Hi,
That is correct... all the providers bring their connections into the
main NOC for the city (brand new facility). So you have to get transport
there, but then you are billing the customer directly for whatever
services they want from you. It looks like 100Mbps residential will be
around $20/month. I'm not sure how you compete on that level, but that
seems to be around the price where the 3-4 providers are at right now.
The city makes money billing the customer the $16.50/month for the
"transport" for each customer.
Travis
On 10/28/2016 7:47 AM, Kurt Fankhauser wrote:
Can a WISP like us even compete in the city of Ammon? I assume that
this fiber all goes to some sort of Central Office building and any
carrier that wants to come into town can then run a line into this
building and sell on the FTTH plant. So in reality the only providers
that can compete is whoever owns the long-haul fiber coming into this
town. And selling service in the $20/month price bracket to the
customer and then having to turn around and pay the city of Ammon on
top of that sounds like you'd be lucky to make a couple dollars per
customer at all.
On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 5:05 AM, <fiber...@mail.com
<mailto:fiber...@mail.com>> wrote:
Rob Genovesi wrote:
> I despise over regulation but it could create a large enough barrier
> to entry that only serious operators would enter the market and that
> might prevent race to the bottom, at least for a little while.
How do you define a serious operator and who gets to set the rules?
I'd much rather have low barriers to entry and any downside that
it brings. Generally speaking we need more competition, not less.
A far larger long term threat than bottom of the barrel
operators is market consolidation, due to the fact that the ISP
business is very much a volume business where the winner can just
outscale smaller players.
> >> I'm sure spammers and DCMA violators will love it!
> >
> > How do you figure the above applies?
>
> That seems pretty obvious, DCMA violators will just keep jumping to
> the next service provider any time their current provider is
forced to
> turn them off.
That assumes there is an infinite supply of ISPs to chose from,
which there clearly isn't. In other words, this is not a viable
long term strategy, and most people are smart enough to figure
that out and don't go down that road. Much easier to just use a
VPN service than jumping ship every time you get a DMCA complaint.
Jared
