After Five Years Of Fighting, Lafayette Gets Their Fiber Symmetrical 10Mbps($28.94), 30Mbps($44.95) and 50Mbps ($57.95) We've been tracking the deployment of municipally-owned fiber in Lafayette, Louisiana for years, the project being particularly notable for some of the sleazy efforts made by Cox and AT&T (then SBC) to kill it. Those efforts, back in 2005, included everything from hinting at exporting local support jobs if the deal was approved, to hiring push pollsters to try and convince locals that the government-controlled project would result in politicians rationing consumer TV viewing. Needless to say, Cox and Bellsouth lost. A few weeks ago, Lafayette Utilities System (LUS) unveiled their pricing for the service, offering triple play bundles ranging from $84.85 to $200, with downstream broadband services ranging from 10Mbps to 50Mbps (all symmetrical). LUS offers standalone symmetrical 10Mbps for $28.95, 30Mbps for $44.95, and 50Mbps for $57.95. There's no caps, no contracts, and no installation fee. Those prices handily beat not only local competitors Cox and AT&T (it's now pretty clear why they fought so hard), but carriers in other markets too. Comcast offers a 50Mbps tier in select markets for $139.95 (when bundled), but its upstream speed is 5Mbps. Verizon's 50Mbps/20Mbps service costs $144.95/month standalone, or $139.95 when bundled. The fastest speed AT&T currently offers customers is 18Mbps/1.5Mbps, which is $65 a month if you bundle TV service. According to the Lafayette Daily Advertiser, LUS began officially offering service yesterday after five years of debate. The service is being rolled out in four phases, with all customers expected to be able to receive service by 2011. The first customers were supposed to be online in January, but the launch was delayed by negotiations with broadcasters over channel lineups and prices. Phase I involves wiring two areas on opposite ends of the city. "This infrastructure will allow Lafayette to continue making great enhancements to our city during a time when many areas are experiencing a slowdown in development," City-Parish President Joey Durel, said in a prepared statement "Beyond these initial services, the LUS Fiber infrastructure will favorably position Lafayette for economic development and other opportunities to move our community forward." update: Joey Durel, Lafayette City-Parish President, stops by our comment section to leave a note: Thank you all for your comments. We are excited by the possibilities this brings to our community. We put together a very conservative business plan and should easily be able to sustain our pricing. Of course as programming costs go up, our prices will go up, and so will the competition. One thing not mentioned is the fact that we are also giving 100MBS peer to peer, for FREE. And, if this initiative doesn't live up to the expectations, my neck is on the chopping block. I think it is worth the minimal risk. And, by the way, this is not backed by the government, so taxpayers are not at risk. These are revenue bonds backed by our utilities system, and while there is some risk it is actually very low. Thanks again,
Joey Durel
Lafayette City-Parish President
|
  antwanpBeyond FM, Beyond AM, XM Satellite RadioPremium
join:2002-05-14
Cedar Hill, TX | You know... I would literally murder someone to get symmetrical 50Mbps...
Just sayin'... 
--
The Perils of Living in 3-D: »www.antwanpayne.com | |
|  |  TSI GabePremium,VIP
join:2007-01-03
Chatham, ON
kudos:2 | Re: You know... So are you going to kill me? 
 | |
| | | | | Re: You know... well you beat me, i'm going back into the corner with the 50/20.
(upload locked up durring test. actually gets the 20mbits up, i swear) | |
| | | | | said by TSI Gabe:So are you going to kill me? Not bad. In Japan though, that sucks when you can get 100/100 for $50. | |
| | | |
2 edits | Re: You know... if its like me its probably the router knocking the speed down. I have a 100/100 connection at work but we have things like snort running on the router that knock down the throughput.
We had to use a dell poweredge server as the router so we could anywhere near our 100/100 through the router.
The upload is 100 also but throughput is bad because of the router. | |
| | | | | | | Re: You know... had the same problem with our router. with deep packet inspection it could only handle 20mbit down. switched to a server to handle the speed. | |
|
| | |  meister_sdPremium
join:2006-01-29
La Mesa, CA
kudos:7 | said by cameronsfx:Not bad. In Japan though, that sucks when you can get 100/100 for $50. I'm going to have to move my server to my in-laws! They live in Tsukiji and have a slower connection now at about that same price using YahooBB. I think its 60/60. | |
| | | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: You know... But all the people you want to serve to are in the US right? Can you say "latency"?
