en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Still not available in SoCal.
Population +17million (Metro L.A. area)
It would be a decent alternative to forced bundling by cable/telco, or having to pay ~$40/month for 1.5Mbps ADSL dry loop / $46/month cable HSI dry. |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | Cheapest internet in CO for me is $35 for 1/384 on cable. Otherwise I think it's $55 for cable and $40 for DSL. No Clear here though bandwidth is plentiful, just like in LA (okay, LA is better b\w wise but we have les competition here). |
|
squison
join:2001-07-07
Decatur, GA
 ·AT&T Southeast
| reply to en102
They're probably going about it the right way -- go after mid-size cities without tons of competition (1 cable+1 dsl) before tackling the SoCal and NYC's of the world. I imagine bringing up a new service for a huge population like that has all sorts of challenges, so they might as well get the bugs worked out on those "tiny" cities like Atlanta and Vegas. |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| I suspect you have it right -
Vegas is relatively small - and has big $$$ business.
L.A. is phyiscally huge - and it would take quite some time to build out.
Many cities in the 100l to 500k wouldn't be too difficult to build quickly. If they hit places with poor cable/DSL deployment (i.e. Charter, Cox, mom/pop cable co or Qwest/CenturyLink) that want expensive service - typically slow rates... The could do well.
Unlike fixed - the most expensive piece is the spectrum licensing itself, and its already been purchased - they just have to use it.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
