It is a very political discussion that will likely never result in any form
of consensus, especially among this group because of financial interests
involved, as to whether or not government should be involved in building
fiber networks.  However, from my perspective (and UTOPIA Fiber's),
interest in this from municipalities has skyrocketed recently.  Google
Fiber was the worst thing for actually bringing fiber to communities. There
were a few that benefitted, but the rest said, "Hey, we don't have to build
municipal fiber because Google is coming!"  Over 1100 communities submitted
applications for Google Fiber and any that were considering it put their
plans on hold.  Since that time and now, existing providers have continued
to fall further behind meeting the demands of their communities, demand has
dramatically increased, and Google Fiber expansion is over.

We are in an extremely competitive area in Utah but we still see demand of
our fiber network growing.  In all of our cities except for Tremonton
(Frontier is the ILEC), we have Centurylink, Comcast, Rise Broadband,
Vivint Wireless, and many other smaller WISPS providing services without
our fiber.  The fact that we continue to see take-rate increases in all of
our cities suggests that either those other companies are getting worse
(Comcast has ranked up to become #1 most hated in America), or demand for
fiber-based services is increasing faster than those companies' ability to
provide it, or maybe some of both.  Centurylink has a lot of areas in our
cities where they have even built GPON, but we are not losing customers to
them.  Their pricing is too high, and their service is terrible.

During the Google Fiber courting period I never heard from cities looking
for advice or help on how to get their city connected, but now I am
contacted regularly.  I truly believe we will see a huge increase in
municipal fiber projects and would encourage those on here that see this as
a bad thing to consider how they might benefit from it.

We had a small local CLEC in Brigham City called Brigham.net that spoke out
against us because they though that when built the city it would put them
out of business.  We met with them and explained how we operate, and they
quickly 180'd because they realized they could become a provider on the
network.  Now they have customers in several cities and offer 1Gbps service
instead of their old DSL offerings over Centurylink.  Meanwhile, as
Centurylink upgrades their networks with fiber they are shutting the doors
on the CLECs.

I like what Ammon is doing, but it isn't big enough for much economy of
scale for them or their partners.  However, there are a lot of cities that
are hungry for municipal fiber options now that Google Fiber has left them
high-and-dry.  If you're a good provider, have a good reputation among your
customers, and can be competitive, you ought to do well on a municipal
fiber system so long as it is open-access.

Roger




On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 6:46 PM, Lewis Bergman <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2016, 6:19 PM <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Lewis Bergman wrote:
>> > At the root is that you somehow believe government involvement is
>> always good.
>>   Now don't you go putting words in my mouth!
>>   I never said such a thing.
>>
>
> You have made a case for it
>
>   I do not think government involvement is always good. Neither do I
>> believe that government involvement is always bad.
>>
>>   By your own words, you fall into the latter camp. I consider both
>> positions to be extreme, and not a considered approach. Always having a
>> knee jerk reaction rarely leads to an optimal result.
>>
> Don't go pouring words in my mouth. Not everything,but most.
>
> > History doesn't back you up, especially where broadband is concerned.
>>   Oh, goodie! A history lesson! Please tell me more. Out of the 450
>> community networks in the US, how many did not work out and why?
>>
> Go ahead, enlighten me.
>
>> > Government, most any government, does a pretty poor job if what it
>> should be doing much less tasks it
>> > has no business doing.
>>   I'm sure government does a lot of things wrong and the wrong things.
>>   Use your vote to change that. You'll have a chance to do so agsin next
>> week.
>>
>
> You must be unfamiliar with the US system if you thinks voting changes
> much of anything around here. Neither party is interested in smaller
> government or generally making things better.
>
> > You sound like someone who makes a living directly benefiting from tax
>> dollars.
>> > Or even worse, done quasi governmental agency with the tax or secured
>> money benefits but no accountability.
>>   I'm so sorry to disappoint you.
>>   Why do you have something against people who get paid with tax dollars?
>>   Does this animosity extend to police, firefighters and enlisted
>> personnel?
>>
> Nice. Sure. I hate everyone.  Basic logical fallacy. Police and
> firefighters are actually part of what the government should be doing.
> Enlisted? Why stop there? What about officers? Puppies, babies.
>
> What a load of emotional bait. I would have thought you were above that.
>
>
>
>> Jared
>>
>

Reply via email to