I'm really curious as to how LUS is running their system hardware wise. Honestly if I knew how I'd woork for something like this back home in Texas. | |
|
| | | | | I better run for my life....
 | |
|
| | | | said by TSI Gabe:So are you going to kill me? Locked and loaded. | |
|
| gigantePremium
join:2000-06-30
Anchorage, AK | I would legitimately lose a few toes for 50/50. What good are toes? | |
| | | | 
It must be nice. I can have this Alltel/Verizon EVDO or dial up. | |
| | | | said by antwanp:I would literally murder someone to get symmetrical 50Mbps... Just sayin'... If you read the title of this report
It say 5 years
Thats right 5 years!!!
That is a long long time!!!
Imagine having this in 2003 and costing only slightly more say...
40 dollars, 55 dollars and 70 dollars respectively
Anyway this is definite the broadband that we all should be getting
Not DSL or Cable, these two serve the corporation well since the upload is utterly crap and download speed is mediocre at best.
I have been dreaming of symmetrical broadband since DSL was invented in 1999 or Cable Internet in 1988.
I knew this crap asymmetrical was by design
It not what we want but it serve those profiteer well since
you cannot upload much, you cannot do much with your broadband connection...
Its like Having ISDN with faster download speed | |
|
1 edit | Who will they get access from? Would be interested to know who they are going with for Tier 1 access to the internet. At minimum they will need at least somewhere near 10Gbps to be able to supply everyone on the system the true speeds being advertised. Only time will tell.
| |
| | | | Re: Who will they get access from? It would be quite a long time before they are sustaining 10Gbps. They have probably started out with a few hundred Mbps and will grow as needed. If they bought 10Gbps right off the bat they will be doomed from piss poor management.
Just looking at the whois for their website's ip address they are doing business with AT&T.AT&T WorldNet Services ATT (NET-12-0-0-0-1)
12.0.0.0 - 12.255.255.255
Lafayette Consolidated Government LAFAYETT3-107-0 (NET-12-152-107-0-1)
12.152.107.0 - 12.152.107.255
Lafayette Utilities Systems Internet Core LAN LUS-ISP-INTERNETCORE-LAN-12-152-107-192-M26 (NET-12-152-107-192-1)
12.152.107.192 - 12.152.107.255 | |
| | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: Who will they get access from? They look to be divided between AT&T and Qwest. Not bad, though personally I think Level3 is da bomb for qality b/w. | |
|
 FiOS LIVESo fast, it's LIVE
join:2008-11-25
Collegeville, PA | Verizon's 50 mbps That's 50/20 not 50/5. Just though I'd point that out even though it doesn't compare to 50/50.
Congrats to Lafayette for choosing to go with all symmetrical tiers. Symmetrical is the future of bandwidth especially for fully fiber networks that have the bandwidth to provide it. | |
| |  JeepMattC'mon the UPremium
join:2001-12-28
Wilmington, DE
kudos:2 | TV Lineup The HD lineup is a little weak, but overall really impressive for a start-up!
--
"ONE team - ONE city - ONE dream!!" | |
| | |  Vamp9190Premium
join:2002-02-11
Chantilly, VA
kudos:1 | Re: TV Lineup Where did you see the line-up, I did not see mention of that in the article.
Must be a fascinating process. They are basically running their own Cable company. Who is the 'broadcaster' they get the channel line-up from? Do they have to talk to each network individually, etc.
They should make a documentary about the whole process, or better yet a reality show. I would definately tune in to watch the behind the scenes of a fiber start-up. | |
|
| | Can they sustain it I dont see how they will be able to sustain the infrastructure with such low prices. | |
| | beaups
join:2003-08-11
Hilliard, OH | Re: Can they sustain it Awesome. Wonder if the pricing will stay low just long enough to lure people away from the competition...only to raise prices later. | |
| |  wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | said by majortom1029:I dont see how they will be able to sustain the infrastructure with such low prices. Stop being so realistic will you?? There is no place for that here! | |
| |  tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3 | $125M in government backed bonding helps alot to keep prices down, as well as no profit motive.
at some point they may need to raise prices, but this is a pretty good Promo | |
| | | wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | Re: Can they sustain it said by tshirt: $125M in government backed bonding helps alot to keep prices down, as well as no profit motive. at some point they may need to raise prices, but this is a pretty good Promo The "no profit motive" is a bit of a misnomer. While they arent a 'for profit' company like Cox or ATT, they still need to make money. All that equipment, fiber, man hours, vehicle maintenance, etc, etc, etc, doesnt pay for itself. They still are technically making a decent profit as otherwise they would run out of money in no time. Now of course, (in theory) they are supposed to put that money right back into the network however.
