 decifal
join:2007-03-10
Bon Aqua, TN | lol This tickles the crap outta me | |
|
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL | poor guy "said Drew Peterson".....I didnt know he got out of jail! 
--
BF69~~~Please stop suffocating gerbils! | |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
 ·VOIPo
| Hmm..... '"The lack of judicial action on the part of the Supreme Court will likely discourage other private enterprises from doing or expanding their business in Minnesota," said Drew Peterson'
Why would it discourage others from expanding there? I know they would be going up against the Gov but still. All they have to do is offer a better product maybe even lower prices, but it can be done. | |
|
 | Metatron2008
join:2008-09-02
Stockbridge, GA | Re: Hmm..... By 'private enterprises', he means ISPs only, and by 'doing or expanding their business', he means go to where a monopoly is to get easy money. | |
|
| 
fatness
subtle
Janitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing
 ·EarthLink
Host:
Earthlink DSL
TekSavvy
Forum Feature Requ..
Need Site Help?
Rants, Raves, and ..
| said by me1212  :'"The lack of judicial action on the part of the Supreme Court will likely discourage other private enterprises from doing or expanding their business in Minnesota," said Drew Peterson' Why would it discourage others from expanding there? I guess he's saying that businesses will avoid having fiber connections, and will purposely seek out areas with less, slower, and/or more costly internet service.  | |
|
| 
insomniac84
join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN
| They already have a huge advantage. They build a network that sells phone service and cable service. Then sell internet over it without having to pay for a new network.
They will of course be in Minnesota and will compete. It's just sad you have to invest in muni-broadband to force the big players to offer fair prices.
They really need to force these nation wide companies to offer standard prices statewide, or nation wide.
It's absurd that they can offer cheaper prices in areas with competition while somehow justifying the higher price in areas without competition. | |
|
| | me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | Re: Hmm..... Competition is what we need, and you are right is IS sad. I say we do local loop undundling, it worked in France and Japan why not here too. | |
|
| | | |
| | | |
insomniac84
join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN
| Re: Hmm..... said by espaeth :Competition only works if the companies can actually make a profit at the end of the day. Oh they easily make profits. The problem is they want unlimited growth of profits. So once an area is saturated, the only way to grow is to price gouge the customer you have. In duopolies where your competition has the same philosophy, you can raise your prices and they will match you. It's easy to collude when the competition shares your same wants and philosophies. Muni-broadband puts a cap on that really fast. As the goal is steady long term profits and not unlimited profit growth. | |
|
| | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: Hmm..... said by insomniac84 :said by espaeth :Competition only works if the companies can actually make a profit at the end of the day. Oh they easily make profits. I believe espaeth was referring to the CLECs making a profit, which is much more challenging if they actually have to provide a portion of the facilities to include remote terminals and the power to feed them. | |
|
| | | | 
RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY
| said by espaeth :said by me1212 :Competition is what we need, and you are right is IS sad. I say we do local loop undundling, it worked in France and Japan why not here too. Local loop unbundling only works for private loops like that of the telco infrastructure built out on sub-Cat1 grade cabling. Unbundling is generally only feasible at the major COs, but that limits the footprint of any data-based service to technologies that can operate with the distance of the CO. As of yet, it is still prohibitively expensive to unbundle remote terminals due to limited / non-existent cabinet space. Companies don't have the money to pour their own pad and get their own utility power to feed a remote terminal to only acquire a handful of customers from the incumbent LEC. Competition only works if the companies can actually make a profit at the end of the day. What is being talked about is having the "Last Mile" separate from the Cable Company/ISP itself. The Cable Company/ISP peers at the central point where all the Last Mile runs end up (This is the equivalent of the Central Office/CO for Phones service/Dry Copper runs). | |
|
| | | | | |
| | 
mskittykat
Reality Bites...So I'm Back
Premium
join:2002-10-17
Upper Marlboro, MD
| How right you are. It was laughable to read the rep's commentary stating in essence that service with lower costs / addequate service was a bad idea. Maybe for them, considering there's no other competition around.
This is a practice I'd love to see go nationwide as well. In some areas these servies among others; i.e. gas, electric, etc. tend to be all tide up by one provider and they pretty much do as they feel....at the very least push the envelope.
--
"Smart is knowing your ABC's. Intelligent is knowing how to use them." | |
|
|
RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY
| said by me1212 :I know they would be going up against the Gov but still. Since this is funded by private investment not government obligations, they are NOT competing with the government but a private group that the government has asked to do the work. This is the same as when the telco was given exclusive rights to service the town. In my opinion, failure to install fiber when requested makes the telco an non-interested party and makes them ineligible to oppose it in court (ie: When they tried to block it, they should have been ruled as someone who had no right to bring the suit in the first place). | |
|
| | me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | Re: Hmm..... That makes it even better. | |
|
| 
vzw emp
@qwest.net
| This guy is a paid corporate shill. He says what the company wants him to say regardless of whether there's actually any truth to the words coming out of his mouth. He knows it does nothing to prevent competition but his employer has been trying to kill this project (and, ironically, competition) through the court system. Now that they've lost they want to make it look like they were fighting for the "consumers" of Minnesota, not to protect their own profit. This is what lesser corporations do when faced with competition. Instead of making a better product they choose to eliminate the reason to do so.
