The major difference with iProvo is the fact that despite being nearly a necessity, most major communications systems have been provided by private companies while other utilities are more frequently run by municipalities. For a long time, AT&T had a loosely regulated monopoly for phone systems, which mimics most modern private utilities. Deregulating and splitting up AT&T gave us cheaper phones and more technology improvements.
As for my hometown utility? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Gas_and_Electric Covers almost half the people in California while http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_California_Edison picks up another significant chunk. These are public companies which handle millions of people and perform well in stock exchanges. The notable exceptions in the second article discount LA and SD municipal utitilies. Assuming Wikipedia's statement that says PG&E gets as much as $4.5 billion profits on $11 billion in revenue (41%) is accurate, it sounds like northern Californians are getting the shaft (or they should own PG&E stock). It sounds like California was failing it's responsibility to regulate a monopoly it bailed out a couple years prior. I'm not sure how Provo Power performs in comparison, and energy markets have changed drastically lately, but it becomes a question of translating profits into assets. Profits are measured in current value dollars received less spent. Assets are property or financial instrument bought in an attempt to store money in a way that maintains or grows value despite inflation. Assets become liabilities when they lose value. If Provo Power could find a profitable/break even way to build out iProvo, then they've translated profits into assets. With a heavy drain on utility profits to cover the loans on iProvo, it looks like a liability rather than an asset. But a public utility like Provo Power isn't really supposed to make much of a profit in the first place. In a strict business paradigm you either dump a liability(there's an economic incentive for picking up a failed business entity), or fix it's problems so it becomes an asset again. Dumping iProvo from the public utility will decrease the subsidy power customers are paying for fiber customers. But lots of companies engage in business development using profits from existing customers, so of course it costs money in the short term. I would argue that ultimately fiber is not only a potential asset, but a natural utility monopoly. Copper just doesn't compare for future use and wireless spectrum and bandwidth is finite. As a natural monopoly, it doesn't make sense for a second fiber optic network to be built, so it's imperative for Provo to only sell with a strong regulatory agreement. In the short run there is competition, but in the long run I don't believe that Comcast and Qwest will be sustainable at their lower data rates. Which is why state law require public networks to carry all ISP's, so when demand catches up with supply we won't be at the mercy of a monopoly. On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 10:24 AM, Jeff Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > About government regulations for the ISP-- I agree that usually government > regulations are a bad thing for business. What of other infrastructure in > the city? Are there restrictions on prices for electricity? water? sewage? > phone lines? plain old coax cable? > > Provo handles many of these things, but what is the norm in hometown USA? I > know some cities simply contract out things like electricity, and the > electric company that wins the bid is basically a monopoly. Do cities put > price requirements on the monopoly electric company? > > I'd be interested in what government restrictions, if any, exist for other > infrastructure in the city-- city owned or not. What do you know? What does > the city where you grow up do? > > > Jeff Anderson > > > -------------------- > BYU Unix Users Group > http://uug.byu.edu/ > > The opinions expressed in this message are the responsibility of their > author. They are not endorsed by BYU, the BYU CS Department or BYU-UUG. > ___________________________________________________________________ > List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/mailman/listinfo/uug-list >
-------------------- BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ The opinions expressed in this message are the responsibility of their author. They are not endorsed by BYU, the BYU CS Department or BYU-UUG. ___________________________________________________________________ List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