--
Комитет государственной безопасности
| |
| | | | tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3 Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| Re: Can they sustain it That's not profit, all they pay is operating costs, debt service (should be pretty cheap right now) and a fairly small amount of pincipal. in the operating costs account the should be accumulating a reasonable reserve for repair/replacement, service expansion
somewhere down the line if they suffer massive,sudden, unanticipated plant damages (*(say a storm/earthquake/flood/ fire they'll need to borrow more for repair which will force a rise in customer prices.
That's alot different than have raised money on the open market, and paying investors a premium return to finance an overbuild (would be considered fairly risky for a private company), debt service could exceed 10% return before one inch of fiber was layed vs 2-3% gov't (homeowner) backed bonds | |
| | | | | wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | Re: Can they sustain it said by tshirt: That's not profit, all they pay is operating costs, debt service (should be pretty cheap right now) and a fairly small amount of pincipal. You are correct that the term is not "profit", however its the principal I am discussing. The entity in question (local gvmt) cant just break even or they will lose money. They need to make some profit to cover their costs. If not, the taxpayers are in for a surprise sooner than later....
--
Комитет государственной безопасности
| |
| | | | | |  RadioDocYeah, like it matters.Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
La Grange, IL
kudos:2
 ·AT&T Midwest
| Re: Can they sustain it Profit is what is left over once you cover your costs. What makes this work is not needing to sustain a stock price, quarterly dividends or a high return on investment. When you can concentrate on the long term rather than the next quarter (or for some companies, next week) and have the local government-owned utility subsidizing the construction through bonds it's not terribly difficult to make ends meet.
Now, if they can just keep their fingers out of the cookie jar. This is Louisiana, after all... | |
| | | | | | | wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | Re: Can they sustain it said by RadioDoc:Profit is what is left over once you cover your costs. What makes this work is not needing to sustain a stock price, quarterly dividends or a high return on investment. When you can concentrate on the long term rather than the next quarter (or for some companies, next week) and have the local government-owned utility subsidizing the construction through bonds it's not terribly difficult to make ends meet. Now, if they can just keep their fingers out of the cookie jar. This is Louisiana, after all... Only time will tell. We all saw how successful UTOPIA was.....
--
Комитет государственной безопасности
| |
| | | | | | | | JBear
join:2005-02-24
canada | Re: Can they sustain it UTOPIA?
"Created by a collaboration of cities in Utah, UTOPIA stands for Utah Telecommunication Open Infrastructure Agency. This open fiber network links multiple cities and fosters competition among communication service providers who offer Internet, television, telephone and other services, giving customers the freedom to choose their own service providers, the best prices, and absolutely the best service."
Was it successful? I am really hoping it is because it seems like such a great idea. | |
| | | | | | | | | wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | Re: Can they sustain it said by JBear:Was it successful? I am really hoping it is because it seems like such a great idea. It failed big time and the taxpayers took it on the chin. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | They have successful deployments but their financial picture isn't as good as they originally estimated. Cities may end up having to pay debt service on the bond payments where in the beginning they were hoping the network could pay for itself. Part of the problem was the bureaucracy of the federal RDA funding, another part was the dirty tactics of Qwest and Comcast and lawsuits trying to hold it up, another part is incumbent telcom lobbyists that keep pushing laws in the state to hamper the network, and finally, it was managed well from the start. It's not a failure yet--many cities have 30/30 connections up and running for about 50,000 businesses and residents, but this is still short of the goal of over 100k and it is over-budget. Still, there are signs that it has helped the economic development in those cities and even though cities may end up paying debt service, I don't think you can say it's a total loss, unless you are a competing wireless company or incumbent who is eager to write the whole thing off as nothing but a failure. More info at a great website, www.freeutopia.org | |
|
| | | | | | |  batageekSlave To The DuopolyPremium
join:2003-01-25 | With LUS, the city can offer the service directly. UTOPIA forced the cities to be wholesalers of fiber.
--
»www.tricitybroadband.com | |
| | | | | | | | | wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | Re: Can they sustain it said by batageek:With LUS, the city can offer the service directly. UTOPIA forced the cities to be wholesalers of fiber. Like I said before, I wish them the best of luck and lets see what happens.
