5 ms·

The issue is that offering halfway decent internet to people in rural areas would cost them lots of money and there's not much evidence they could get away with

The issue is that offering halfway decent internet to people in rural areas would cost them lots of money and there's not much evidence they could get away with a huge price increase to compensate since most people don't have any extra money to spend in internet (especially in areas that tend to be low wage/low cost of living). They're also against the government doing it because that would potentially cost them customers. Plus none of their executives would actually choose to live in "flyover country" anyway if they care about quality internet. The problem is that utility companies are natural monopolies that aren't supposed to make profits and also many politicians now subscribe to a laissez-faire ideology that doesn't recognize that natural monopolies exist and that both regulating them and investing public funds in infrastructure in areas they'd neglect are legitimate and necessary functions of government. That's why we have a postmaster general who thinks the post office needs to turn a profit by providing worse service at a higher price who was put into his position by a politician who was supposedly elected by rural America to defend their interests. Infrastructure investment was what made America rich and great and letting it stagnate and crumble to protect short term corporate profits is what is causing this country's decline and opening the door for China's rise.

willis936 6y ago
>The issue is that offering halfway decent internet to people in rural areas would cost them lots of money What did they do with the $100 million they got in 2013? There is a massive (10s of billions at this point) subsidy of internet expansion in the US with no apparent binding contract that has specified deliverables and defined punishment. It’s basically free money. Of course they’re going to pocket it. They probably drafted the bills. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Service_Fund#Connect_America_Fund https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Service_Fund#Connect...
- whoknew1122 6y ago
  Probably stock buy-backs to increase share price and thus executive pay. It's what companies have been doing since St. Reagan of Hollywood blessed us with trickle-down economics.
  - gremlinsinc 6y ago
    > St. Reagan of Hollywood God, bless you. I love this title for Mr. Trickles.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
pdimitar 6y ago
The cost can be amortized over time through other customers that actually do need the fiber. They are huge companies. They should be able to absorb a one-time big investment, come on.
throw0101a 6y ago
> The issue is that offering halfway decent internet to people in rural areas would cost them lots of money and […] Which was the original purpose of AT&T being a regulated monopoly: they were 'mandated' to build out telephone lines everywhere, but were allowed to raise prices in urban areas to help subsidize the cost. See also electrical utilities. If we're not going to have The Market™ do things, then perhaps government should step in. Have the state or country run the fibre and handle ISO Layers 1 and 2, and then have ISPs handle things at Layer 3 (IP): * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipal_broadband https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipal_broadband * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-access_network https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-access_network See UTOPIA Fiber in Utah: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Telecommunication_Open_Infrastructure_Agency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Telecommunication_Open_In... * https://www.utopiafiber.com/residential-pricing/ https://www.utopiafiber.com/residential-pricing/
- gremlinsinc 6y ago
  Glad you brought up UTOPIA... I live in Cedar City. Iron County population is like 50k. We have 1 Gig down 25MBPS UP ... could be better upload speed, but really for being rural it flies. Provider: South Central Communications. Gov. Cox ran a telecom company that helped work with UDOT on Utopia to whenever they have new construction just lay conduit which can be shared by telecoms. This was brilliant. I'm not a fan of Cox for mishandling covid, being weak on masks, etc... but I'm damn thankful Utah is one state that got fiber right.
dublinben 6y ago
>The issue is that offering halfway decent internet to people in rural areas would cost them lots of money Telcos like AT&T can't even be bothered to offer decent internet to people in urban areas. Their best DSL offerings don't even meet the definition of broadband any more.
GeekyBear 6y ago
>The issue is that offering halfway decent internet to people in rural areas would cost them lots of money Oddly enough, once competition appears, their inability to build out a half decent network disappears. >Time and time again, however, telecom has shown a willingness to compete on both price and service if a better municipal network pops up. Many cities with fiber networks are suddenly seeing massive investment from incumbent telecom providers—often, telecom will increase speeds and drop prices below cost. After Wilson, North Carolina built a fiber network, Time Warner Cable dropped rates within city limits and then, to subsidize the loss, it jacked up prices in neighboring communities, where it still had a monopoly. In Chattanooga, Comcast now offers 2 Gbps connections, which is faster internet than it offers anywhere else in the country. https://www.vice.com/en/article/ezpk77/chattanooga-gigabit-fiber-network https://www.vice.com/en/article/ezpk77/chattanooga-gigabit-f...

willis936 6y ago

>The issue is that offering halfway decent internet to people in rural areas would cost them lots of money What did they do with the $100 million they got in 2013? There is a massive (10s of billions at this point) subsidy of internet expansion in the US with no apparent binding contract that has specified deliverables and defined punishment. It’s basically free money. Of course they’re going to pocket it. They probably drafted the bills. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Service_Fund#Connect_America_Fund https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Service_Fund#Connect...

whoknew1122 6y ago
Probably stock buy-backs to increase share price and thus executive pay. It's what companies have been doing since St. Reagan of Hollywood blessed us with trickle-down economics.
- gremlinsinc 6y ago
  > St. Reagan of Hollywood God, bless you. I love this title for Mr. Trickles.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

pdimitar 6y ago

The cost can be amortized over time through other customers that actually do need the fiber. They are huge companies. They should be able to absorb a one-time big investment, come on.

throw0101a 6y ago

> The issue is that offering halfway decent internet to people in rural areas would cost them lots of money and […] Which was the original purpose of AT&T being a regulated monopoly: they were 'mandated' to build out telephone lines everywhere, but were allowed to raise prices in urban areas to help subsidize the cost. See also electrical utilities. If we're not going to have The Market™ do things, then perhaps government should step in. Have the state or country run the fibre and handle ISO Layers 1 and 2, and then have ISPs handle things at Layer 3 (IP): * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipal_broadband https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipal_broadband * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-access_network https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-access_network See UTOPIA Fiber in Utah: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Telecommunication_Open_Infrastructure_Agency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Telecommunication_Open_In... * https://www.utopiafiber.com/residential-pricing/ https://www.utopiafiber.com/residential-pricing/

gremlinsinc 6y ago
Glad you brought up UTOPIA... I live in Cedar City. Iron County population is like 50k. We have 1 Gig down 25MBPS UP ... could be better upload speed, but really for being rural it flies. Provider: South Central Communications. Gov. Cox ran a telecom company that helped work with UDOT on Utopia to whenever they have new construction just lay conduit which can be shared by telecoms. This was brilliant. I'm not a fan of Cox for mishandling covid, being weak on masks, etc... but I'm damn thankful Utah is one state that got fiber right.

dublinben 6y ago

>The issue is that offering halfway decent internet to people in rural areas would cost them lots of money Telcos like AT&T can't even be bothered to offer decent internet to people in urban areas. Their best DSL offerings don't even meet the definition of broadband any more.

GeekyBear 6y ago

>The issue is that offering halfway decent internet to people in rural areas would cost them lots of money Oddly enough, once competition appears, their inability to build out a half decent network disappears. >Time and time again, however, telecom has shown a willingness to compete on both price and service if a better municipal network pops up. Many cities with fiber networks are suddenly seeing massive investment from incumbent telecom providers—often, telecom will increase speeds and drop prices below cost. After Wilson, North Carolina built a fiber network, Time Warner Cable dropped rates within city limits and then, to subsidize the loss, it jacked up prices in neighboring communities, where it still had a monopoly. In Chattanooga, Comcast now offers 2 Gbps connections, which is faster internet than it offers anywhere else in the country. https://www.vice.com/en/article/ezpk77/chattanooga-gigabit-fiber-network https://www.vice.com/en/article/ezpk77/chattanooga-gigabit-f...