3 ms·

This is one problem that throwing money at just isn't going to help in the long run. Many administrations have tried this, "oh hey we are helping bring broadban

This is one problem that throwing money at just isn't going to help in the long run. Many administrations have tried this, "oh hey we are helping bring broadband to rural areas with lots of $$$ and investment", but then it just leads to the same incumbent isps dragging their feet and doing the absolute minimum possible to meet the requirements. And then those who are now "within reach" of broadband have one provider as their option who have no incentives at all to play nice in terms of pricing, plans, and options. The federal government needs to invalidate all ISP + Municipality exclusivity deals and invalidate all laws that prevent municipalities from creating their own ISPs and running their own networks. Chattanooga is way ahead of the times.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
rayiner 3y ago
> run. Many administrations have tried this How many do you think?
I_Am_Nous 3y ago
I just came back from MATSS 2023 and there's definitely a lot of consultant work being built around getting Enhanced A-CAM or BEAD funding. I work for a rural ISP/telco and I can tell you we don't have any expectation of building out regulated networks without some kind of funding to help. On the flip side that many people don't get exposed to, there are cybersecurity requirements before funding can be applied, so this may help old telcos modernize their networks. Realistically there's no market to spend upgrade money in any of our service areas. Comcast may have 20k subscribers in a single suburb but we don't have that many subscribers in our entire service area, so the ROI would be many years before we break even. The thing most people forget is that small rural ISPs are regulated with the same laws the corporate behemoths are and it's difficult to reach parity so the small guys can get help while the big guys who don't need it can't get it. It's generally service area by service area and less about which company requests assistance to built out/upgrade that area.
chiefalchemist 3y ago
> The federal government needs to invalidate all ISP + Municipality exclusivity deals But it's not doing that. Instead, it's got $18B of taxpayer dollars to shovel into the pockets of those ISPs. I trust the rest of the math is doable for you.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

rayiner 3y ago

> run. Many administrations have tried this How many do you think?

I_Am_Nous 3y ago

I just came back from MATSS 2023 and there's definitely a lot of consultant work being built around getting Enhanced A-CAM or BEAD funding. I work for a rural ISP/telco and I can tell you we don't have any expectation of building out regulated networks without some kind of funding to help. On the flip side that many people don't get exposed to, there are cybersecurity requirements before funding can be applied, so this may help old telcos modernize their networks. Realistically there's no market to spend upgrade money in any of our service areas. Comcast may have 20k subscribers in a single suburb but we don't have that many subscribers in our entire service area, so the ROI would be many years before we break even. The thing most people forget is that small rural ISPs are regulated with the same laws the corporate behemoths are and it's difficult to reach parity so the small guys can get help while the big guys who don't need it can't get it. It's generally service area by service area and less about which company requests assistance to built out/upgrade that area.

chiefalchemist 3y ago

> The federal government needs to invalidate all ISP + Municipality exclusivity deals But it's not doing that. Instead, it's got $18B of taxpayer dollars to shovel into the pockets of those ISPs. I trust the rest of the math is doable for you.