3 ms·

Can someone explain why Fibre isn't being released in Silicon Valley first, where they would almost certainly find buyers? If its a case of scaling it up, they

Can someone explain why Fibre isn't being released in Silicon Valley first, where they would almost certainly find buyers? If its a case of scaling it up, they could release it community by community, couldn't they?

jaggederest 14y ago
Incentives from the city, plus regulatory regimes. It's very, very, very much more expensive to dig up streets in the bay than in KC
- jrockway 14y ago
  All the utilities in Kansas City are above ground, so no digging is required.
  - greyfade 14y ago
    I hope they've got a way to keep squirrels off the lines.
prostoalex 14y ago
A bunch of Bay Area cities applied, judging from this map http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/next-steps-for-our-experimental-fiber.html http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/next-steps-for-our-ex... but maybe releasing it in Bay Area first would provide a distorted impression that everybody is bananas about fiber access and willing to pay through the roof to get it.
- jseliger 14y ago
  California also has a notoriously difficult regulatory climate. It might be easier to start the process somewhere else, where permitting and other requirements are favorable.
jlarocco 14y ago
If they're using the initial deployments to get an idea of public interest then Silicon Valley would give them a very skewed perspective.
KirinDave 14y ago
For one, it'd be much more expensive in the massive sprawl of San Jose and all but impossible to deploy in San Francisco or Palo Alto. For two, there's this big question of how the cable and telecom companies are going to oppose this. Part of this fiber rollout is sort of an elaborate demonstration to the big cable and DSL providers in which Google says, "You are aware we can cheerfully destroy your market if you don't improve and play ball with us." If the KC deployment goes well, Comcast and friends will have to start thinking very long and hard about how they are going to keep Google out of their slice of the market, because given the current climate in politics they probably aren't going to be able to make an anti-trust argument stick.

jaggederest 14y ago

Incentives from the city, plus regulatory regimes. It's very, very, very much more expensive to dig up streets in the bay than in KC

jrockway 14y ago
All the utilities in Kansas City are above ground, so no digging is required.
- greyfade 14y ago
  I hope they've got a way to keep squirrels off the lines.

prostoalex 14y ago

A bunch of Bay Area cities applied, judging from this map http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/next-steps-for-our-experimental-fiber.html http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/next-steps-for-our-ex... but maybe releasing it in Bay Area first would provide a distorted impression that everybody is bananas about fiber access and willing to pay through the roof to get it.

jseliger 14y ago
California also has a notoriously difficult regulatory climate. It might be easier to start the process somewhere else, where permitting and other requirements are favorable.

jlarocco 14y ago

If they're using the initial deployments to get an idea of public interest then Silicon Valley would give them a very skewed perspective.

KirinDave 14y ago

For one, it'd be much more expensive in the massive sprawl of San Jose and all but impossible to deploy in San Francisco or Palo Alto. For two, there's this big question of how the cable and telecom companies are going to oppose this. Part of this fiber rollout is sort of an elaborate demonstration to the big cable and DSL providers in which Google says, "You are aware we can cheerfully destroy your market if you don't improve and play ball with us." If the KC deployment goes well, Comcast and friends will have to start thinking very long and hard about how they are going to keep Google out of their slice of the market, because given the current climate in politics they probably aren't going to be able to make an anti-trust argument stick.