--
Комитет государственной безопасности
| |
|
| | | | | | | | said by RadioDoc:Now, if they can just keep their fingers out of the cookie jar. This is Louisiana, after all... You have the nerve to say that coming from Chicago? You need to look in your own backyard. | |
|
| | | | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | I think someone else pointed this out and I don't mean to be picky but the basic economic principle of profit is generally the amount left over after operating costs, debt retirement, capital improvements and reserves are fully funded. An organization that is classified as non-profit would never have any amount left over. If it did, it would refund the left over amounts to those which it provides service.
I do understand what you are saying but using the term profit is at best, very confusing.
What would eventually surprise taxpayers is if the utility only funded operating costs and debt retirement without building up reserves to cover the eventual need to replace portions of the infrastructure as it ages.
A perfect example of this problem is our nation's interstate highway system. In 1956 our nation started construction. Although expansion continues, the original plan was considered complete in 1992 when the eastern and western halves of I-70 were connected in Colorado. Just yesterday I heard that the system now needs ~$2 trillion to fix current infrastructure deficiencies. Obviously the government has not been funding the necessary reserves to replace and improve the system as portions of it exceed their useful and safe life span. (Consider the Minneapolis I-35 bridge as an example...) Obviously we taxpayers are "surprised" and... left holding the bag... | |
|
| | | | | said by wifi4milez:said by tshirt: $125M in government backed bonding helps alot to keep prices down, as well as no profit motive. at some point they may need to raise prices, but this is a pretty good Promo The "no profit motive" is a bit of a misnomer. While they arent a 'for profit' company like Cox or ATT, they still need to make money. All that equipment, fiber, man hours, vehicle maintenance, etc, etc, etc, doesnt pay for itself. They still are technically making a decent profit as otherwise they would run out of money in no time. Now of course, (in theory) they are supposed to put that money right back into the network however. If it is all about profit then having faster cheaper broadband would be pointless...
We would all be stuck on ISDN which cost more then adsl and cable even back then...
We need to be driven by technology and motivation to move forward not on money gain and losses
Because in truth money is just an exchange of service or product...
You make a dollar you spend a dollar
you make a million you spend a million
It just an illusion of something that is not there.
What give it value is what we believe what it is worth.
It is infact an invisible object that everyone trust to exchange whatever we need or want.
Broadband can be as cheap as 10 dollar,as costly as 100 dollar or 1000 dollar... speed is not what determine price.
satellite cost 100 dollar a month and it is as slow as dialup in term of upload...
I have no problem with att, comcast, cox, timewarner going out of business and replaced by faster and cheaper internet service by 3rd party.
I am so sick and tired of their monopoly as long as they are in business we would never see faster cheaper broadband in the near future. They want to keep cheaper, faster alternative canned to stay in business much like aol dialup who doesn't want to offer anything faster or lower their price. cheaper broadband alternative is their worst enemy and they will fight it to keep it out of the market.
if dialup is all we are offered even thought faster connection is possible what can we do? | |
| | | | | wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | Re: Can they sustain it said by jadebangle:I am so sick and tired of their monopoly as long as they are in business we would never see faster cheaper broadband in the near future. They want to keep cheaper, faster alternative canned to stay in business much like aol dialup who doesn't want to offer anything faster or lower their price. cheaper broadband alternative is their worst enemy and they will fight it to keep it out of the market. if dialup is all we are offered even thought faster connection is possible what can we do? Dont get me wrong I am all for these people having another choice for broadband. I think the bigger argument here is that most people fear that this will end up costing the taxpayers more money.
--
Комитет государственной безопасности
| |
| | | | | | | | Re: Can they sustain it said by wifi4milez:said by jadebangle:I am so sick and tired of their monopoly as long as they are in business we would never see faster cheaper broadband in the near future. They want to keep cheaper, faster alternative canned to stay in business much like aol dialup who doesn't want to offer anything faster or lower their price. cheaper broadband alternative is their worst enemy and they will fight it to keep it out of the market. if dialup is all we are offered even thought faster connection is possible what can we do? Dont get me wrong I am all for these people having another choice for broadband. I think the bigger argument here is that most people fear that this will end up costing the taxpayers more money. Money is not a problem for most of us
Its availability is the problem
You can pay someone a million a month if you like but if they don't offer the speed and technology you want, their is nothing you can do.
for your info, taxes are a scam
the rich, the few are suppose to pay taxes
we the ppl who are working for a corporate or company are not suppose to pay anything
it is for business only
how many of us own business?
very few right? but as an employee you are not suppose to pay any taxes at all...
these so called income taxes is a scam to impoverish many
you wonder why rich get richer? because they dont pay any taxes or pay very little say 1 percent LOL
These are wages, its not profit or gains
Thats what most of us don't get
You are working to feed yourself you are not a big company that make billions. Many of us are so under educated its not funny.
