RE: Google and the New America Foundation have teamed up to launch a Google Moderator about the National Broadband Plan

<bias alert> I work for a (small) rural service provider.</bias alert>

The reality is, without USF and ICC (which can make up to 70% of an RLECs
revenue stream), there would be no telephone or wireline broadband service
in rural America.  Unless we want rural (outside the town center) America to
regress to low multi-Mbps wireless-only internet connectivity, subsidies
will be required.  At a minimum, ILECs are required, by regulation, to
provide dial-tone to its entire service area.  Believe, we don't get excited
about $10,000 in construction costs to provide $18.50/month dial-tone for an
auto-dialer in a hog barn on a long gravel road.  But until regulatory and
public policy say otherwise, ILECs are obligated to build it.  And if we're
obliged to build it, we need help for that hog barn and the rural plant,
switching equipment, etc.

In our non-ILEC areas we provide some 256 and 1024 kbps (downstream) BWA,
and we've had a few requests for faster service, either wirelessly or over
fiber.  But when I share the construction and turn-up costs, the customers
quickly step back.  And it's unfortunate, because most of those requests are
so they can do tele-work or are a small-biz.  As you might be guessing by
now, the ILEC has not built out DSL to their areas.  And the other wireless
provider in the area offers roughly the same tier in speeds we do.  

Perhaps I'm not directly answering your point -- please feel free to
re-direct me.

Frank

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Jawaid Bazyar
Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 1:53 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Google and the New America Foundation have teamed up to launch
a Google Moderator about the National Broadband Plan

<snip>

I disagree with you that Federal help is needed in rural areas. In the 
past 14 years since deregulation, we have seen an unprecedented 
explosion in broadband services and in the technologies used to deliver 
it. ISDN, Satellite, WiFi, WiMax, Fiber, DSL, BPL, Broadband over Gas 
Pipes, etc etc. There is no one-size-fits-all solution here, and 
injecting federal money into the system will only push back the day when 
the right solution (or combination of solutions) is found for Rural America.

Subsidizing the infrastructure will lead to requiring subsidies for the 
operation. That's what we have now, with billions of dollars a year 
funneled into supporting unprofitable rural telephone companies. We need 
incentive to develop technology to make these operations profitable, not 
action that will merely extend the dependency.

Regards,

Jawaid Bazyar
foreThought.net



Frank Bulk wrote:
> http://moderator.appspot.com/#16/e=a4977
>
> I got to spout in this forum, because there's no way to comment on some of
> the ideas posted in Google Moderator.  
>
> Just breeze through some of the ideas -- it's clear that most people think
> that gov't will solve our broadband problems.  Second, it appears that
most
> people lack faith in capitalism and free market principles.  Not saying
that
> the general public doesn't have good reason to believe that ISPs have let
> them down sometimes, it's just that people think that gov't can do it
better
> and/or cheaper than private enterprise.
>
> Generally speaking, competition has worked for urban and sub-urban areas,
> and industry is developing their network and service offering in a way
that
> makes money.  Apparently people are speaking out of the populist side of
> their brain and not their pocketbook, because I guess they don't want to
> earn a return in their mutual funds or stocks.  How many MSOs aren't
> building out DOCSIS 3.0, even though the capital costs for head end
> equipment is enormous, and every upgrade requires a new modem and perhaps
a
> truck roll.  Same with Verizon's FiOS and AT&T Universe.  People forget
that
> these upgrades are costing these companies billions of dollars.
>
> In some sub-urban areas and rural areas, where there is no broadband
> available (or limited/no competition), it hasn't happened because the ILEC
> (nor anyone else, for that matter) perceives a return on their investment.
> In those cases, there does need to be some incentive or assistance to make
a
> build out happen.  
>
> As long as no flaming arises, I would be interested in hearing from others
> on this topic, too.
>
> Frank
>
>   

-- 
<http://www.foreThought.net> 	Jawaid Bazyar
President
[email protected] <email:[email protected]>
ph 303.815.1814
fax 303.815.1001
	Communications Simplified

-- 
Eat sushi frequently. - Avi
[email protected] is the human contact address.
[email protected] is the list posting address.
See below URL for subscribe/unsubscribe and list options:
http://inet-access.net/mailman/listinfo/list

-- 
Eat sushi frequently. - Avi
[email protected] is the human contact address.
[email protected] is the list posting address.
See below URL for subscribe/unsubscribe and list options:
http://inet-access.net/mailman/listinfo/list