Is Google Fiber a model for Municipal Networks?

Mon Feb 4 18:23:12 UTC 2013

On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Jay Ashworth <jra at baylink.com> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Matthew Petach" <mpetach at netflight.com>
>
>> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 9:05 AM, Leo Bicknell <bicknell at ufp.org> wrote:
>> > True, but I think it means we've bound the problem. It appears to
>> > take $1400-$4500 to deploy fiber to the home in urban and suburban
>> > areas, depending on all the fun local factors that effect costs.
>>
>> *sigh*
>>
>> I'd gladly pay $5000 NRC to get fiber to my house. I only wish it
>> were that simple. :( Heck, if they wanted longer-term ROI, I'd pay
>> $5000 NRC and $200 MRC for a fiber connection to my house, if
>> only there were someone who could provide it. I suspect the real
>> costs are much higher, and that's why there's nobody willing to do
>> it for that cheap.
>
> No, Matt; in a sufficiently dense deployment, it appears you can actually
> get it done for that money, based on actual deployment results.
>
> If my project pans out, I'll give it to you for less than that. :-)

I think the problem with your model is that the same one
Google faced; you don't divide your cost based on the number
of homes connected, you divide by the number of people forking
out money for it.

Building infrastructure to 10,000 homes doesn't work if 9,999
of them say "no thanks, I'm happy with my current cable TV";
that last person's gonna have a heck of a bill, or you're going
to go bankrupt subsidizing them.

Google Fiber's "sign up, and if we get enough signups, then
we'll build" model seems to be the only sane way to ensure
that you won't be left holding the bag if not enough subscribers
opt in to the service to fund it.

Now, if only we had a system for signing up to show our
support for a build like that here in the bay area... ^_^;

Matt