Check out UTOPIA for a good case study.  There are plenty more too.

From: Lewis Bergman 
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2015 6:03 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Plan to Compete with Municipal Fiber?

100% agree with Brian. This seems to be the path for about 99% of the Muni 
WISPS out there. Keep your eye on it, get to the know the staff. When the pain 
seems to get to much for them to bear offer to step in. 

The only thing you will have to deal with is the customers who think you should 
charge, or give for free, with the same structure a tax funded entity couldn't 
make work. That won't matter since those socialists can't understand logic 
there is no use explaining it to them.

On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 10:06 PM, Brian Webster <i...@wirelessmapping.com> wrote:

  My suggestion would be to just wait it out. Let them build it and lose money. 
Eventually they will realize that they have no idea how to be an ISP, the 
customers will not deal with slow government response times to complaints, and 
the government will hate dealing with title II issues and open internet 
regulations. They will throw their hands up and offer it via bid or something 
else to a private company to manage/own/run. You might be able to pick it up 
for far less than it would have cost you to build. I certainly would not try to 
overbuild them before they get going. The average consumer has already heard 
about their promised prices, you will be fighting that even though they have 
not even started building yet.



  Do a search for the UC2B project in Illinois, it was a municipal/university 
system built with stimulus funds. They did what they needed to meet grant 
obligations, then they all argued among the partners about who and how they 
would run things and failed at that. They finally let a private company take 
over and expand the system.



  Thank You,

  Brian Webster

  www.wirelessmapping.com

  www.Broadband-Mapping.com



  From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Carl Peterson
  Sent: Monday, July 06, 2015 8:45 PM
  To: af@afmug.com
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Plan to Compete with Municipal Fiber?




  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







-- 

Lewis Bergman 
325-439-0533 Cell

Reply via email to