Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband

2017-09-28 Thread chuck 
All those areas have ILECS.  Most, if not all receive USF.  Even if they are 
copper, they can shorten the loops to VDSL or ADSL2+ lengths without extreme 
amounts of money.  It can be done.  The FCC needs to keep the broadband speed 
up high to force this, even though it sets a higher bar for WISPS to receive 
support.  But are ANY WISPS receiving USF support yet?

From: Brian Webster 
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2017 5:04 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband

This is an old map but you get the idea. There are a lot of places on the east 
coast that have unserved areas that WISP’s don’t cover. Upstate NY is a good 
example. Trees, terrain, lack of towers combined with low household density 
make it an almost impossible task to make a business case to build to those 
unserved areas, even as a WISP. The sad thing is that even if the government 
paid someone the whole cost to build out the network to these rural places, the 
only people that could still justify being able to serve these customers are a 
larger operator who can cost average those low density areas over their 
profitable markets. I looked and looked at a lot of regions of the state and 
the numbers were ugly. Rural parts of MA, CT and the other New England states 
are much the same situation. The mid Atlantic states that have those towering 
pine trees and relatively flat terrain are real ugly to design wireless 
networks for, 80 to 100 foot pine trees densely planted? No thanks. It was hard 
enough to design cellular coverage along the cleared highway paths through 
those trees.

 

The map is deceiving too, while it looks like a lot of unserved white areas, 
one has to look at where the population actually lives to has a more accurate 
view of the problem.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2017 8:55 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband

 

Brian Webster would be the guy to tell us, but I'm sure he's tied up with WECAT 
stuff.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions

Midwest Internet Exchange

The Brothers WISP








From: "Josh Reynolds" <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2017 7:54:20 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband

How many areas are wisps NOT in.

 

On Sep 28, 2017 7:39 AM, "Dave" <dmilho...@wletc.com> wrote:

+1 I could see that for sure.
But we could get into the area they are not and would not go much faster.



On 09/28/2017 07:35 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:

  It would mean cell cos get more federal funding. A lot more.

   

  On Sep 28, 2017 12:37 AM, "Mathew Howard" <mhoward...@gmail.com> wrote:

  I don't really see how redefining "broadband" to 10/1 is a bad thing... 
shouldn't that mean that other companies wouldn't (in theory, anyway) be able 
to get funding to overbuild areas where we are already providing 10mbps, which 
they currently could, unless we have at least 25mbps? 

   

  On Sep 28, 2017 12:30 AM, "Steve Jones" <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:

Off the topic, but we  have a customer who keeps trying to get our cs to 
ise the term broadband. Hes limited to 6x2 and thinks (semi correctly) he can 
fule an fcc complaint if they use that word. Hes also accused us of violating 
federal monopoly laws because we have an exclusive contract on the grain 
elevator in his town. 

If i could release emails, voicemails, and call recordings from this guy 
over thelast ten years, i would win the internet and nobody in this industry 
would ever hate a customer less.

 

On Sep 27, 2017 10:05 PM, "Josh Reynolds" <j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote:

  As a note to this...

  "As always, you're not going to be blown away by the performance.
  You're paying $60 per month for 10Mbps downloads and 1Mbps uploads,
  which doesn't meet the FCC's definition of broadband."

  https://twitter.com/JRosenworcel/status/910514607743217665

  "#FCC proposing to lower US #broadband standard from 25 to 10 Mbps.
  This is crazy. Lowering standards doesn't solve our broadband
  problems."

  Why would they do such a thing?

  Oh, so they can get more of our tax dollars to roll out competition in
  your area. Funded by you.


  On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Steve Jones <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> 
wrote:
  > Theyre replacing a tower here five feet from the current tower. I 
assume my
  > bosses taxes are helping to fund this assholes
  >
  > On Sep 27, 2017 6:50 PM, "Tushar Patel" <tpa...@ecpi.com> wrote:
  >
  > 
https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/27/att-rural-wireless-internet-expands-to-9-more-states/
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >

 

   

 

--

Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband

2017-09-28 Thread Mike Hammett 
Brian Webster would be the guy to tell us, but I'm sure he's tied up with WECAT 
stuff. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Josh Reynolds" <j...@kyneticwifi.com> 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2017 7:54:20 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband 


How many areas are wisps NOT in. 


