Assuming you didn't have to recoup build costs, I don't see how it would be hard to run the network at $50 per sub. Bandwidth is dirt cheep at scale and there isn't much to go wrong with a fiber plant.
> On Jul 6, 2015, at 3:10 PM, Christopher Gray <cg...@graytechsoftware.com> > wrote: > > About $40M is grant funding from the state for "last mile" services that is > only available to municipalities. The balance of the funding is coming from > town borrowing. My town will receive about $1.2M from the grant and will vote > in September whether to authorize $2.3M of borrowing that would be paid with > property tax. > > I'm 95% sure this will go through, and the network would be lit in about 3 > years, but I can't get their numbers to work out. I cannot see how they can > actually provide service and maintain their network and offer a base service > of only $50 / month. If that jumps to $100, I could see remaining > competitive, though. > > >> On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 1:58 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote: >> Where is the funding coming from? >> I would not be comfortable building in an area where I am sure to get over >> built. >> >> From: Christopher Gray >> Sent: Monday, July 06, 2015 11:56 AM >> To: af@afmug.com >> Subject: [AFMUG] Plan to Compete with Municipal Fiber? >> >> Several of the rural towns in my planned coverage area are looking into >> municipal fiber (average density about 10 premises per fiber mile, all above >> ground). They're claiming $50 for 25 Mbps service, $79 for 100 Mbps, and >> $109 for 1 Gbps. They already have funding authorized in about half of the >> towns they are targeting... but they'd be about 3 years from providing any >> service. >> >> Is it reasonable or possible to compete with such a thing? Should I ignore >> any area that plans to fund this, or might it be worth getting a foothold >> before their system is lit? >> >> Thanks - Chris >
