dslreports logo
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery


how-to block ads

Search Topic:
share rss forum feed

Tavistock NJ

Kansas City ISPs want same deal KC gave Google

Other Kansas City ISPs want the same deal KC gave Google. Now this was inevitable. If a gov't discriminates between vendors and doesn't go thru open bidding processes, they will be challenged in court.


To entice Google Inc. to build its ultra-high-speed fiber network there, Kansas City, Kan., and Kansas City, Mo., offered the Internet company sweeteners including several free or discounted city services. Now, Time Warner Cable Inc. and AT&T Inc., the incumbent Internet and TV providers in town, are angling to get the same deal.

Among the sweeteners granted Google by both cities are free office space and free power for Google's equipment, according to the agreement on file with the cities. The company also gets the use of all the cities' "assets and infrastructure"—including fiber, buildings, land and computer tools, for no charge. Both cities are even providing Google a team of government employees "dedicated to the project."

Time Warner Cable has been negotiating with Kansas City, Kan.,to get a "parity agreement" granting it the same concessions as Google got, the city and the company says. Time Warner Cable has already signed such a deal with Kansas City, Mo.

AT&T also has approached Kansas City, Mo., for the same deal, according to a person familiar with the matter.

All of a sudden, the cost to Kansas City taxpayers is going up and up for this Google deal.

Snohomish, WA

1 recommendation

I'd be seeking retroactive compansation for all previousley paid RoW, inspections, meeting franchise costs, and extras.
this could become VERY expensive for the cities, FOREVER even if google walks

Jim Kirk
reply to FFH

Come on, Tommy. Don't be a Google hater.

Ai Otsukaholic
reply to FFH

When they pony up $70 Gb service they can have it.


reply to FFH

Perhaps at&t and TWC should provide the same level of service and quality of service to get those perks?

Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Tulsa, OK
reply to FFH

No way the incumbents should get the same deal unless they also agree to build out FTTH and sell it cheap and unrestricted.

Snohomish, WA

2 edits

1 recommendation

reply to jjeffeory

Google hasn't provided anything yet, where the city provided and guaranteed those advantages to Google in advance.
Hardly a level playing field. also At&T( and probably TWC do to franchise requirements) has the burden of serving EVERY house, on demand rather than being able to cherry pick ONLY those that pay in advance and agree to be installed during googles flash build schedule.
Face it, these rules are VERY different then when At&t and TWC built out.
That may not be a bad thing, but it does show yet another cost shift from the privately owned network onto the public without any ownership rights.

In fact Google only said their service would be cost competitive with existing services until the recent price announcements, so google COULD have said the were going to charge $100's more.
The cities had no legal way of knowing that all their freebies would be repaid.
It's not hating google to say the city gov't appears to have acted in capricious and irresponsible manner towards their fiduciary duty to the citizens.
And those of you not totally enamored of Google, might recognize this if in each place above it says Google, instead you subsituted say, Lightsquared...would you then feel so good about each of the cities actions in response to the vague promises that LS (as above) made? Or perhaps the promises were stronger in the backroom deals it took to only have learned about these conditions and concessions made to please LightSquared?

Those of you who complain thread after thread about the Corp./Gov't conspirisies secret handshakes and bribies
yet choose to ignore this, most obvious example just because you TRUST Google to "do no evil" and imagine they are doing something you want for your benefit are in serious denial.