On Sep 28, 2017 7:39 AM, "Dave" < dmilho...@wletc.com > wrote: 



+1 I could see that for sure. 
But we could get into the area they are not and would not go much faster. 



On 09/28/2017 07:35 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote: 



It would mean cell cos get more federal funding. A lot more. 


On Sep 28, 2017 12:37 AM, "Mathew Howard" < mhoward...@gmail.com > wrote: 



I don't really see how redefining "broadband" to 10/1 is a bad thing... 
shouldn't that mean that other companies wouldn't (in theory, anyway) be able 
to get funding to overbuild areas where we are already providing 10mbps, which 
they currently could, unless we have at least 25mbps? 



On Sep 28, 2017 12:30 AM, "Steve Jones" < thatoneguyst...@gmail.com > wrote: 




Off the topic, but we have a customer who keeps trying to get our cs to ise the 
term broadband. Hes limited to 6x2 and thinks (semi correctly) he can fule an 
fcc complaint if they use that word. Hes also accused us of violating federal 
monopoly laws because we have an exclusive contract on the grain elevator in 
his town. 
If i could release emails, voicemails, and call recordings from this guy over 
thelast ten years, i would win the internet and nobody in this industry would 
ever hate a customer less. 



On Sep 27, 2017 10:05 PM, "Josh Reynolds" < j...@kyneticwifi.com > wrote: 



As a note to this... 

"As always, you're not going to be blown away by the performance. 
You're paying $60 per month for 10Mbps downloads and 1Mbps uploads, 
which doesn't meet the FCC's definition of broadband." 

https://twitter.com/JRosenworcel/status/910514607743217665 

"#FCC proposing to lower US #broadband standard from 25 to 10 Mbps. 
This is crazy. Lowering standards doesn't solve our broadband 
problems." 

Why would they do such a thing? 

Oh, so they can get more of our tax dollars to roll out competition in 
your area. Funded by you. 


On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Steve Jones < thatoneguyst...@gmail.com > 
wrote: 
> Theyre replacing a tower here five feet from the current tower. I assume my 
> bosses taxes are helping to fund this assholes 
> 
> On Sep 27, 2017 6:50 PM, "Tushar Patel" < tpa...@ecpi.com > wrote: 
> 
> https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/27/att-rural-wireless-internet-expands-to-9-more-states/
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 












--

Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband

2017-09-28 Thread Josh Reynolds 
How many areas are wisps NOT in.

On Sep 28, 2017 7:39 AM, "Dave"  wrote:

> +1 I could see that for sure.
> But we could get into the area they are not and would not go much faster.
>
>
> On 09/28/2017 07:35 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
>
> It would mean cell cos get more federal funding. A lot more.
>
> On Sep 28, 2017 12:37 AM, "Mathew Howard"  wrote:
>
> I don't really see how redefining "broadband" to 10/1 is a bad thing...
> shouldn't that mean that other companies wouldn't (in theory, anyway) be
> able to get funding to overbuild areas where we are already providing
> 10mbps, which they currently could, unless we have at least 25mbps?
>
> On Sep 28, 2017 12:30 AM, "Steve Jones"  wrote:
>
>> Off the topic, but we  have a customer who keeps trying to get our cs to
>> ise the term broadband. Hes limited to 6x2 and thinks (semi correctly) he
>> can fule an fcc complaint if they use that word. Hes also accused us of
>> violating federal monopoly laws because we have an exclusive contract on
>> the grain elevator in his town.
>> If i could release emails, voicemails, and call recordings from this guy
>> over thelast ten years, i would win the internet and nobody in this
>> industry would ever hate a customer less.
>>
>> On Sep 27, 2017 10:05 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:
>>
>> As a note to this...
>>
>> "As always, you're not going to be blown away by the performance.
>> You're paying $60 per month for 10Mbps downloads and 1Mbps uploads,
>> which doesn't meet the FCC's definition of broadband."
>>
>> https://twitter.com/JRosenworcel/status/910514607743217665
>>
>> "#FCC proposing to lower US #broadband standard from 25 to 10 Mbps.
>> This is crazy. Lowering standards doesn't solve our broadband
>> problems."
>>
>> Why would they do such a thing?
>>
>> Oh, so they can get more of our tax dollars to roll out competition in
>> your area. Funded by you.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Steve Jones 
>> wrote:
>> > Theyre replacing a tower here five feet from the current tower. I
>> assume my
>> > bosses taxes are helping to fund this assholes
>> >
>> > On Sep 27, 2017 6:50 PM, "Tushar Patel"  wrote:
>> >
>> > https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/27/att-rural-wireless-inter
>> net-expands-to-9-more-states/
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
>

Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband

2017-09-28 Thread Mike Hammett 
The term never meant anything anyway. The funding requirements never changed. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Adam Moffett" <dmmoff...@gmail.com> 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2017 6:53:25 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband 


That's exactly it10mbps puts wireless back in the game for federal funding. 




-- Original Message -- 
From: "Mathew Howard" < mhoward...@gmail.com > 
To: "af" < af@afmug.com > 
Sent: 9/28/2017 1:37:03 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband 





I don't really see how redefining "broadband" to 10/1 is a bad thing... 
shouldn't that mean that other companies wouldn't (in theory, anyway) be able 
to get funding to overbuild areas where we are already providing 10mbps, which 
they currently could, unless we have at least 25mbps? 


On Sep 28, 2017 12:30 AM, "Steve Jones" < thatoneguyst...@gmail.com > wrote: 



Off the topic, but we have a customer who keeps trying to get our cs to ise the 
term broadband. Hes limited to 6x2 and thinks (semi correctly) he can fule an 
fcc complaint if they use that word. Hes also accused us of violating federal 
monopoly laws because we have an exclusive contract on the grain elevator in 
his town. 
If i could release emails, voicemails, and call recordings from this guy over 
thelast ten years, i would win the internet and nobody in this industry would 
ever hate a customer less. 


On Sep 27, 2017 10:05 PM, "Josh Reynolds" < j...@kyneticwifi.com > wrote: 


As a note to this... 

"As always, you're not going to be blown away by the performance. 
You're paying $60 per month for 10Mbps downloads and 1Mbps uploads, 
which doesn't meet the FCC's definition of broadband." 

https://twitter.com/JRosenworcel/status/910514607743217665 

"#FCC proposing to lower US #broadband standard from 25 to 10 Mbps. 
This is crazy. Lowering standards doesn't solve our broadband 
problems." 

Why would they do such a thing? 

Oh, so they can get more of our tax dollars to roll out competition in 
your area. Funded by you. 


On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Steve Jones < thatoneguyst...@gmail.com > 
wrote: 
> Theyre replacing a tower here five feet from the current tower. I assume my 
> bosses taxes are helping to fund this assholes 
> 
> On Sep 27, 2017 6:50 PM, "Tushar Patel" < tpa...@ecpi.com > wrote: 
> 
> https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/27/att-rural-wireless-internet-expands-to-9-more-states/
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband

2017-09-28 Thread Mike Hammett 
It shouldn't have been raised to 25 when it was, but rolling it back is 
retarded especially given that in the not too far future, it should be 25 
anyway. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Josh Reynolds" <j...@kyneticwifi.com> 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 10:05:48 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband 

As a note to this... 

"As always, you're not going to be blown away by the performance. 
You're paying $60 per month for 10Mbps downloads and 1Mbps uploads, 
which doesn't meet the FCC's definition of broadband." 

https://twitter.com/JRosenworcel/status/910514607743217665 

"#FCC proposing to lower US #broadband standard from 25 to 10 Mbps. 
This is crazy. Lowering standards doesn't solve our broadband 
problems." 

Why would they do such a thing? 

Oh, so they can get more of our tax dollars to roll out competition in 
your area. Funded by you. 

On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Steve Jones <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: 
> Theyre replacing a tower here five feet from the current tower. I assume my 
> bosses taxes are helping to fund this assholes 
> 
> On Sep 27, 2017 6:50 PM, "Tushar Patel" <tpa...@ecpi.com> wrote: 
> 
> https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/27/att-rural-wireless-internet-expands-to-9-more-states/
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband

2017-09-28 Thread Dave 

+1 I could see that for sure.
But we could get into the area they are not and would not go much faster.


On 09/28/2017 07:35 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:

It would mean cell cos get more federal funding. A lot more.