Jesus, it took them this long to get approved for faster broadband...
I guess we should dislike the major player who are the cause of this delay. att,comcast,charter,cox can all go to hell lol these are wallstreet gangster or thief 
we are sucker for them... we pay them so much by now they can run to the bank and laugh at how easily misguided we are.
lots of pay every month for crap asymmetrical dsl,cable.
like milking a cow that know nothing about how this scam is being played on us. | |
|
| | |  NOCManMacChatterPremium
join:2004-09-30
Colorado Springs, CO | KGB  | |
| | | | | wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | Re: Can they sustain it  | |
|
| |  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | said by tshirt: $125M in government backed bonding helps alot to keep prices down, as well as no profit motive. at some point they may need to raise prices, but this is a pretty good Promo heck id pay $300/mo for 50000 / 50000!
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|
| AVonGaussPremium
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL | Maybe the infrastructure does not cost as much as we all have been lead to believe? Even if they double their prices, it would seem that they would still be lower than any other large provider in the US. | |
| | | RadioDocYeah, like it matters.Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
La Grange, IL
kudos:2 | Re: Can they sustain it Heh...the delay in starting the build-out probably dropped the real costs by 50%. Someone in Lafayette should send Cox and AT&T flowers. | |
|
| | | They are a government owned ISP. If they don't need to make a dime they can raise taxes rates as needed. | |
| | |
See 7 replies to this post | |
| grumpy3b
join:2001-12-11
Lompoc, CA
kudos:1 | they are not needing to subsidize multi-million dollar executive compensation packages nor do they need to spend zillions on network advertising. It is amazing just how much money a marketing department sucks out of a company.
One wonders why places such as your regional energy providers (gas/electric) ever need to advertise...heck we need to return to the days when drug companies were not allowed to advertise Rx meds on TV or non-medical professional periodicals.
But remove the marketing and huge executive wages and it is amazing what that does to decrease overhead. It leaves some minor admin costs and then of course support and maintenance. Once the cable was pulled, the infrastructure over head is repair/maintenance only. And that is not very expensive.
And don't assume the muni systems do not earn a "profit" they still need to service their debt as well as fund expansion and other projected costs. So there is a markup over exact known costs. Just no shareholder BS to deal with, only providing tax payers with the service as promised.
Back in the late-60s early 70s our small town was it's own cable provider and the service was fine. But then good old Teleprompter lured the powers that be with a myriad of promises and, of course, graft...since then it was all down hill. Teleprompter got nailed for all manner of illegal activity and eventually it has us now on Comcrap.
Of course our muni has a fiber plan too which has also experienced much of the same negative spin campaigns. So, I expect it to be a decade before we ever see a real & true fiber system here.
--
Using Millenicom? Come visit the Unofficial Millenicom forum here on BBR »Millenicom | |
| |  lovswr
join:2001-09-15
Smyrna, GA
1 edit | Because just straight bandwidth is dirt cheap. When you are not trying to make a 32% profit (that you want to increase by 2 or 3 points every quarter) you can do some amazing things.
Do not believe the AT&T or comcast hype. On a per port basis, their actual costs for bandwidth are probably at least 2 orders of magnitude cheaper than what this little local telco could ever dream about. However those guys have to maintain that giant spread between costs & prices to maintain those profits.
--
lovswr = good hivswr = bad
I don't know how my post got way down here. I was trying to reply to a poster very early on page 1. I still stand by my point though. | |
| | JBear
join:2005-02-24
canada | This is pretty interesting and exciting .
I like the UTOPIA model where the Cities are wholesalers and charge the companies Maintenance, overhead, and expansion fees.
I also like the LUS where they are a competitor who need not worry about profit, just Maintenance, minimal expansion, and overhead. Both just keep the competition honest and competitive (if they can keep up).
A properly run gov't agency/utility is a marvel! Too bad most have no incentive to run efficiently. | |
|
| | Only in japan, korea, sweeden, uk, australia................ well if most of us can get 10/10 for 28.94 a month vs att, comcast, cox, timewarner and the rest of the clown in this country of capital greed... we would be on our way to surfing happily. 30mbps for 44.95 vs verizon fios 20/20 64.95 or 50mbps vs verizon 50/20 would make verizon user jealous and wanting more from their provider.
