3 ms·

in France we solved that problem by requesting anyone laying down fiber to allow any other operator to use it. You get some benefits from laying down the cable

in France we solved that problem by requesting anyone laying down fiber to allow any other operator to use it. You get some benefits from laying down the cable (enough to make you want to do that) but then companies compete for the customer. The regulation authority puts a 3 months ban on offers when a cable is available to leave time for the interested companies to provide service. To some extend, the one who lays down the cable has some advantage as their logo is on the cable. They are also the ones who will always give you an offer after the 3 months period. this is how I moved forma a company I liked a lot (Free) to the one who brought the fiber (Orange) because they had an offer immediately. Free and others came 2 YEARS later and now they are surprised that they hardly get customers in the area.

EricE 6y ago
Yes, I think this is by far the most equitable solution - for the privilege of getting right of way to lay cable, you should be forced to allow others to leverage the infrastructure too. Which is why so many companies fight it :p
gjhr 6y ago
But that wouldn't have helped here. No companies wanted to lay down cable even when they would then get a monopoly on the customers in the town.
- BrandoElFollito 6y ago
  That was also the case for some remote places in France. The deal was that a company can operate only if they also fiber low density places. This comes from the time where there was a monopoly on wired phones, but everyone was entitled to one, even if you were 10 km away in your house over the cliff.
robocat 6y ago
In New Zealand (≈Oregon) the government funded private networks[1], that do not act as ISPs. Any ISP can use the network, and pays the network provider. A similar system is used for power, where there are regional companies owning and maintaining the residential power network assets, but you can choose any power company provider for your power, and a connection fee shows up on your power invoice from them to pay for the poles and maintenance etc. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-Fast_Broadband https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-Fast_Broadband

EricE 6y ago

Yes, I think this is by far the most equitable solution - for the privilege of getting right of way to lay cable, you should be forced to allow others to leverage the infrastructure too. Which is why so many companies fight it :p

gjhr 6y ago

But that wouldn't have helped here. No companies wanted to lay down cable even when they would then get a monopoly on the customers in the town.

BrandoElFollito 6y ago
That was also the case for some remote places in France. The deal was that a company can operate only if they also fiber low density places. This comes from the time where there was a monopoly on wired phones, but everyone was entitled to one, even if you were 10 km away in your house over the cliff.

robocat 6y ago

In New Zealand (≈Oregon) the government funded private networks[1], that do not act as ISPs. Any ISP can use the network, and pays the network provider. A similar system is used for power, where there are regional companies owning and maintaining the residential power network assets, but you can choose any power company provider for your power, and a connection fee shows up on your power invoice from them to pay for the poles and maintenance etc. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-Fast_Broadband https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-Fast_Broadband