NY Mayors Lament Lack of NY FiOS > In before FiOS is too expensive

reply to 25139889

Re: In before FiOS is too expensive

Actually Ohio is in the middle. But at least we do NOT have the government spending our money on socialism projects that force us all to pay. We pay for enough and are in enough debt than to take on some network that will NEVER be paid for. States and cities that take on these projects and can ever pay for them in the end are the stupid ones. Those leaders are NOT leaders. They're only there to spend money and get what they want.

If creating an FTTH network was what the Country needed- The Federal government would set that and start setting out RFPs to build such a network and more and more private companies would be doing this; when in fact they do NOT. Overbuilding does NOT work. And it's been proven customers with more than 3 choices can NOT make a choice. so they will stay with who they currently have. Take VZ's FiOS- customer count is horrible low compared to what they stated it would be. Why? Customers do NOT WANT CHANGE. They do NOT LIKE IT. ATT? The same way. Customers do NOT like change and will not adopt to it.

reply to Telco
This is not republican ideology. This is somebody who is using socialism as a scare tactic.

The other side of the coin is not capitalist. if the government is subsidising these isps to build out, and collecting tariffs to build out, then it's corporate socialism. You'll find NWOhio ignores the other side of the coin.

A real capitalist society would let the isps build out without any interference and only stop monopolies from forming..

Where is Comcast collecting their money? ATT or their U-Verse Network? Charter? Cablevision? Verizon for FiOS? I don't see them collecting any money to build out their networks. I don't see TWC collecting anything else.

And btw- they are NOT ISPs. An ISP sells access access to the Internet. These companies were around BEFORE and do more than sell HSI. And they actually sell access to a private online network. NOT the Internet.

And you have no monopolies. Cities are free to have any private company build they wish- And again; its a proof of business that overbuilding does NOT work. If it did RCN would have NEVER filed bankruptcy. WOW would be a greater threat than they are. FiOS would have overbuilt ATT. TWC would be in Comcast areas. and going on. We'd have more 3rd party MSOs. But actually, you don't for one reason- does NOT work and is too risky. The risk does NOT cost.

reply to Metatron2008

reply to Telco

reply to 25139889
Therefore, the status-quo does not work. Of course building three separate cable networks is not 'profitable'. However, if the government was to build a FTTH like they did with roads and then wholesale it to any carrier, this would indeed be profitable.

Not to mention, companies are short-term profit driven and adverse to long-term investments. Whereas, a government is able to invest long-term and buy bonds for 30 years for example, which is a must for any large scale projects.

This short-term quarter driven outlook is why more and more nations are overtaking us - it's our Achilles heel actually.

reply to Sammer
The case with Solyndra is more than meets the eye. And you know why this was the case? Because the $0.5 Billion we 'loaned' was not only matched but wiped out by the $20 Billion 'granted' by China to their solar companies.

When it comes to FIOS, it's a simple case of corporations colluding rather than competing. Instead of spending billions to build out a competitive broadband network, they'd much rather work out a deal to secure spectrum and focus on their monopoly (wireless).

Of course, try to install a MUNI FTTH in FIOS territory, in homes not even covered, and watch them kick and scream about it.