I thought that 10/10 for 54.00, 20/20 for 92.00 and 50/50 for 139.99 is a bit steep and I was quite right... if you are competing with att dsl and comcast cable internet even many user would be switching to this pricing scheme or offer. we would be able to do more with our connection that are symmetrical, no cap. bandwidth cap in my opinion is a hidden scam to hide the fact that dsl and cable is really much slower and congested then what they advertise.
Instead of providing more bandwidth to everyone a greedy company who interest is control and based on selfishness thrive on limitation using existing old and ancient technology that should be scrapped and thrown back in the trashcan where it really belong.
The truth is they do no want any competition namely ATT, Comcast, Cox, Timewarner all are owned by the same greedy few who have a monopoly on broadband in the usa.
This is what happen when the few own so much of what we need and the rest of us are just drooling for it. Want it? Pay up. Thats their motive and i find it absurd.
We know its possible to offer fastest speed, no cap and cheap broadband but the the few in control of broadband isn't too happy about that.
They want to sell us crappy slow broadband at high price so they can keep their investment as high as they can get it to give it to their wallstreet thief buddy.
Why should we let the few dictate what broadband we should get and who to provide us service?
I think everyone of us should vote with our opinion not with our wallet which is the reason why these monopoly can take place and we see little to no improvement on broadband connectivity or penetration. | |
| |
1 edit | Re: Only in japan, korea, sweeden, uk, australia................ So we should all be happy with the socialized policies being put into place including the now socialized PORN that will ride a Government ran infrastructure? | |
| |  IgnitePremium,VIP
join:2004-03-18
UK | You must know a different UK to the one I live in, here we have far less FTTH than the US, I would guesstimate less than 5000 connections nationwide. | |
| | elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | said by jadebangle:well if most of us can get 10/10 for 28.94 a month vs att, comcast, cox, timewarner and the rest of the clown in this country of capital greed... we would be on our way to surfing happily. Instead of providing more bandwidth to everyone a greedy company who interest is control and based on selfishness thrive on limitation using existing old and ancient technology that should be scrapped and thrown back in the trashcan where it really belong. The truth is they do no want any competition namely ATT, Comcast, Cox, Timewarner all are owned by the same greedy few who have a monopoly on broadband in the usa. I think everyone of us should vote with our opinion not with our wallet which is the reason why these monopoly can take place and we see little to no improvement on broadband connectivity or penetration. What a load of horse puckey. The duopolys have delivered us incredible improvements in broadband connectivity and penetration. In 1998, we were still struggling to get 56K switched digital service, at a cost of over $100 per month. We progressed to 256K DSL for $60, which became 512K, then 768K, then the price dropped. Cable entered the foray, and we now have 6 Meg speeds for $45.
All of this progress was driven by "greed", investors chasing mythical profits. Much of the industry already went through bankruptcy once, which screwed the shareholders and paid off much of the backbone and last-mile investments - new companies picked up the pieces and continue to discount against each other, even if you only have two choices.
I still think we'd be better off having the last-mile spun off and treated as a public (fiber+copper) coop, so it would be easier for ISPs, CLECs, and CATV to enter the local market, but even without that, we've enjoyed remarkable progress.
said by jadebangle:They want to sell us crappy slow broadband at high price so they can keep their investment as high as they can get it to give it to their wallstreet thief buddy. Why should we let the few dictate what broadband we should get and who to provide us service? So you'd rather have your "broadband" provided by the post office, who didn't think anyone wanted overnight packages until federal express came along? The same people that provide municipal bus "service"? The folks who run the public school system?
Do you really want to switch out the "few, evil, greedy" corporate entities for a few-er government dictators who will decide what "progress" is and when you deserve it? | |
| | | | | Re: Only in japan, korea, sweeden, uk, australia................ Greed hold back tehnology that cost the same or less
Namely fiber optic
No matter how much you push DSL, Cable it is an inferior product. Its just not going to compete or fair worse then better alternative. Its like comparing a honda vs toyota.
Neither have the potential to grow or offer us symmetrical real broadband solution.
I am saying we need better alternative rather then no alternative such as DSL or Cable
Neither of this is enough for our need.
anything faster then dialup is considered broadband? IMHO is misleading and false advertisement.