On Sep 28, 2017 12:37 AM, "Mathew Howard" > wrote:


I don't really see how redefining "broadband" to 10/1 is a bad
thing... shouldn't that mean that other companies wouldn't (in
theory, anyway) be able to get funding to overbuild areas where we
are already providing 10mbps, which they currently could, unless
we have at least 25mbps?

On Sep 28, 2017 12:30 AM, "Steve Jones" > wrote:

Off the topic, but we  have a customer who keeps trying to get
our cs to ise the term broadband. Hes limited to 6x2 and
thinks (semi correctly) he can fule an fcc complaint if they
use that word. Hes also accused us of violating federal
monopoly laws because we have an exclusive contract on the
grain elevator in his town.
If i could release emails, voicemails, and call recordings
from this guy over thelast ten years, i would win the internet
and nobody in this industry would ever hate a customer less.

On Sep 27, 2017 10:05 PM, "Josh Reynolds"
> wrote:

As a note to this...

"As always, you're not going to be blown away by the
performance.
You're paying $60 per month for 10Mbps downloads and 1Mbps
uploads,
which doesn't meet the FCC's definition of broadband."

https://twitter.com/JRosenworcel/status/910514607743217665


"#FCC proposing to lower US #broadband standard from 25 to
10 Mbps.
This is crazy. Lowering standards doesn't solve our broadband
problems."

Why would they do such a thing?

Oh, so they can get more of our tax dollars to roll out
competition in
your area. Funded by you.

On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Steve Jones
> wrote:
> Theyre replacing a tower here five feet from the current
tower. I assume my
> bosses taxes are helping to fund this assholes
>
> On Sep 27, 2017 6:50 PM, "Tushar Patel" > wrote:
>
>

https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/27/att-rural-wireless-internet-expands-to-9-more-states/


>
>
>
>
>
>





--

Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband

2017-09-28 Thread Dave 
I have a very formal L.O.T for those kind and I am sure the Celcos would 
love to have his business.



On 09/28/2017 12:30 AM, Steve Jones wrote:
Off the topic, but we  have a customer who keeps trying to get our cs 
to ise the term broadband. Hes limited to 6x2 and thinks (semi 
correctly) he can fule an fcc complaint if they use that word. Hes 
also accused us of violating federal monopoly laws because we have an 
exclusive contract on the grain elevator in his town.
If i could release emails, voicemails, and call recordings from this 
guy over thelast ten years, i would win the internet and nobody in 
this industry would ever hate a customer less.


On Sep 27, 2017 10:05 PM, "Josh Reynolds" > wrote:


As a note to this...

"As always, you're not going to be blown away by the performance.
You're paying $60 per month for 10Mbps downloads and 1Mbps uploads,
which doesn't meet the FCC's definition of broadband."

https://twitter.com/JRosenworcel/status/910514607743217665


"#FCC proposing to lower US #broadband standard from 25 to 10 Mbps.
This is crazy. Lowering standards doesn't solve our broadband
problems."

Why would they do such a thing?

Oh, so they can get more of our tax dollars to roll out competition in
your area. Funded by you.

On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Steve Jones
> wrote:
> Theyre replacing a tower here five feet from the current tower.
I assume my
> bosses taxes are helping to fund this assholes
>
> On Sep 27, 2017 6:50 PM, "Tushar Patel" > wrote:
>
>

https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/27/att-rural-wireless-internet-expands-to-9-more-states/


>
>
>
>
>
>




--

Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband

2017-09-28 Thread Josh Reynolds 
It would mean cell cos get more federal funding. A lot more.

On Sep 28, 2017 12:37 AM, "Mathew Howard"  wrote:

I don't really see how redefining "broadband" to 10/1 is a bad thing...
shouldn't that mean that other companies wouldn't (in theory, anyway) be
able to get funding to overbuild areas where we are already providing
10mbps, which they currently could, unless we have at least 25mbps?

