With our own money. I don't believe there are any grounds for CAF to fund any deployment that doesn't have voice. There is no legislative authorization for that.
See ya in court! :-) ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 10:24:16 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Internet Only CAF For sure. Makes your competitors more able to compete against you. -----Original Message----- From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 9:23 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Internet Only CAF Not so good for WISPs I guess :/ On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 10:20 AM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote: > It could be good for the smaller telcos. Right now we would not have a > product to sell if we sold only naked DSL/FTTH. Have to bundle in that > dial > tone before it becomes cost competitive. > > -----Original Message----- From: Josh Reynolds > Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 9:17 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [AFMUG] Internet Only CAF > > > http://www.telecompetitor.com/connect-america-fund-for-rural-carriers-stand-alone-broadband-lower-ror-on-tap/ > > > "Importantly, the order proposes that the nation’s small rural > *rate-of-return* _carriers_ should be able to collect funding for > high-cost lines that are _only delivering broadband_ and not voice > service – an important change as more and more consumers cancel, or > would like to cancel, traditional voice service. The order also calls > for lowering the authorized rate of return for ROR carriers – a move > that Wheeler said was made to “better reflect current financial market > conditions.” > > Emphasis mine. This seems... a little sticky to me.
