It doesn't much matter who the telco is for CAF money to be awarded... you can see who has been awarded what money on the FCC's website, and CenturyLink has definitely gotten a large sum for it ($500M/yr for 6 years).
Here's a press release on Clink's own website: http://news.centurylink.com/news/centurylink-to-bring-broadband-to-1-2-million-rural-households-in-33-states Poke around on FCC for CAF and you're sure to find deployment maps.It is a sizable chunk of money up for grabs. On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 3:02 PM, Chuck Guzis <[email protected]> wrote: > On 12/30/2015 11:59 AM, Geoffrey Oltmans wrote: > >> On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Jim Brain <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> We were spoiled in South Dakota, as somehow (and I am sure someone >>> knows and will enlighten us/me) the rural telcos (LECs?) tapped >>> into lots of funds from somewhere to drop fiber to all of the rural >>> homes. 50Mb was the slowest speed, as I recall, for data. The >>> catch was that you had to buy a telephone service with your >>> Internet, probably for some legal/regulatory reason. But, it was >>> cheap, and we bought just the basics, and 50Mb was more than one >>> could expect when you are 8 miles from the nearest town and on a >>> large acreage. So, in markets where this type of service is >>> offered, I think telcos will thrive. >>> >>> >> Probably the FCC's Connect America Fund. This is meant to do for >> broadband what the REA did for electrical power. >> > > Probably because we're served here by one of the big outfits > (CenturyLink), that sort of money isn't available for us. So we rural folk > still suffer--because it doesn't pay to deploy service to low-density areas. > > It really is amazing that I've been living with internet service that > wouldn't even tax a 10base2 "thinnet" LAN connection. In the meantime, CL > still pays an annual dividend of something like 8% to its stockholders. > > --Chuck >