On Sep 28, 2017 12:30 AM, "Steve Jones"  wrote:

> Off the topic, but we  have a customer who keeps trying to get our cs to
> ise the term broadband. Hes limited to 6x2 and thinks (semi correctly) he
> can fule an fcc complaint if they use that word. Hes also accused us of
> violating federal monopoly laws because we have an exclusive contract on
> the grain elevator in his town.
> If i could release emails, voicemails, and call recordings from this guy
> over thelast ten years, i would win the internet and nobody in this
> industry would ever hate a customer less.
>
> On Sep 27, 2017 10:05 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:
>
> As a note to this...
>
> "As always, you're not going to be blown away by the performance.
> You're paying $60 per month for 10Mbps downloads and 1Mbps uploads,
> which doesn't meet the FCC's definition of broadband."
>
> https://twitter.com/JRosenworcel/status/910514607743217665
>
> "#FCC proposing to lower US #broadband standard from 25 to 10 Mbps.
> This is crazy. Lowering standards doesn't solve our broadband
> problems."
>
> Why would they do such a thing?
>
> Oh, so they can get more of our tax dollars to roll out competition in
> your area. Funded by you.
>
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Steve Jones 
> wrote:
> > Theyre replacing a tower here five feet from the current tower. I assume
> my
> > bosses taxes are helping to fund this assholes
> >
> > On Sep 27, 2017 6:50 PM, "Tushar Patel"  wrote:
> >
> > https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/27/att-rural-wireless-inter
> net-expands-to-9-more-states/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband

2017-09-28 Thread Adam Moffett 
That's exactly it10mbps puts wireless back in the game for federal 
funding.



-- Original Message --
From: "Mathew Howard" <mhoward...@gmail.com>
To: "af" <af@afmug.com>
Sent: 9/28/2017 1:37:03 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband

I don't really see how redefining "broadband" to 10/1 is a bad thing... 
shouldn't that mean that other companies wouldn't (in theory, anyway) 
be able to get funding to overbuild areas where we are already 
providing 10mbps, which they currently could, unless we have at least 
25mbps?


On Sep 28, 2017 12:30 AM, "Steve Jones" <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> 
wrote:
Off the topic, but we  have a customer who keeps trying to get our cs 
to ise the term broadband. Hes limited to 6x2 and thinks (semi 
correctly) he can fule an fcc complaint if they use that word. Hes 
also accused us of violating federal monopoly laws because we have an 
exclusive contract on the grain elevator in his town.
If i could release emails, voicemails, and call recordings from this 
guy over thelast ten years, i would win the internet and nobody in 
this industry would ever hate a customer less.


On Sep 27, 2017 10:05 PM, "Josh Reynolds" <j...@kyneticwifi.com> 
wrote:

As a note to this...

"As always, you're not going to be blown away by the performance.
You're paying $60 per month for 10Mbps downloads and 1Mbps uploads,
which doesn't meet the FCC's definition of broadband."

https://twitter.com/JRosenworcel/status/910514607743217665 
<https://twitter.com/JRosenworcel/status/910514607743217665>


"#FCC proposing to lower US #broadband standard from 25 to 10 Mbps.
This is crazy. Lowering standards doesn't solve our broadband
problems."

Why would they do such a thing?

Oh, so they can get more of our tax dollars to roll out competition 
in

your area. Funded by you.

On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Steve Jones 
<thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Theyre replacing a tower here five feet from the current tower. I 
assume my

> bosses taxes are helping to fund this assholes
>
> On Sep 27, 2017 6:50 PM, "Tushar Patel" <tpa...@ecpi.com> wrote:
>
> 
https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/27/att-rural-wireless-internet-expands-to-9-more-states/ 
<https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/27/att-rural-wireless-internet-expands-to-9-more-states/>

>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband

2017-09-27 Thread Mathew Howard 
I don't really see how redefining "broadband" to 10/1 is a bad thing...
shouldn't that mean that other companies wouldn't (in theory, anyway) be
able to get funding to overbuild areas where we are already providing
10mbps, which they currently could, unless we have at least 25mbps?

On Sep 28, 2017 12:30 AM, "Steve Jones"  wrote:

