New New York Broadband Program to offer 100Mbps minimum

[RV_]

All New York residents and businesses will get a minimum download speed of 100Mbps under a new $1 billion plan by New York Governor Andrew Cuomo.

 

Excerpt:

 

"The $1 billion New New York Broadband Program would put the state four times ahead of the proposed Federal Communications Commission minimum broadband download speed description of 25Mbps.

 

The governor announced on Friday that the state would invest $500 million to encourage the private sector to upgrade broadband and roll out broadband to underserved and unserved areas.

 

The aim will be for the private sector to match the government investment, leading to a total $1 billion in funding for broadband upgrades.

 

The requirement will be for broadband providers to offer at least 100Mbps download speeds, or, in some limited cases, 25Mbps download speeds for the remote and underserved areas.

 

"Access to high-speed internet is critical to ensuring that all New Yorkers can reach their full potential in today's technology-driven world," Cuomo said in a statement.

 

"We're launching the largest state broadband investment in the nation in order to make that goal a reality. This is a truly bold undertaking that will improve the lives of New Yorkers in every corner of the state, and I am proud to make it a priority of our administration's second-term agenda."

 

The state estimates that 1 million New Yorkers cannot get broadband at 6Mbps download speeds, while 5.4 million residents cannot get broadband at 25Mbps. A total of 7 million residents cannot get broadband at 100Mbps.

 

The co-investment plan proposed by New York is similar to that in New Zealand, where the national broadband network is being rolled out by a number of private telecommunications companies with financial support from the New Zealand government.

 

In Australia, the government-owned company NBN Co is rolling out a mixture of fibre to the home, fibre to the node, fibre to the basement, cable, fixed wireless, and satellite services to deliver at least 25Mbps by 2020."

 

That article with maps and links including one to the study undertaken in pdf format is here:

http://www.zdnet.com/article/new-new-york-broadband-program-to-offer-100mbps-minimum/?tag=nl.e539&s_cid=e539&ttag=e539&ftag=TRE17cfd61

 

There have ben many successful municipal broadband systems that are making waves and scaring the cable operators who are trying to monopolize that now commodity. Some states have actually been lobbied successfully to outlaw any attempt to install broadband in municipalities tired of the cable company run around. It is tome to reap the same benefits for the citizens as we reaped with regulation and breaking up ma Bell. The consumers won.

 

The push is on, and many are unaware how far we've come despite states banning competition for cable companies. Here's a great map showing communities with alternatives to monopolistic cable gouging with little returns for consumers compared to other countries. See this map and play with the tag. Much information. The states in red have passed barrier laws against any form of broadband except the cable and telcos. Here's the map and more: http://www.muninetworks.org/communitymap

[dewilso]

Ya, tax dollars at work ! And in Livingston, Tx, 50 miles from Houston we can barely sustain 5MPS !

[Jack Mayer]

Ya, tax dollars at work ! And in Livingston, Tx, 50 miles from Houston we can barely sustain 5MPS !

There are a lot of places like that, believe it or not. Where we are in the summer - where I run the network - we were "restricted" to 10 mbps by the provider (telco). They would not sell us more. They also restricted how MANY of the 10 mbps lines we could have to three total....and no matter what you could not have more. And you had no alternative because of state legislation preventing competition.

 

Now, the state has killed those laws and we have an independent company that ran their OWN fiber right to our router. 100 mbps (or up to 1gig if we want it). The telcos are squeeling like little pigs.Tough.We gave them a chance.

[RV_]

Jack's right,

The problem isn't the government and tax dollars. The problem is the legislation in individual states like Texas and Louisiana to name two, that are clearly marked on the map on the second link in my post as having laws that restrict anyone but the cable and Telcos in providing services. They claim that municipal Internet and television services will fail and bankrupt the City or damage them in some way.

 

Texas is one of the two states that restrict municipal broadband that we live in. I live in Louisiana. Funny how only two cities provide the telecommunications as a public utility rather than an entertainment service in our two states.

 

Let's have a look at a sleepy little city in Texas, Greenville, that apparently had their own City urtility company allowed to provide their broadband faster, and cheaper than most big cities. Go here: http://www.geus.org/internet-price.htm That is the 100 year old Greenville Electric utility company making good money, and providing fast Internet at good prices.

 

However Austin went ahead and asked to be in the Google free 5 mbs service with a 300 dollar installation fee, and Gigabit fiber speeds for very little when comparing for speeds and price: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2013/04/google-fiber-expands-tv-internet-to-austin-texas/ I'm not seeing tax dollars there.provided their own municipal very high speed broadband services.

 

Over to my side of the state line we have Lafayette. They offer gigabit services at relatively cheap prices. To put that in perspective, gigabit download speeds are 66.6 times faster than my 15 mbs service that I'm being charged by Suddenlink, $40.00 a month for15 mbps. 66.6 times that would mean that if the service was worth more, it would be worth 66.6X$40.00 which is $2666.66 dollars a month.

