marigoldsGainfully employed, finallyPremium,MVM
Saint Louis, MO
reply to tshirt
said by tshirt:You have it backwards. KCK was the PR deal (they are the lower income community). KCMO is about 3 times the area and people of KCK and almost twice the per capita income.
It was KCK that cut the deals, as far as I know, the KCMO build was just a PR add-on when KCMO people complained about redlining (which is actually the basis of this whole project, I don't think you could find another "Cherrypicking" example as clear as the Google fiber selection process)
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
Geographic Information Science researcher
I'm not talk redlining as in Income level, it was about COOPERATION.
KCK WAs the original selected target because they were willing to bend over backwards for the actual build (not silly PR stuff like renaming the city, like Topika did) KC, MO was not announced until a few months later, AFTER complaints. KC, MO appears to begetting more benefit as the payments to the power company for pole rights were pledged to reduce power rates.
Either way this experiment is not about ROI in either KC and thus doesn't set a model/example for the traditional ISPs.