> Off the topic, but we  have a customer who keeps trying to get our cs to
> ise the term broadband. Hes limited to 6x2 and thinks (semi correctly) he
> can fule an fcc complaint if they use that word. Hes also accused us of
> violating federal monopoly laws because we have an exclusive contract on
> the grain elevator in his town.
> If i could release emails, voicemails, and call recordings from this guy
> over thelast ten years, i would win the internet and nobody in this
> industry would ever hate a customer less.
>
> On Sep 27, 2017 10:05 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:
>
> As a note to this...
>
> "As always, you're not going to be blown away by the performance.
> You're paying $60 per month for 10Mbps downloads and 1Mbps uploads,
> which doesn't meet the FCC's definition of broadband."
>
> https://twitter.com/JRosenworcel/status/910514607743217665
>
> "#FCC proposing to lower US #broadband standard from 25 to 10 Mbps.
> This is crazy. Lowering standards doesn't solve our broadband
> problems."
>
> Why would they do such a thing?
>
> Oh, so they can get more of our tax dollars to roll out competition in
> your area. Funded by you.
>
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Steve Jones 
> wrote:
> > Theyre replacing a tower here five feet from the current tower. I assume
> my
> > bosses taxes are helping to fund this assholes
> >
> > On Sep 27, 2017 6:50 PM, "Tushar Patel"  wrote:
> >
> > https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/27/att-rural-wireless-inter
> net-expands-to-9-more-states/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband

2017-09-27 Thread Kurt Fankhauser 
I need to hear the voicemails

On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 1:30 AM, Steve Jones 
wrote:

> Off the topic, but we  have a customer who keeps trying to get our cs to
> ise the term broadband. Hes limited to 6x2 and thinks (semi correctly) he
> can fule an fcc complaint if they use that word. Hes also accused us of
> violating federal monopoly laws because we have an exclusive contract on
> the grain elevator in his town.
> If i could release emails, voicemails, and call recordings from this guy
> over thelast ten years, i would win the internet and nobody in this
> industry would ever hate a customer less.
>
> On Sep 27, 2017 10:05 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:
>
> As a note to this...
>
> "As always, you're not going to be blown away by the performance.
> You're paying $60 per month for 10Mbps downloads and 1Mbps uploads,
> which doesn't meet the FCC's definition of broadband."
>
> https://twitter.com/JRosenworcel/status/910514607743217665
>
> "#FCC proposing to lower US #broadband standard from 25 to 10 Mbps.
> This is crazy. Lowering standards doesn't solve our broadband
> problems."
>
> Why would they do such a thing?
>
> Oh, so they can get more of our tax dollars to roll out competition in
> your area. Funded by you.
>
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Steve Jones 
> wrote:
> > Theyre replacing a tower here five feet from the current tower. I assume
> my
> > bosses taxes are helping to fund this assholes
> >
> > On Sep 27, 2017 6:50 PM, "Tushar Patel"  wrote:
> >
> > https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/27/att-rural-wireless-inter
> net-expands-to-9-more-states/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband

2017-09-27 Thread Steve Jones 
Off the topic, but we  have a customer who keeps trying to get our cs to
ise the term broadband. Hes limited to 6x2 and thinks (semi correctly) he
can fule an fcc complaint if they use that word. Hes also accused us of
violating federal monopoly laws because we have an exclusive contract on
the grain elevator in his town.
If i could release emails, voicemails, and call recordings from this guy
over thelast ten years, i would win the internet and nobody in this
industry would ever hate a customer less.

On Sep 27, 2017 10:05 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:

As a note to this...

"As always, you're not going to be blown away by the performance.
You're paying $60 per month for 10Mbps downloads and 1Mbps uploads,
which doesn't meet the FCC's definition of broadband."

https://twitter.com/JRosenworcel/status/910514607743217665

"#FCC proposing to lower US #broadband standard from 25 to 10 Mbps.
This is crazy. Lowering standards doesn't solve our broadband
problems."

Why would they do such a thing?

Oh, so they can get more of our tax dollars to roll out competition in
your area. Funded by you.

On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Steve Jones 
wrote:
> Theyre replacing a tower here five feet from the current tower. I assume
my
> bosses taxes are helping to fund this assholes
>
> On Sep 27, 2017 6:50 PM, "Tushar Patel"  wrote:
>
> https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/27/att-rural-wireless-
internet-expands-to-9-more-states/
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband

2017-09-27 Thread Steve Jones 
Theyre replacing a tower here five feet from the current tower. I assume my
bosses taxes are helping to fund this assholes

On Sep 27, 2017 6:50 PM, "Tushar Patel"  wrote:

https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/27/att-rural-wireless-
internet-expands-to-9-more-states/

[AFMUG] AT & T Rural broadband

2017-09-27 Thread Tushar Patel 
https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/27/att-rural-wireless-internet-expands-to-9
-more-states/