Government are run by the few at the expense of the many
You have it backward 
Business are not regulated by government and government are business oriented for the benefit of the few or the super rich who own almost everything today. We have a fascism already in place since world war I
There has never been a government for the ppl by the ppl
It just doesn't exist. Because ppl chose to follow each other then to go their own way. To be self sufficent would mean taking responsibility. Most of us want others to hold our hand and be shown what to do rather then making their own choices.
Business=Government=Private entity or corporation
Don't be brainwashed by what we are taught in school its all a lie to keep us ignorant and misguided | |
|
| | | | Re: hmmm.... They're all checking on the job market and cost of living in Lafayette, as well as trying to figure out how quickly their service can be installed once they get into their new houses down there. | |
| | | |
Vamp9190Premium
join:2002-02-11
Chantilly, VA
kudos:1 | lock in these prices LUS offers standalone symmetrical 10Mbps for $28.95, 30Mbps for $44.95, and 50Mbps for $57.95. There's no caps, no contracts, and no installation fee.
Seriously? Wow. Now I am jealous. What's my municipality done for me lately?  | |
| |
See 10 replies to this post | |
| | Government should not compete with private business And if there are two private providers already, what excuse does government have to compete unfairly with private business, using taxpayer money? | |
| |
See 14 replies to this post | |
| | They fought against ATT/SBC domain in the area... but now 47% of their bandwidth comes from ATT itself (and the others 53% from Qwest)...
»www.robtex.com/as/AS25921.html
Of course, one thing is residential service, they´re now probably buying wholesale capacity from ATT, but still...
Anyways, I'm still jealous, the best we can get here in Brazil is 20/1 ADSL2+ or 12/2 Cable... | |
|
approval from:
landry98 
Pv8man
FiOS LIVE
Gunner
| There is more... Thank you all for your comments. We are excited by the possibilities this brings to our community. We put together a very conservative business plan and should easily be able to sustain our pricing. Of course as programming costs go up, our prices will go up, and so will the competition. One thing not mentioned is the fact that we are also giving 100MBS peer to peer, for FREE. And, if this initiative doesn't live up to the expectations, my neck is on the chopping block. I think it is worth the minimal risk. And, by the way, this is not backed by the government, so taxpayers are not at risk. These are revenue bonds backed by our utilities system, and while there is some risk it is actually very low. Thanks again,
Joey Durel
Lafayette City-Parish President | |
| |
See 10 replies to this post | |
 jmn1207Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1 | Build Your Own Here is to all those people that always jump in a discussion and tell everyone to build their own network and to leave the ISP and their network management systems alone.
Cheers! | |
| | | NbWY1
join:2003-05-23
Columbia, MD | Re: Bravo, Lafayette! This is seriously cool, congrats indeed | |
| | | | |  Re: Bravo, Lafayette!
| |
|
| | Congrats Lafayette I would like to be able to enjoy service comparable to this. I live ~50 miles west of Philly, and will be the last to see service on par with FTTH. I can get (and have) Comcast for internet, and the service has been good, although I think that I am last in line for the latest upgrades from Comcast. There is no competition here. I can't get (and couldn't live with) DSL from Frontier (with their lovely 5GB/month in+out) because I am 22000 feet from the CO, no path for satellite (quite a step backwards from Comcast), failed site surveys for wireless, and no hope that Verizon will come in and save the day. I can get dial-up, and T1, and would be VERY happy to have symmetrical 50MB for what I pay now. I would settle for 5MB symmetrical Hats off to Lafayette for making this happen. I sincerely hope that this proves to be maintainable in all ways. | |
| |  MSaukMSaukPremium
join:2002-01-17
Sandy, UT | Re: Congrats Lafayette wow congrats! I am sure after millions of dollars in lawyer fee's this must feel good to finally get it up and running.
That is how I felt when UTOPIA opened it's doors. Qwest and Comcast both tried to stop them and Qwest convinced the city it would build up and guess what, they have not done SQUAT! So now SLC is quickly falling behind the curve because the lawmakers listened to their pockets instead of their heads.
That pricing is great as well, looks like the UTOPIA pricing as well.
--
MatthewSauk.com | |
| | |  RolteC0h
join:2001-05-20
Fresh Meadows, NY
kudos:1 | Re: Congrats Lafayette Wow, now that is a deal. Great job on fighting the money hungry cable/telco providers.
Lets just hope they don't attach usage limits when pipes start to get saturated.
