamest repsonse ever. I have an idea....go to a rural area, and count how many restruants there are per square mile. Then, go to NYC, and count how many restruants there are per square mile.
NYC will have more; why? BECAUSE THERE ARE MORE PEOPLE, AND BUSINESS' TARGET AREAS THAT THEY CAN SELL MORE IN. When you move to a rural area, there are some advantages over a more urban area; generally cleaner, more house for the money, more land, less traffic; one of the trade offs is there is generally no competition commercially. Maybe one movie theater, 2 or three restruants, etc. That's just how it is, as I have lived in both areas.
If an ISP thought it would be profitable to wire an area, they would do it. Competition has nothing to do with this argument. ISPs make agreements with the municipalities, and they do have certain addendums where they dont have to service every home, as well it should be. If someone choses to buy a house a rural area, they should make sure a decent ISP can get there, if its really important to them.
There are always options of the sat-co broadband providers. They dont have the same costs associated with the wire guys. Maybe the solution is develop some program where if a wired company wont go to your home, you can get the sat-co broadband; and the government can either subsizide those funds, or give some funds to the sat-cos to improve their speeds. |
|
| ISPs make enough money to wire this country three times over with fiber. They won't because it'd hurt the mythical bottom line.
People who defend ISPs staunch stance against wiring rural areas with decent speeds are heavily deluded. Yes, the you might have to eat the initial investment.. but who is really hurt here? The ISPs will make that drop in the pond back tenfold in a manner weeks and gain customers. |
|
 ansarSearch for HighSpeed
join:2004-12-10
Utica, MS | reply to baineschile
What about the Universal Slush Fund? I would love to have all the money back that I have paid into it over the years.  |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | reply to slynerve
Wow, PDOOMA much?
The bottom line most definitely isn't mythical. Is yours? Also, with a 1000% ROI in a matter of weeks, it's unfathomable as to why these silly ISPs haven't built the infrastructure yet  |
|
1 edit | reply to slynerve
It can be understood that ISPs don't wire every house if there's not enough potential buyers to justify the cost, as you have stated.
However, how do you justify the fact that ISPs shoot down every proposal by other entities to wire the same places they refuse to wire?
--
B.S. in Mathematics
Graduate student: M.S. in Mathematics |
|
| reply to tmc8080
i live in rural missouri.mediacom,centurylink,socket and tranquility that i can recall.granted the last two ride ctl's copper.so how many would it take to make you happy. |
|
| reply to tmc8080
socket and tranquility ride ctels lines here.also mediacom has most of the cable subs.charter is here but small in this area. |
|
| reply to openbox9
said by openbox9:Wow, PDOOMA much?
The bottom line most definitely isn't mythical. Is yours? Also, with a 1000% ROI in a matter of weeks, it's unfathomable as to why these silly ISPs haven't built the infrastructure yet
Wow, really? What kind of world are you living in where the monetary drop in the pond it'd take to get rural communities going would at all hurt companies worth millions, perhaps billions?
Excuse me for not playing the woe is the telco card. I have personal experience in trying to get a WISP going and it was a nightmare of redtape and local telco and cable blockading everything.
Prices from other markets and the fact America is largely a duopoly of cable and DSL/fiber, along with TV price hikes, well. They'd more than make up that investment in giving a scattering of people access to speeds above 3MB. |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to openbox9
said by openbox9:Wow, PDOOMA much?
The bottom line most definitely isn't mythical. Is yours? Also, with a 1000% ROI in a matter of weeks, it's unfathomable as to why these silly ISPs haven't built the infrastructure yet
Major POTS build outs ended a long time ago. So where is the USF going?
USF could have paid for universal fiber 20 times over, yet it just vanishes into thin air. |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to ansar
said by ansar:What about the Universal Slush Fund? I would love to have all the money back that I have paid into it over the years.
+1
The Universal Slush Fund just evaporates into thin air. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | reply to DataRiker
I agree. It needs to go away. We've been soaked by wasteful taxation long enough. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2
1 edit | reply to slynerve
How exactly do you define a "monetary drop in the pond"? Apparently the government has wasted billions on encouraging buildouts with little to show. Granted, private industry could likely do it more efficiently, but it's not a "drop in the bucket".
I'm sure you realize the significant differences of wireless providers versus wireline, so I'm not sure your point there except to suggest that starting a business is challenging.
My point is that a lot of people appear disillusioned as to how much money infrastructure projects can cost. |
|
| reply to openbox9
said by openbox9:I agree. It needs to go away. We've been soaked by wasteful taxation long enough.
I'd rather the ISPs pay back the last 15 years of USF fees and the $200 billion in tax grants they received as per the '96 Telecom Act. Then use that money to buy up the copper lines and build out FTTH. |
|
| reply to openbox9
It isn't the government's fault that the corporations evaporated the funds they were given.
Private industry? Don't make me laugh. If it were up to them, we wouldn't even have 768K download speeds.
Why do you feel the government is to blame and not the people wasting the money they were given? You don't want the government telling them how to spend taxpayer money, yet it's the government's fault they wasted it? |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | What? It's not the government's fault that regulators failed in their responsibilities? It's not the governments fault for continuing to drop money left and right with no accountability or return on investment? Accountability, accountability, accountability. |
|
| Then where's the accountability of the corporations who wasted the money? |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | Ask your elected officials and their appointed regulators. |
|
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | reply to slynerve
Let's say you are a subdivision trustee responsible for making sure the common grounds in the subdivision are mowed. You contract with a neighborhood kid. He sends bills, which you regularly approve for payment, but he never mows anything. In fact you learn that he has subcontracted the job and they mowed once and then never again because the kid didn't pay them. The kid keeps sending bills and you keep approving them for payment.
Who do the subdivision members hold accountable for wasted funds and overgrown common grounds? |
|
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | reply to sonicmerlin
Why the hell would we want to buy the copper lines instead of just running new fiber and letting the copper rot? |
|
