4 ms·

> I have no idea what backroom deal Google made with Provo, Utah, but something similar HAD to happen for Google to win the fiber for only $1. Oh god. You're g

> I have no idea what backroom deal Google made with Provo, Utah, but something similar HAD to happen for Google to win the fiber for only $1. Oh god. You're great. :) "Google will take over Provo’s fiber network and improve upon it as soon as the acquisition is official ... which will reportedly cost Google about $30 million. But Google will also take over Provo’s remaining construction loans, which reportedly need to be paid for another dozen years at the very least, according to the official agreements released by city officials on Thursday. Google will also be covering residents’ costs, as Provo households have reportedly been paying $5.35 a month on top of their utility bills regardless of whether they used iProvo." [0] Another thing you're forgetting: iProvo was owned by Provo, UT. Public utilities have a different set of incentives and obligations than private corporations. This means that deals like "Hand over control of the municipal fiber network to a company in exchange for that company assuming all related debts, as well as performing massive upgrades to said network in short order, on their own dime." make lots of sense, if you can trust that the company will live up to their word. I would be shocked if there wasn't a provision in the agreement that would force Google to hand the network back over to Provo if they failed to meet their obligations. Google has proven that they're serious about delivering gigabit symmetric connections at very reasonable prices to residents in the areas that they've been able to enter. The incumbent telcos have demonstrated time and time again that they're very committed to high-speed Fiber-To-The-Press-Release deployments, as well as token FTTP deployments in politically important areas... and nowhere else. > ...Kansas City's deal required Google to wire up the schools with 1 GBPS internet... Which is a perfectly reasonable stipulation. If you're not going to require universal service (just as ATT, Comcast, & etc. are not required to provide for data services), it's entirely reasonable to demand that a private operator provide service to things like schools and libraries to operate in an area. > Politics is politics, no matter the players. You really need to look at the vast gulf between the games that incumbent telcos play (e.g. banning municipally owned and operated fiber service in the name of creating a "level playing field") and Google's acceptance of public-good service requirements in exchange for reduced pole attachment fees. [0] http://www.ibtimes.com/google-fiber-utah-why-provo-sold-its-39-million-internet-service-google-just-1-1205081 http://www.ibtimes.com/google-fiber-utah-why-provo-sold-its-...

dragontamer 11y ago
Erm, yes. I would say that accepting the debt of the local municipal government is by definition, "getting cozy with the local government". Or would you say otherwise?
- simoncion 11y ago
  What do you call it when one company acquires the assets and obligations of a portion of another company [0] for a token amount of money? Do you say that the acquiring company is "getting cozy" with the company that's divesting itself of those assets? If not, why not? [0] Say, a stagnating project that the divesting company can no longer fund at a level required to ensure the project's success in the marketplace.
  - dragontamer 11y ago
    > What do you call it when one company acquires the assets and obligations of a portion of another company [0] for a token amount of money? Fishy. Unless I have complete and utter trust in the larger company. Consider this: Google is the only company right now that has substantial web traffic, and can very easily violate Net Neutrality by making say... Youtube Google-fiber specific. Even if Google doesn't do this, the fact remains that if they continue to grow in the ISP space, their monetary power and political power will grow exponentially. Or, Google can play the tactics of the previous ISPs by degrading their competitor's traffic (such as slower Bing, Yahoo, or DDG performance on their network). Its innately fishy from my point of view. Google gains too much power for a very low monetary investment.
    - simoncion 11y ago
      > [I call that f]ishy. Okay. I guess you don't pay attention much. This sort of thing is not entirely uncommon and frequently entirely aboveboard. :) > Google is the only company right now that has substantial web traffic... What? Netflix pumps twice the traffic of YouTube. [0] > Or, Google can play the tactics of the previous ISPs by degrading their competitor's traffic... Backbone providers (of which ATT is a huge one) can facilitate this sort of thing right now. I wonder why they don't. ;) > Its innately fishy from my point of view. Google gains too much power for a very low monetary investment. You... uh... missed the part where Google takes on the obligation to perform $30 million in near-term improvement, the obligation to pay iProvo's outstanding construction loans for at least the next twelve years, the obligation to cover the $5.25 per month per Provo, UT resident currently paid by each Provo resident. Google is putting a lot more than $1 into this deal. [0] http://variety.com/2015/digital/news/netflix-bandwidth-usage-internet-traffic-1201507187/ http://variety.com/2015/digital/news/netflix-bandwidth-usage...

dragontamer 11y ago

Erm, yes. I would say that accepting the debt of the local municipal government is by definition, "getting cozy with the local government". Or would you say otherwise?

simoncion 11y ago
What do you call it when one company acquires the assets and obligations of a portion of another company [0] for a token amount of money? Do you say that the acquiring company is "getting cozy" with the company that's divesting itself of those assets? If not, why not? [0] Say, a stagnating project that the divesting company can no longer fund at a level required to ensure the project's success in the marketplace.
- dragontamer 11y ago
  > What do you call it when one company acquires the assets and obligations of a portion of another company [0] for a token amount of money? Fishy. Unless I have complete and utter trust in the larger company. Consider this: Google is the only company right now that has substantial web traffic, and can very easily violate Net Neutrality by making say... Youtube Google-fiber specific. Even if Google doesn't do this, the fact remains that if they continue to grow in the ISP space, their monetary power and political power will grow exponentially. Or, Google can play the tactics of the previous ISPs by degrading their competitor's traffic (such as slower Bing, Yahoo, or DDG performance on their network). Its innately fishy from my point of view. Google gains too much power for a very low monetary investment.
  - simoncion 11y ago
    > [I call that f]ishy. Okay. I guess you don't pay attention much. This sort of thing is not entirely uncommon and frequently entirely aboveboard. :) > Google is the only company right now that has substantial web traffic... What? Netflix pumps twice the traffic of YouTube. [0] > Or, Google can play the tactics of the previous ISPs by degrading their competitor's traffic... Backbone providers (of which ATT is a huge one) can facilitate this sort of thing right now. I wonder why they don't. ;) > Its innately fishy from my point of view. Google gains too much power for a very low monetary investment. You... uh... missed the part where Google takes on the obligation to perform $30 million in near-term improvement, the obligation to pay iProvo's outstanding construction loans for at least the next twelve years, the obligation to cover the $5.25 per month per Provo, UT resident currently paid by each Provo resident. Google is putting a lot more than $1 into this deal. [0] http://variety.com/2015/digital/news/netflix-bandwidth-usage-internet-traffic-1201507187/ http://variety.com/2015/digital/news/netflix-bandwidth-usage...