At the same time, however, they have sought protectionist policies barring public sector providers from doing so with lower cost business models financed by more patient capital that doesn't require a high, short term return on investment. From their perspective, their service territories whether they fully serve them or not are their proprietary franchises. Hence, the need for protectionism to keep others out.
"The incumbents won't upgrade to fiber, Mr. President, because it's an option they cannot choose." |
In fact, looking toward 2014, perhaps the biggest regulatory threat to new FTTH deployments is a push by politicians in many states to restrict municipalities and other public entities or public/private partnerships that want to build their own networks where incumbent providers (typically milking old, obsolete systems) refuse to do so.Click here for the full article (.pdf)
The New America Foundation issued a critical report on U.S. Internet service on January 15, 2014. It urges the U.S. Federal Communications Commission work with Congress and other stakeholders to implement the 2010 U.S. National Broadband Plan’s recommendation that state-level barriers to municipally-built Internet infrastructure be eliminated.
1 comment:
This is true, and Steve Ross's prediction six years ago has unfortunately come to pass. Many states have, at the urging of the incumbents, passed protectionist laws that make it nearly impossible for not only 100% muni efforts, but also have made public/private partnerships very difficult.
Post a Comment