Sorry Chuck - did not mean to attribute to the wrong person. Fred did say it. But none the less, here in Ohio, We've never been asked for a penny from Connect Ohio other than when we hired Chip Spann via Connected Nation to do some network design for us early on. And perhaps CK opperates different from CO. I know they've been around a LOT longer. I guess it's kinda Fords. You either love 'em or hate em, depending on your experiences with them. My main point is that not everyone has had such a negative experience with CN, and in some cases, very good success working with them.
Dave Hannum New Era Broadband, LLC On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 5:25 PM, Fred Goldstein <fgoldst...@ionary.com>wrote: > At 1/15/2011 05:02 PM, Chuck Hogg wrote: > > I didn't say that, but it is well known. > > > I said it, and I stand by it, noting what Chuck said as an example. Even > before the federally-funded mapping projects, CK was operating -- it was the > prototype for CN -- and it was referring people to BellSouth. I think at > the time it was a $20k fee to be listed. $20k for BellSouth, $20k for a > tiny local ISP. Sort of a poll tax model. Great for the big guys. But it's > not the big guys who need someone to tell the public who provides service > where they are. > > > Second, Connect Kentucky came to me and asked us to be a partner to Connect > Kentucky. I said sure, send over the paperwork. It was a minimum $10k to > be listed on the associates part. $50k to be a partner. Do they honestly > think I can afford either? Guess who was partners? HughesNet, WildBlue, > Bellsouth (AT&T), Time Warner, Windstream, Insight... so when a customer in > my area called them to see about access, even though I fully cooperated with > CK, went to EVERY meeting, provided them with full mapping data and showed > them how to use Radio Mobile, they referred them to HughesNet or WildBlue. > They knew I had that area covered, it was very blatant, but because I didn't > pay them the money, they referred them to an inferior product, satellite > service. They were provided with MILLIONS!!! to do mapping for Kentucky. > The maps they did were immediately removed and taken offline as soon as > their funding ran out. It was done in spite of the Kentucky Government. > The TAX PAYERS OWN THAT DATA, and they stole it from us all. Guess what > happened another year later? Another company was hired to do THAT EXACT > SAME MAPPING again, and yes, they got MILLIONS again. > > I tried MULTIPLE times to work with them, and MANY MANY MANY open ended > promised were made by them. > > None of this is opinion, it's all FACT. Ask MANY MANY MANY people around > the US that are under a Connect program. Most will show their displeasure. > > Regards, > > Chuck > > > On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 2:41 PM, David Hannum <oujas...@gmail.com> wrote: > Chuck said: "It is well known that CN is a marketing and lobbying front > for the Bells." > I would agree with that it is a well known "opinion" by many on this list. > However, from what we've seen, they lobby as much, if not more, for > independent companies like most of us are. They lobby for Broadband in > general - they don't play favorites at the high level. However, they have > some very knowledgible, dedicated wireless guys. And if you work very much > with them, you'd see that wireles is all those guys are about. > > Dave Hannum > New Era Broadband, LLC > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Fred Goldstein <fgoldst...@ionary.com> > wrote: > At 1/15/2011 08:25 AM, Chuck Hogg wrote: > >You know at the time I saw the email, I was surprised. However, > >nobody on this list knows about the joke of a deal CN is like Rick and > >I do. After the millions of dollars in tax revenue and all this > >mapping, that public information was removed from their website. > >Millions of tax paying dollars down the drain. Because of the > >potential WISPA problems, I won't tell you how I really feel. > > I'm not a member (yet) so take that as a disclaimer. This is the > public forum, not official correspondence. > > It is well known that CN is a marketing and lobbying front for the > Bells. Bob's satire was harmless, reflective of their value to > independent ISPs, wireless and otherwise. If CN is whinging, let > them, because it hit home. > > Bob's contributions have at times been a high point of this > list. Not everything has to be somber. > > >On Saturday, January 15, 2011, Josh Luthman > >< j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote: > > > The problem was the lack of maturity and how bad the content > > makes WISPA look. > > > We have our opinions. We are people. But we, as adults and > > businesses or representatives, need too display a level of advancement. > > -- > Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com > ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ > +1 617 795 2701 > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
