(another story that has been superseded somewhat by subsequent events and news, but issues still relevant. )
It appears that Google isn’t really pricing their fiber to the home service at “takeover the market” levels. And they aren’t going to roll it out unless they get “high enough” participation in various neighborhoods. Disappointing…
In other related broadband news, “Connect America” is going to support some rural broadband in NM. But seems small potatoes relative to the need. 8000 new connections compared with 220000 needed. Here’s the AP below:
ALBUQUERQUE – More of rural New Mexico will get high-speed Internet over the next three years as a part of the first phase of the Federal Communications Commission’s “Connect America Fund.”
U.S. Senator Tom Udall, D-N.M., says almost 8,000 New Mexico residents will get high-speed internet access under the program, which is giving $2.3 million in grants to CenturyLink and Windstream to build broadband infrastructure for rural New Mexico homes and businesses,.
Udall says that nearly 47 percent of New Mexico’s rural population, or about 220,000 people, still lack access to high-speed internet.
The “Connect America Fund” aims to connect all 19 million rural Americans by 2020.
gary575 on 28 Jul 12
I think this time I will be the “glass half full” guy. The Google pricing is most assuredly “takeover the market” pricing – assuming, of course there is a market. If there is no market, any venture is sure to fail from lack of paying customers.
1) They are offering free 5 Mbps service – it doesn’t get a lot chaper than that and 5 Mbps is more than the “broadband” which “Connect America” is brinfunding for NM (and NM users will have to pay some TBD price).
2) $70 per month for 1 Gbps is dirt cheap by US standards. FiOS 200 Mbps service (1/5 the speed) is about $300 per month.
3) The bundle being offered for $120 is a comprehensive home media platform that is well beyond anything offered by any US ISP (Cable or Phone).
That said, many commentators are talking more about San Leandro, CA than Kansas CIty. In SL, a public/private venture is rolling out 10 Gbps service to businesses and public facilities in te city – hoping to spur economic growth. It is being done on a shoestring (relatively) and is actually being deployed. Consumer use “may” follow, but at least the core infrastructure is going in.
This model is similar to Palo Alto and along the lines I would have hoped LC could have pursued. San Leandro’s public investment has been limited to conduit access and right-of-ways. http://www.prlog.org/11934029-san-leandro-not-google-is-writing-the-next-champter-of-the-internet.html