According to Corran, it doesn't mean jack shit yet. There's no regulation or 
funding tied to it. 




----- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



----- Original Message -----

From: "Jason McKemie" <j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 7:06:38 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Two FCC related questions 

Doesn't this just mean if you don't offer service of at least 25mbps your area 
won't count as served? I'm pretty sure you can call your service whatever you 
damn well please. 

On Friday, January 30, 2015, Mark Radabaugh < m...@amplex.net > wrote: 




Keep in mind the cable companies don't get federal subsidies. The cable data 
operations are unregulated information service exactly like us, and they can 
easily meet the 25/3. 


They are opposed because it means the telcos are going to be given federal 
money to upgrade to 25/3 and become competition. 


Cable spends it's own money to compete, just like us. They are equally ticked 
over changing the definition so that their competition, who has not spent their 
own money, and waited for government handouts is going to be rewarded. 


Mark Radabaugh 
Amplex 
27800 Lemoyne, Ste F 
Millbury, OH 43447 
419-261-5996 

On Jan 30, 2015, at 6:19 PM, Jeremy < jeremysmi...@gmail.com > wrote: 


<blockquote>


I found it interesting that the cable companies were claiming to be against 
this change. This seems handcrafted by them if you ask me. Every year when they 
request funding the WISPs in those areas (with the help of WISPA) file claims 
against them receiving those funds under the basis that 'broadband' is already 
available in those areas where they are claiming that it is not. This has 
actually worked fairly well in keeping those entities from receiving those 
funds. Now, almost none of us meet the 'broadband' qualification and now they 
can use the government funds to build out on top of us almost uncontested. 


On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 4:03 PM, Jeremy < jeremysmi...@gmail.com > wrote: 

<blockquote>

My company is called 'Blue Spring Broadband'. I will not be changing my name. 
We offer dedicated connections up to 100Mbps, and more on a case-by-case basis 
(ie. I would offer 1Gbps near the NOC to anyone willing to pay for it). 
Although we do not offer more than 15x3 to residential currently, I still 
believe we can be classified as a broadband service provider. I happily give 
quotes on a 25x25 dedicated unlimited connection to any residential customers 
that ask for it ($1K/mo. roughly). Until some governing entity tells me 
different that is my stance. 




On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 3:49 PM, Ken Hohhof < af...@kwisp.com > wrote: 

<blockquote>




It’s depressing to think about all the government money that went to subsidize 
1 Mbps (if that) Hughesnet service under the recovery act. 

The contradiction is like setting a standard that every citizen must get fresh 
whole grain organic locally grown low sugar low sodium food, just a couple 
years after handing out pork rinds, moon pies and Jolt cola in the school lunch 
program. 





From: Bill Prince 
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 3:22 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Two FCC related questions 


+1. They have the added complication that they are way oversubscribed compared 
to almost everything else. 

Let's not even mention latency. 

If "broadband" included something about latency (like "just" < 200 ms for 
instance), then they would lose big time. 


bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> On 1/30/2015 1:17 PM, Glen Waldrop wrote: 



<blockquote>

Doubtful. They can't sustain those speeds wide spread any better than we can. 



<blockquote>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: That One Guy 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 3:12 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Two FCC related questions 

at those sustained speeds, the only tech that could realistically deliver to 
the rural market right now would be satellite wouldnt it 



On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 2:46 PM, SmarterBroadband < li...@smarterbroadband.com 
> wrote: 

<blockquote>



+1 



From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Sterling Jacobson 
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 12:21 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Two FCC related questions 

Even if you don’t deliver 25Mbps as defined, can’t you just put a plan rate for 
25Mbps and give it some ridiculous price that no one will ever buy, then claim 
broadband? 

I mean the other lower plan rates wouldn’t be broadband, but your company could 
be branded as selling broadband? 



From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Tyson Burris @ Internet 
Communications Inc 
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 12:40 PM 
To: memb...@wispa.org 
Cc: af@afmug.com 
Subject: [AFMUG] Two FCC related questions 

1. Is the 25Mbps classification immediate? 
2. What are you NOW going to call your previously determined ‘broadband’ 
service? 


Tyson Burris, President 
Internet Communications Inc. 
739 Commerce Dr. 
Franklin, IN 46131 

317-738-0320 Daytime # 
317-412-1540 Cell/Direct # 
Online: www.surfici.net 

ICI
What can ICI do for you? 

Broadband Wireless - PtP/PtMP Solutions - WiMax - Mesh Wifi/Hotzones - IP 
Security - Fiber - Tower - Infrastructure. 

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail is intended for the 
addressee shown. It contains information that is 
confidential and protected from disclosure. Any review, 
dissemination or use of this transmission or its contents by 
unauthorized organizations or individuals is strictly 
prohibited. 





-- 


All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the parts 
you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you can't get them 
together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not use a hammer. -- 
IBM maintenance manual, 1925 

</blockquote>

</blockquote>


</blockquote>


</blockquote>


</blockquote>

</blockquote>

Reply via email to