Interesting People mailing list archives
Re: Google Plans to Build Ultra High-Speed Broadband Networks
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 17:56:29 -0500
Begin forwarded message: From: Bob Schmidt <schmidt () provider com> Date: February 16, 2010 5:37:24 PM EST To: dave () farber net Subject: Re: [IP] Re: Google Plans to Build Ultra High-Speed Broadband Networks Dave, for IP if you wish, A couple of observations about Google's broadband project that I haven't seen mentioned here (or elsewhere for that matter). 1. Google is in effect letting the reverse of what would ordinarily be (or would have in the past been) a municipal RFP for a cable system. Instead of the city asking cable companies for a bid, Google is asking the cities. This is rather remarkable and I'm not sure it has ever been done before in either the phone or cable industries. Whether for cherry picking will remain to be seen or it could be that Google is attempting to estimate near term total market potential based on the number of responses it receives. 2. As to its capability to actually execute, build out and service the system(s), I believe it is entirely possible that rather than take on the executional piece itself, Google may simply sub out these tasks to an experienced broadband partner, who knows, perhaps with one of its cell phone partners like Verizon with whom it already has a co-optition-like (cooperative/competitve) relationship on the phone side. Consider that the "love to hate" feeling about the phone company and the cable company currently far exceeds the same feeling about Google and we can see that a customer facing Google brand with lots of goodwill could well be combined with service level standards consistent with Google brand standards where Google holds the traditional phable (phone/cable) companies accountable through a commercial relationship that creates levels of customer satisfaction that no municipal franchise or state utility commission has been able to achieve. Crazy? Perhaps, but I would not consider it out of the realm of possibility. Bob Schmidt Provider Marketing Group Orlando, FL At 08:43 AM 2/15/2010, you wrote:
From: "Bill Stewart" <bill.stewart () pobox com> To: <dave () farber net>, <ip () v2 listbox com> Date: February 14, 2010 11:50:11 PM EST Subject: [IP] Google Plans to Build Ultra High-Speed Broadband NetworksNow, with respect to whether Google will cherry pick locations, I believe it is only fair to wait and see before passing judgment.Of course they'll cherry pick; there's really no alternative. First of all, they'll need to build in areas where they think they can find a market (though their perceptions of what kind of market to pursue may be different from other CLECs or ILECs, which is a Good Thing.) They'd be fools to start by trying to compete for Brett Glass's Lariat.net rural wireless customers, for example, as opposed to a densely packed city or suburb, though they might well decide to start with an area that isn't already served by Verizon FIOS or AT&T Uverse, or where they think they can beat the local Cable TV carrier. But also, local regulations can have a huge impact on choices of markets. Some cities or counties place unsustainable burdens on construction, or insist on an unreasonable fraction of revenue for business fiber builds, or run their own municipal fiber and are hostile to competition, or have geographical problems like rivers and freeways (and bureaucratic obstacles to crossing the freeways.) If you remember the early 80s, when cable TV was being built town by town, the important issues often weren't which company had a far-reaching vision for the future of communications, but which city council member's brother-in-law would get the paving contract or how many free public access channels there'd be. The FCC and state PUCs have reduced the power of local governments to interfere, but street construction is still street construction, and poles and conduits often have complex ownership and usage limitations. As far as customer service goes, I was a Netcom customer when they were growing from 10,000 subscribers in the mid 90s to 100,000, and on-hold times could be 45 minutes some years...------------------------------------------- Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/ Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
------------------------------------------- Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/ Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Current thread:
- Re: Google Plans to Build Ultra High-Speed Broadband Networks, (continued)
- Re: Google Plans to Build Ultra High-Speed Broadband Networks David Farber (Feb 11)
- Re: Google Plans to Build Ultra High-Speed Broadband Networks David Farber (Feb 11)
- Re: Google Plans to Build Ultra High-Speed Broadband Networks David Farber (Feb 11)
- Re: Google Plans to Build Ultra High-Speed Broadband Networks David Farber (Feb 11)
- Google Plans to Build Ultra High-Speed Broadband Networks David Farber (Feb 11)
- Re: Google Plans to Build Ultra High-Speed Broadband Networks Dave Farber (Feb 12)
- Re: Google Plans to Build Ultra High-Speed Broadband Networks Dave Farber (Feb 13)
- Re: Google Plans to Build Ultra High-Speed Broadband Networks David Farber (Feb 14)
- Re: Google Plans to Build Ultra High-Speed Broadband Networks David Farber (Feb 14)
- Re: Google Plans to Build Ultra High-Speed Broadband Networks Dave Farber (Feb 15)
- Re: Google Plans to Build Ultra High-Speed Broadband Networks David Farber (Feb 16)