re Why Google Fiber Failed to Disrupt the ISPs

["Dave Farber" <farber () gmail com>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Edward Almasy <ed () almasy net>
> Date: August 2, 2017 at 3:31:21 PM EDT
> To: dave () farber net
> Subject: Re: [IP] re Why Google Fiber Failed to Disrupt the ISPs
>
>
> Ironic that Brett decries talking about ISPs as a homogeneous group, and then proceeds to do so at length, but more 
> to the point:  If running an ISP is so incredibly hard and unprofitable, why is it that so many community-based 
> providers, often built by literal amateurs and many offering gigabit+ service, seem to be viable?
>       https://muninetworks.org/communitymap
>
> It looks to me like the available evidence more supports the view that while not easy, setting up and running an ISP 
> is markedly less difficult than Brett and others make it out to be, and Google likely scaled back their Fiber efforts 
> for reasons unrelated to profitability.
>
> Ed
>
>
>
> > On Aug 2, 2017, at 2:14 PM, Brett Glass <brett () lariat net> wrote:
> > From: Brett Glass <brett () lariat net>
> > Subject: Re: [IP] Why Google Fiber Failed to Disrupt the ISPs
> > Date: August 2, 2017 at 2:14:37 PM EDT
> > To: dave () farber net, "Ip ip" <ip () v2 listbox com>
> >
> > Dave, and Everyone:
> >
> > As an ISP with 25 years' experience, I can say with certainty that Google Fiber failed to disrupt "the ISPs" (as if 
> > we are a homogeneous group) because:
> >
> > 1. Being an ISP is incredibly hard, and Google didn't have -- or develop -- the chops to do it. One of the reasons 
> > Google has been so incredibly profitable in its other businesses is that it provides essentially no customer service 
> > or support for any of them. It is COMPLETELY inexperienced at providing personalized technical support, and is not 
> > willing to spend the money to do so. It is also unused to being blamed for every tiny technical problem which is not 
> > its fault (a situation which ISPs encounter daily). Yet its own lobbyists, and those of other edge providers, 
> > encourage consumers to blame any network, computing, or service problem on the ISP.
> >
> > 2. Google Fiber was never intended to be a long term, going concern. It was a money-losing publicity stunt, intended 
> > to stimulate governments at all levels to regulate ISPs. (They'd ask, "If Google can provide broadband that cheaply, 
> > why can't you?" Never mind the fact that Google Fiber was highly unprofitable and therefore unsustainable.)
> >
> > 3. Google Fiber was at cross-purposes with other efforts within Google -- in particular, its lobbying efforts in 
> > Washington DC. Google has been spending millions of dollars -- much of it flowing via foundations, dark money 
> > 501(c)(4)s, academia, "think tanks," and so-called "public interest" lobbying shops -- to lobby for government 
> > regulations that would make ISPs barely profitable or even unprofitable, allowing Google and other edge providers to 
> > collect most or all of the money flowing to and through the Internet ecosystem. Being an ISP itself exposes Google 
> > itself to the very attacks that other portions of the same company are mounting against ISPs.
> >
> > 4. To keep Google Fiber from being even a greater loss than it already was, Google was forced to go into the pay TV 
> > business -- a business against which it competes (via YouTube and its advertising businesses) and which is heavily 
> > regulated. It wasn't prepared for the enormous regulatory burdens of doing so, nor for the extreme difficulty of 
> > negotiating with content providers (including content monopolies such as ESPN and "must carry" local TV stations) 
> > for reasonable rates. And it did not get into the local telephony business, which is an even deeper regulatory tar 
> > pit, even though a "triple play" offering might have boosted revenue. Why? Due to the huge regulatory burdens that 
> > this would impose.
> >
> > In short, Google found out that this money losing publicity stunt -- which it listed in its financial reports as one 
> > of its "other bets" -- was even a worse bet than it thought. Expect it to sell its last mile fiber networks to other 
> > carriers within the next 12-24 months.
> >
> > --Brett Glass



-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/18849915-ae8fa580
Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-aa268125
Unsubscribe Now: 
https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-32545cb4&post_id=20170802154618:3E938A82-77BB-11E7-A1A4-BE899AB1A252
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com