Octopussy2
Premium
join:2003-03-30
Batavia, IL | reply to JTRockville
Re: It's simple folks...
Yes, Comcast. |
|
JTRockville
Data Ho
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
clubs:
 ·LINGO
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·surpasshosting
 ·Verizon FIOS
| reply to Combat Chuck
Looks like TV is provided by the muni:
»www.click-network.com/Business/T···ault.htm
But network services are only provided solely by 3rd parties:
Residential network services are provided by THREE local companies:
»www.click-network.com/Business/H···ISPs.htm
Business network services are provided by FIVE local companies:
»www.click-network.com/Business/L···Page.htm
I'd guess Tacoma is also serviced by an ILEC (but I'm not sure who) and I'm pretty sure they're also serviced by an investor-owned cable company (I think Comcast). |
|
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| reply to JTRockville
said by JTRockville  :Correction: Tacoma leases their Click! network. yes but you as private industry still have to compete with the government run company correct?
--
Dear Hollywood:Shut up and dance monkey! |
|
JTRockville
Data Ho
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
clubs:
·LINGO
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·surpasshosting
·Verizon FIOS
| reply to Combat Chuck
said by Combat Chuck :However, correct me if I'm wrong but, no "muni" I've seen wants to do this they want to run the whole thing end to end. They want control; they want to implement a price point that is lower than the private sector to hell with what the real price (as determined by the market) is; in short, they want another carrot to dangle in front of voters and those who would donate to their campaign. Correction: Tacoma leases their Click! network. |
|
ricep5
Premium
join:2000-08-07
Jacksonville, FL
 ·AT&T Southeast
·AT&T CallVantage
·VoicePulse
 ·Comcast Formerly ..
| reply to oliphant
Agreed. Let munis build the infrastructure then let the content/delivery providers offer their wares to the end user in a competitive fashion.
No different than me choosing between UPS,FedEx, DHL etc. They use the same highways, airports and railroads.
Want cable? Check for what deal Comcast, Time Warner or whomever is offering.
Want broadband? check which bulk provider is offering the best value in bandwidth.
Want Telecom? Check to see what SBC, Qwest or Verizon/MCI is offering in a package. |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| reply to Combat Chuck
If no muni is willing to do it...perhaps this could be the compromise between business and state governments who until now are looking at nothing but banning munis. So long as munis are looking to totally run their show then the opposition has nothing to lose battling them to the death.
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network www.theanimenetwork.com |
|
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| reply to oliphant
said by oliphant :Personally I think the optimal situation for munis is line sharing. The bond pays for the deployment, then private content providers provide service paying the muni a lease or delivery fee per customer that pays back the bond. Then you have content providers trying to undercut each other because the margin isn't a given. And when one provider wants to cap you, their email sucks, their TOS/AUP is restrictive or their latest price increase is the last straw...you're only a phonecall away from switching. I agree with you on this, I feel the best situation would be for local governments that so choose to run fiber and whatever infrastructure needed to support that fiber and then lease out the lines to whoever wants to use them.
However, correct me if I'm wrong but, no "muni" I've seen wants to do this they want to run the whole thing end to end. They want control; they want to implement a price point that is lower than the private sector to hell with what the real price (as determined by the market) is; in short, they want another carrot to dangle in front of voters and those who would donate to their campaign.
I see the broadband conundrum as being similar to the issue of roads at the beginning of the age of the automobile (that being that there weren't enough and those that were there were built for the horse and buggy); the problem wasn't a lack of automobiles (or providers in this case), it was a lack of infrastructure.
--
Dear Hollywood:Shut up and dance monkey! |
|
KoolMoe
Aw Man
Premium
join:2001-02-14
Annapolis, MD
clubs:
·Verizon FIOS
·Speakeasy
| reply to oliphant
I absolutely agree. Muni deployments probably shouldn't go beyond infrastructure. Rent the lines at a cost, each provider able to negotiate their own rates.
Either that or force the ILECs to divest their infrastructure into completely separate entities. Local monoplies who control both the lines and the service are a recipe for the lack of innovation and deployment we're already experiencing.
Eminent Domain is a terrible concept, IMO. But maybe for once it could be used in a good way - to force ILECs and cable companies to sell their infrastructure to the state/county government for a 'fair price' then let those companies compete on their actual merits instead of their monopoly power.
KM
--
eLearning and Website Design | Need an LMS? | Need an LMS & eCommerce solution? |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| reply to brisonic
As I see it consumers are looking for 3 things...product availability/deployment, provider choice and freedom not from having to pay, but simply freedom from the profiteering that is commonplace with double digit rate increases and/or cuts in service.
While I don't think muni BB should be forced upon taxpayers if a municipality puts on a ballot a bond measure to fund deployment that is paid back by revenues, the people should have that option.
Personally I think the optimal situation for munis is line sharing. The bond pays for the deployment, then private content providers provide service paying the muni a lease or delivery fee per customer that pays back the bond. Then you have content providers trying to undercut each other because the margin isn't a given. And when one provider wants to cap you, their email sucks, their TOS/AUP is restrictive or their latest price increase is the last straw...you're only a phonecall away from switching.
Then from this you kill the monopoly and the likes of Time Warner, SBC or even smaller ISPs like Sonic.net and DSL Extreme have access to customers of another incumbants area.
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network www.theanimenetwork.com |
|