Here is the Lafayette Utility Service pricing page: http://lusfiber.com/index.php/internet/pricing-guide

 

Comcast, Suddenlink, and the Telcos, have our two states monopolized to charge as much as they want claiming too much money for the upgrades to provide the services. I have had folks here say that comparing the services and prices of developing countries is not fair to the companies doing all they can here.

 

Greenville Texas, Lafayette Louisiana, and Austin Texas with the same levels of speed and pricing as the two services in my links in Texas and the third, Google in Austin, are not in developing countries!

 

The Big Internet cable and fiber folks say they cannot provide the services that we see in the map here: http://www.muninetworks.org/communitymap for any price and make sure no competitors come in to prove to us how cheaply Gigabit and very high speed services can be.

 

Then Cable and big Telcos claim they want a level playing field with no subsidy programs or any competition. They do not publicize that they lobbied state legislators to pass laws to take away any level playing field that would allow, let alone encourage, small Internet provider startups, and municipalities who freely in a free country have their citizens vote to compete with the commercial companies and provide gigabit speeds to stay competitive.

 

Have the legislators remove all legislation favoring any group over others, and certainly private companies have no right to limit municipalities to do so easily what Greenville Texas and Lafayette Louisiana did and still do. Click on the maps and zoom in and out, then click on some of the pins in it and go to their websites ands see the many citizens deriving the benefits of competition and getting broadband where there was none. If it is so expensive then remove the laws restricting municipal broadband since if true no one would be able to do it and not only compete, but reduce taxes by turning a profit, albeit smaller than the Cable companies and Telcos make.

 

Just to say it isn't so and refusing to do some actual reading, or refusing because you think ignoring it makes it untrue and makes it go away won't folks. I am looking forward to seeing before I die the launching of LEO satellites handling telephony by not cell but satellite, and Internet and TV as well. At speeds and prices that will indeed cause the current cable and Telcos to compete and adapt. Just like the livery stables didn't go away by and large when automobiles replaced the horse and buggy. Many became our service stations at the same locations. Should we have refused the automobile age because the livery owners got together and paid off senators and congressmen to pass laws that cars cannot be purchased in their state, and that fuel could only be sold out of state, no fuel allowed in state to keep the citizens safe?

 

Folks we do still elect our representatives. Some are honest and want what's best for the people not the cable company or automobile dealer association to name two groups that lobbied and had passed idiotic laws to forestall the inevitable from coming to pass. No stealership or cable company would go out of business overnight, in fact when a train is coming they can get onboard, or get run over. The cable companies could become gigabit providers at today's 30 GB prices easily. But we've allowed our lawmakers at the state level to remove any incentives to stay ahead and provide what we need and want. No one can compete and do what is being done everywhere but in states where they manage to get folks totally confused and believe what is good for Comcast or Suddenlink is good for the people. I personally would like a choice. and have at least two broadband providers allowed in each municipality at 30 mbps minimum down, and two up. If the new operators and utilities taking over in the municipalities that get what their citizens want not what a private company wants, or will provide as long as they don't have to, are any indicator of the future our legislators have a lot to answer for for slowing down open and free enterprise. That is why Internet need s]s to be classed as a common title II carrier and regulated. Anyone who thinks that is bad go to that map above and start calling the Gigabit speed providers for under $100.00 and almost free for under 30mbps in some cases. In all cases they are faster if not faster and cheaper. Business has no business regulating us while crying they want no regulation of themselves. Open up the competition by walking the walk cable and Telco companies by removing the laws you caused to be passed to regulate any competition from even being able to try.

 

Don't frame this as politics. Internet is a commerce maker or breaker for every community. No one passed laws keeping the big cable companies out of being Internet providers, and the dial up companies went away pretty much in the cities. But as soon as the cable companies saw what was possible for municipalities to do without them they sure caused to have been passed protective laws that unserve their people.

[RV_]

I mentioned Lafayette Louisiana, and their current gigabit public utility Internet net here: http://lusfiber.com/index.php/internet/pricing-guide

 

Well during the battle over the decision to go with the community municipal Internet via their utility proposal, or the obsolete and more expensive Cable and Broadband service claims, they made this video which apparently won out because it was true. Slick Sam wanted to sell you an obsolete service for only 20% more than the speedier one. Lafayette said no and here is what their Internet services are today:

 

Internet : Package & Pricing Guide

Speed Levels & Details

3x3 - 3 Mbps (download & upload) - $19.95*

*Only available with the purchase of additional services.