Very nice prices, no one can compete with that. Not even FiOS. | |
|
| | That's It !! I'm moving there | |
| | | | Re: That's It !! I've known several folks from there, as well as others who have moved there or visited. It's supposed to be a beautiful area, and carnival season in south Louisiana is lots of fun. Cajuns are probably the most fun-loving people in the country, and, take it from someone who knows, they know how to throw good parties, and they'll use any excuse to have one! | |
|
| | What about P2P? I wonder: how Lafayette will respond to the RIAA and the MPAA information requests?
It is nice to see government working. Cynical me thought that the Muni idea was a money pit that would leave taxpayers on the hook for a half-completed project, but I guess good management can make any project a success.
The telco's and cable companies will end up writing off their investment in the city because they will have a difficult time competing with those prices. | |
| | RadioDocYeah, like it matters.Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
La Grange, IL
kudos:2 | Re: What about P2P? It's just now getting started so your cynicism may not be entirely unwarranted. | |
|
| | Truely Inspiring This is a VERy good example of local government really benefiting it's people. The service offerings are at excellent price points and provide excellent value.
I can see so many uses for this technology in your community. If you child is sick, he can watch his classes from home via an IP video link.
Kids can video conference with Grandma and mom and dad at work. Without having to worry about CAPS.
Contrast this VERY POSITIVE announcement with the big carriers announcing price increases, CAPPING internet service, slowing down your traffic, selling your data to the NSA or the highest bidder. Community run internet service really makes the big boys look like organized crime. | |
| | | No Caps On: »www.fiberforthefuture.com/custom/?id=12
I noticed they don't there's no caps..if there's truly no caps on the internet, they should be advertising that.
I wish I had access to those kinds of speeds and prices..
Good job Lafayette | |
|  HpowerRoflmao
join:2000-06-08
Glendale, CA | Fast n cheap! I am totally jealous of the speeds lol. | |
| | | Good Luck, I hope you succeed. I will rent an apartment and with an EeePC start a data center, lol. | |
| Reviews:
 ·ooma
·Optimum Online
 ·Verizon FiOS
| what incumbents don't want you to see.. That Verizon's been a holdin' out on the good stuff... they should have done 50/50megabit by now for under $60 per month. While Comcast, Cox and Time Warner have visions of selling broadband next to your corner gas station with a metered billing plan even though they're deploying docsis 3.0 speeds, they want you to pay through the nose for it. Hopefully, with the souring economy, the cable companies will mend their ways, and telcos will begin sticking it to the cable companies for all that Voip marketshare they lost.
For the time being, I'm with cable(thankfully, not the crappy ones listed above).. but that's not to say that Verizon couldn't send 20/5 & unlimited Voip with deluxe calling features my way for $59.95 per month.
Unfortunately, there is much apathy in the marketplace.. and AT&T isn't really doing enough to lure capped & captive customers of the cable companies yet. So, ramp up the speed and deployments and lower the prices. There's no way many residential customers are going to pay over $65 for 50 megabit speeds even if it comes with a slice of apple pie, whipped cream and a cherry on top. BTW, if the market place fails to work, you're welcome to duplicate Lafayette's municpal build. The prices seem about right. | |
| | | | LA state law I think i read it someplace before but don't remember where. But isn't it a state law here In LA that if a telacommunications provider offers a price in one area they must offer than in all parts of the state they serve in the state. so for example if cox doesn't pull out of that town and lowers prices to compete, they would have to offer those deals to everyone they serve in the state. | |
| | |  DaarkenRara AvisesPremium
join:2005-01-12
Southwest LA
kudos:3 | Re: LA state law Yes it is state law, in fact last year Cox got busted running a low low special in the east baton rouge area against a local telco. However the local telco played hardball and put several full page ads in the major newspapers that ran in the cities that Cox served.
Talk about Cox getting red faced over that ordeal. LOL
Personally as a cox user, I am glad to see them get this competition. I am so tired of seeing prices go up, and nothing to show for it. I am tired of paying for crap channels that I do not watch. I am tired of having lackluster internet speeds that "can reach" a certain speed. I am tired of having my bandwidth capped because I want to download anything that might be considered illegal because it is a torrent.
One thing I would also like to post is that Lafayette got delayed for several years because of utter lies and bs that was put out to the public by Cox and Bellsouth/AT&T.
I would also like to point out that Lafayette owns it own utility company and provides the city with all its electricity. Not only is the service a stable utility, but when there is an issue, it gets fixed. I should also point out that it is also the CHEAPEST electrical service in the state.
Damn I miss living there, but I do enjoy living close by and going there all the time.
--
www.pointofexistence.com | |
|
| |
|
|
