pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
 ·Comcast
| Contradiction?
Because municipal electric utilities, government facilities and schools are significant users of advanced telecommunications services, these communities have built-in "anchor tenants" that can ensure a sizable revenue stream and lower project risks.
And then later...
Municipalities today are careful to avoid cross-subsidization.
Well what is it going to be? Either other municipal utilities subsidize broadband or they don't? Maybe something just isn't clear here. Can anyone explain it?
The fact is (and this WAS posted on the Tri-Cities Broadband page) that most municipal broadband networks are in fact subsidized by other municipally owned utilities. That's one of the reasons they can offer service at a discount. Is it fair that non-subscribers to broadband have to pay increased utility bills so that other can have cheap broadband?
--
Saying that Microsoft has a monopoly in Operating Systems because one is too lazy to learn a different OS is like saying that Ford has a monopoly in cars because one is too lazy to find a Honda dealership.
[text was edited by author 2003-05-22 10:29:08] |
|
Ericdsa
@attbi.com | You work for Comcast, no? Why do I have to subsidize video customers by paying more for my HSI? |
|
Octopussy2
Premium
join:2003-03-30
Batavia, IL
| reply to pnh102
Whoa. Wait a minute. The utility that was to be built in the Tri-Cities was to be a "stand alone" utility paid for by subscriber fees. It was going to be backed by GO Bonds. Where was it listed that this was going to be subsidized by another utility here, in the Tri-Cities, on our citizen support page (www.tricitybroadband.com)? |
|
ericdsa
join:2003-05-22
Fort Lauderdale, FL | reply to pnh102
Comcast has no problem with me subsidizing it's video subs. |
|
asdfdfdf
@xtraport.net
| reply to pnh102
I think you are trying awfully hard to read something into this that isn't there.
Dealing with the statement you quoted.
1. since many, if not all, electric utilities have upgraded infrastructure (such as fiber), for reasons tied to the distribution of electricity, and since these upgrades have led to excess communication capacity, the utilities are considering utilizing that infrastructure to develop new revenue streams, such as for communications. Clearly municipal electric utilities have an opportunity here to maximize the revenue generated by their present infrastructure.
There is nothing here that says that communications services will come out of the backs of electricity ratepayers.
2. Given that schools, government and municipal utilities all have increasing bandwidth needs, it makes sense that they would utilize any municipal bb system put into place and hence these are "sure reliable customers" who will be there long term. Hence the remark about reduced risk and a more reliable revenue stream. Presumably they would expense the services rendered to them out of their budgets wouldn't they or am I being too simpleminded? Why should this be interpreted as a subsidy? |
|
Rob Froelich
join:2000-03-26
Saint Charles, IL
clubs:
·Comcast
| reply to pnh102
Um, no other municipal entities buying service on a municipal network is not the same thing as a subsidy. It does mean that the other local government entities like the other utilities and schools are definitely going to buy service from the local broadband utility.
So, if you apply your logic here, if the schools or utilities are buying internet service from another company, for example Comcast, would you say they are subidizing Comcast? I think you should read the interview again, with the knowledge that schools and utilities are in area significant consumers of data networking services.
Finally, I don't know of anywhere that non-subscribers to broadband would be charged increased rates for other utilitities in order to finance a broadband network, I'm not a lawyer but I'm pretty certain thats highly illegal in most states.
--
Help! Help! I'm being oppressed!! |
|
lml2000
Whazzup
join:2000-08-17
Los Angeles, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to pnh102
said by pnh102  :
Because municipal electric utilities, government facilities and schools are significant users of advanced telecommunications services, these communities have built-in "anchor tenants" that can ensure a sizable revenue stream and lower project risks.
And then later...
Municipalities today are careful to avoid cross-subsidization.
Well what is it going to be? Either other municipal utilities subsidize broadband or they don't? Maybe something just isn't clear here. Can anyone explain it?
I think I can. On the first statement, the issue is assuring revenues to the BROADBAND OPERATION generated by the BROADBAND NEEDS of OTHER municipal departments (i.e. police, fire, library, admin). The second statement refers revenues generated by the services provided by OTHER MUNICIPAL DEPARTMENTS (i.e. power, water, public works) that could be used to SUBSIDIZE THE OPERATING EXPENSES of the broadband operation.
Baller is saying that the goal of the municipality should be to avoid applying REVENUES generated by services supplied by one department to help fund the OPERATING EXPENSES of another, in the instant case the municipal broadband entity. This should be distinguished from BROADBAND NEEDS of these other municipal departments who would otherwise have to contract out to a private network provider for such communication services. This is not a subsidy. Real revenues are being rec'd by the municipal broadband entity for real broadband services provided to these other departments. Bottom line, what you don't want, for example, is water revenues (generated by the supply of water service) to be applied to fund the operations of the broadband entity; what is OK is for the water utility to contract with the broadband entity for its communication services (voice, data, video).
Hope this helps. |
|
jakennedy
@dmotorworks.com
| reply to pnh102
Schools and other government facilities will have to pay for the service they utilize just like everyone else. This is natural and is not cross-subsidization. The question is will these distinct agencies have the option of choosing a commercial provider if it is more economical for them? |
|
Anonymous Coward
@pacbell.n
 from:
Rob Froelich
| reply to pnh102
About your sig...
Saying that Microsoft has a monopoly in Operating Systems because one is too lazy to learn a different OS is like saying that Ford has a monopoly in cars because one is too lazy to find a Honda dealership.
It should say something like:
Saying that Microsoft has a monopoly in Operating Systems because one is too lazy to learn a different OS is like saying that Ford has a monopoly in cars because one is too lazy to swim to Japan and swim back with it on ones back.
Microsoft puts about as many difficult obstacles in the path of changing OSes as the swim to Japan would be!
Tres,
An avid Linux user.
class5@--NO-SPAM--pacbell.net |
|
Rob Froelich
join:2000-03-26
Saint Charles, IL
clubs: | Hey I like that. I think Steve Ballmer would say that a swim to Japan would be awfully refreshing.
--
Help! Help! I'm being oppressed!! |
|