---------------------------------------------

20x20 - 20 Mbps (download & upload) - $33.95

---------------------------------------------

80x80 - 80 Mbps (download & upload) - $54.95

---------------------------------------------

1000x1000 - 1,000 Mbps or 1 Gbps (download & upload)

- $69.95 - With purchase of all three LUS Fiber services

- $89.95 - With purchase of two LUS Fiber services

- $109.95 - With purchase of LUS Fiber Internet service only

 

That from their website here: http://lusfiber.com/index.php/internet/pricing-guide

 

Now the video is hilarious in hindsight. And contrary to the fear mongering and tax claims and all the crap the Cable companies used in the Lafayette battle, this hilarious video was made by the municipal utility comparing the cable companies and DSL providers with slick Sam, the car dealer trying to switch and bait you from the fast model to their more expensive slower model, with no gas needed either! If you have the bandwidth for a one minute video this is a must see. From 2009, who was the big winner? The people of Lafayette. So after you compare your broadband speeds and prices with the ones in the above paragraph, watch the video that helped make it happen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sgjypdq9bDo

[Vladimir]

I would like to see an analysis of the various municipal broadband systems throughout the country and their capital and operating costs compared to revenue. There really needs to be better reporting and analysis to see how this will all work out in the end.

 

I am a great fan of municipal broadband. We have had it since the turn of the century. There was LOTS of political opposition to the proposal and in the end Washington state ended up more or less banning municipal broadband. The funny part was that the political parties ended up in strange territory due to their political contributors.

 

Here in Chelan County the municipal broadband network cost over 100 million dollars to reach 14,000 households. Believe it or not there are still people using the out-of-area phone and cable companies!! Fiber penetrated 40% of the households that have it available to them.

 

Unless your selling millions of dollars of surplus electricity most counties do NOT have the financial resources to build a broadband network. Even with this the three local PUD's have decided to freeze the build out of the broadband network. They have all forgiven the capital costs and are hoping that operating and maintenance costs will be covered by the fiber fees.

 

One restrictions that the PUD's are operating under is that they can wholesale but not retail services to their owners. For municipal broadband to work our experience has been that the government needs to be able to retail phone, cable, and internet services. That is where the revenue is!!!

 

Here is the link to the Chelan County PUD fiber site: http://www.chelanpud.org/fiber-optics.html

 

You can look at some of the policy papers and decisions made by the Commissioners. It is interesting reading.

 

So far in this country, fiber has been a disaster except for small, rural areas and of course, very deep pockets Google.

 

I would like to see municipal fiber extended throughout this country. A system that makes it financially feasible or at least much cheaper is really needed.

[bigjim]

I tell you I am stunned to hear that my business friendly ex gov. and legislature has not been all over like stink on a skunk trying to make this available to us. Stunned I tell you. Must have accidently overlooked it.

[RV_]

Vladimir, ya gotta stay with me buddy. The link in the first OP of mine shows you where each are and if you drill down through the different pages you can find what you are asking for. That map is all municipal broadband. Click on each and see who and what they are. I do say that if there are a hundred Municipal Broadband systems and 5% failed the 5% can probably be linked to incompetence. the 95% shows that most city level governments are not incompetent. Here it is again: http://www.muninetworks.org/communitymap If you are really interested here is another: http://ilsr.org/financing-municipal-networks-fact-sheet/

 

Here is an excerpt from another:

 

"We have already published a fact sheet on the critical role community broadband plays in job development. Now, ILSR presents a collection of how commnity owned broadband networks save money for local government, schools, and libraries while providing cutting edge services. The Public Savings Fact Sheet is now available.

 

Though schools, libraries, and other community anchors need access to faster, more reliable networks, the big cable and telephone companies have priced those services so high that they are breaking the budget. But when communities create their own connections, affordable high capacity connections are only one of the benefits. A community owned network offers the promise of self-determination -- of upgrades on the community's time table and increased reliability for emergency responders.

 

The Public Savings Fact Sheet is a great piece to share to mobilize other members of your community. Share it with decision makers and use it to start meaningful conversations. Distribute it widely and often.

We are always developing new resources. If you have an idea for a new fact sheet, we want to hear it."

http://muninetworks.org/tags/tags/fact-sheet

 

This page has a lot of the success stories too. http://muninetworks.org/reports

 

Who is telling you that community networks are funded by taxpayers and that they lose money?

 

In most cases they are making money for the municipality! Try reading all of them in the link. Put another way, let the Cable companies compete for a change be it against each other or municipal systems. Sorry but what you are saying is just not bornes out by the facts, and you've had the links to them the whole time.

 

It is not OK for the Cable companies and Telcos to cry poor me don't regulate us because regulations is bad. If that is so then let's deregulate communities from not being able because of regulations the lobby crying the most about regulations managed to put on us, the people. That is what the Cable and Telcos did. They lobbied and got our own states to unsure their monopoly by regulating us. Can't be against all regulation except the ones you put on others. Well you can but you won't fool all of the people all of the time.

 

Me, I'm convinced that the Internet is a vital telecommunications system for me. I want the unregulated regulated. Or let them do a showdown and walk their walk. Let's take all regulations away stopping people from starting municipal broadband in every state.

 

For folks thinking this is political I am actually advocating they take all regulation off us, the people in the municipalities, and regulate the Cable and Telcos who want the telecommunications in their pockets. That's all. The Telcos are still here and doing very well under Title II regulation. See, those just protect us, the people. If they aren't interested inbeing the trusted utility providing our telecommunications then let them move to corner another market.

 

You have the links.