I can't imagine many jobs that are worse than being a spokesperson. You have to totally disregard your own soul, conscience and integrity while reciting other people's BS to earn your paycheck. Like a wise man once said: "You feel that sting, big boy, huh? That's pride F***IN' with you!" | |
|
ArkhmAsylm
Evrythng I need isn't really what I want
join:2006-02-22
Saint Paul, MN | Let the fun begin It's been an interesting path, to say the least. I'm hoping that they're able to make it work for this small of a city.
--
*Tap, Tap, Tap* Is this thing on? | |
|
|
tmc8080
join:2004-04-24
Floral Park, NY
| trend This shouldn't just happen in the state of Minnesota, but in places where AT&T and Verizon, Comcast & Time Warner refuse to deploy networks and seek to jettison rural and poor ROI geographies. All incentives should funnel to those who will build next generation infrastructure and serve the local customer base with 100% deployment, no cherry picking, no lobbying to create an unfair advantage in the market, etc. Municiapl networks don't have an unfair advantage if they are the only viable alternative left in their geographic region and areas are UNDERSERVED by any monopoly/duopoly. | |
|
| me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
·VOIPo
| Re: trend That would work, but I think that they should try to find some1 who can do it for the muni like if there is a local wisp or just someone who know what they are doing and give them something like a Gov grant. That way they can keep the big dogs at bay, I mean how many of the big ISPs have taken Gov money b4, and how many are going to again with the stimulus package money? If they can get Gov money why not a smaller ISP? | |
|
babystars_13
join:2009-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN | ... Good for them. Corporations shouldn't be telling anyone how to manage their own business as all there concerned at is how much money they make. | |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | Does this mean all of Minnesto can? If the State Supreme court says one city can why why can't others, with out having to go to the SC? Just sayin'. | |
|
| MightyPez
join:2002-05-01
Saint Paul, MN
 ·Comcast
| Re: Does this mean all of Minnesto can? I'll just throw this tidbit out. I work as the systems admin for a local shipping company. I got a phone call a few weeks ago from someone representing the Minnesota Department of Commerce. They asked if I would take a brief survey about telecommunications products. Then they asked me a series of questions all about fiber. Would I be interested in fiber if it were offered in our area? Would we switch if it was priced competetively against our current provider? Etc etc.
It could mean nothing, but I get the feeling a lot of other cities are chomping at the bit to deploy muni-fiber. | |
|
| | me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | Re: Does this mean all of Minnesto can? I ain't surprised if the other towns/cities want to do this, it can help keep cost down-ish, they can have better speeds(I have seen some with 100/100), and I have not seen one with a cap yet so they may be able to help with that too. | |
|
digitalfreak
join:2005-12-09
49533
1 edit | Spread the FUD Cue the corporate shills and their proclamations of doom and gloom for the citizens of Monticello. | |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| Good for Monticello Maybe TDs should spend all that money on lawyers and court costs and improve and expand and maybe this wouldn't even be an issue. Three years ago my friend moved to the western edge of my country which for some reason is TDS territory and 3 years later he's still waiting for 3 Mbp DSL to get to his area. Which may NEVER get there. Meanhwile I get to choose from 6 Mbps naked DSL from Bellsouth or up to 20 Mbps from Charter and I live a mere 6 miles away. I have no doubt that if the local government decided to offer that part of the country broadband TDS would use despite them have ZERO plans to offer it to that area themselves. There's an old saying "use it or lose it" You can't sit there and say you won't expand to an area because it's not profitable then try to prevent someone else from doing so claiming it's "your" territory by saying you "might" expand in the "future". | |
|
Big Dawg 23
join:2002-03-27
Northfield, MN
| Might be coming soon to me My city in Minnesota is doing a Fiber study now. They are looking at doing a triple play. They did a survey and got a good response to people wanting it. Now they are moving to a full study on the feasible. The hitch to the whole project is funds from the Government.
Currently we have Charter and Qwest here. Charter offers 20MB and Qwest is still stuck in 1997 with 1.5MB service. | |
|
neufuse
join:2006-12-06
Indiana, PA | It's sad... that everyone wants direct fiber conectons... towns want them... but the telco's and MSOs come back and say NO WE DONT WANT TO AND YOU CAN'T DO IT EITHER!.... | |
|
already got it
@windomnet.com | ahhhh my town did this 5 years ago Windom MN did this 5 years ago. Fiber to every building. | |
|
MadMusky
join:2007-05-21
| This one's only half the story The linked Pioneer Press story doesn't tell you the full story. This isn't a situation where the telco wasn't doing anything and not investing in the market. TDS has actually deployed FTTH in Monticello already. The pricing could be better but it's currently 25 meg for $70/month. If you owned a business how would you like it if you made a big investment in facilities only to have the govt try to compete with you. Monticello has a history of being anti-business (the city even owns the town liquor store). | |
|
|
|
|
Monticello, Minnesota Wins Right To Run Fiber
