The article discusses the possibility of Starlink at their address.Would Starlink help in this situation?
It seems like the issue is straight forward. It's not Comcast's fault that they would need to do underground work, tear up the road, and then restore the road to serve one customer. They won't ever see any return on the costs of that. Something that might help is asking the city to run overhead poles to his house and then Comcast can use that and it would probably greatly reduce the cost, but I'd doubt they'd do it for the same reason Comcast won't take up an 80,000 dollar project so one couple can get high-speed.
It's very unlikely they need to tear up the road. We were once on a well and switched to city water; the city line was on the other side of a road, and then had to run underneath our circular drive, twice, before reaching the house. No pavement was touched; they used a directional drilling rig to run the line, even though it had to be several feet underground for frost protection in this part of the country. Cable has no such requirement, so it would likely be even easier.
Pay for your neighbor 's internet if they let you run an Ethernet cable to your house?
It was only after closing on the house in July 2019 that they learned the bad news.
and then...
Cohn told us the sellers disclosed in documents before the sale that Internet wasn't connected at the home
Which is it?
It was only after closing on the house in July 2019 that they learned the bad news.
and then...
Cohn told us the sellers disclosed in documents before the sale that Internet wasn't connected at the home
Which is it?
It was only after closing on the house in July 2019 that they learned the bad news.
and then...
Cohn told us the sellers disclosed in documents before the sale that Internet wasn't connected at the home
Which is it?
It was only after closing on the house in July 2019 that they learned the bad news.
and then...
Cohn told us the sellers disclosed in documents before the sale that Internet wasn't connected at the home
Which is it?
It seems like the issue is straight forward. It's not Comcast's fault that they would need to do underground work, tear up the road, and then restore the road to serve one customer. They won't ever see any return on the costs of that. Something that might help is asking the city to run overhead poles to his house and then Comcast can use that and it would probably greatly reduce the cost, but I'd doubt they'd do it for the same reason Comcast won't take up an 80,000 dollar project so one couple can get high-speed.
It's very unlikely they need to tear up the road. We were once on a well and switched to city water; the city line was on the other side of a road, and then had to run underneath our circular drive, twice, before reaching the house. No pavement was touched; they used a directional drilling rig to run the line, even though it had to be several feet underground for frost protection in this part of the country. Cable has no such requirement, so it would likely be even easier.
Isn't part of the issue the underground power lines that already exist? I would assume code would have them grouped together, but departing high and low voltage lines. I'd doubt you could do the directional drilling with the existence of high voltage lines already existing there. But maybe.
And my experience with sewer hookup when I was a little different when I was house shopping. There was a house that needed a sew hookup to pass code, and there was a sewer line to the street, but the cost to get the municipality to do the work was like 10k if they would even do it. Which they didn't and the house was uninhabitable.
Maybe Comcast if blowing smoke, but I'd believe the cost estimate, if not overinflated because I don't think I've ever seen a construction project under budget.
I appreciate a good Comcast bashing story. But this one is a little hard for me to get behind. Quick search of Zillow for houses recently sold in that area of Seattle show most way north of $800,000. And Northgate would be a location I would consider moving to if I was working for a certain employer based out of Redmond.
Now that is probably irresponsible conjecture on my part - even people making $500k per year may not have thirty grand laying around to sink into Comcast’s pocket.
But this couple probably had much more mobility and choice in where they could live than many many other people in Seattle, where affordable housing is harder to find. And the fact that the government was willing to step in on their behalf is a little ‘icky’.
That said, I consider high speed Internet a basic necessity- even for rich people. So I hope this couple finds a happy ending.
It was only after closing on the house in July 2019 that they learned the bad news.
and then...
Cohn told us the sellers disclosed in documents before the sale that Internet wasn't connected at the home
Which is it?
Likely they didn't read the disclosure form at closing. My closing docs are over 50 pages long and one page is a form with disclosures on it.
Isn't DSL a thing in the US? Presumably these house do at least have landlines? It wouldn't give you amazing speeds, but certainly better than 15Mbps downstream (and more reliably too)...
Isn't DSL a thing in the US? Presumably these house do at least have landlines? It wouldn't give you amazing speeds, but certainly better than 15Mbps downstream (and more reliably too)...
I wonder why we never see these sorts of articles about people getting electricity or water at their houses, even in remote rural areas. Maybe the government should look into what happened there and figure out how to fix these crazy internet stories.
/S (in case you can't feel my eyes rolling through your screen)
It was only after closing on the house in July 2019 that they learned the bad news.
and then...
Cohn told us the sellers disclosed in documents before the sale that Internet wasn't connected at the home
Which is it?
Likely they didn't read the disclosure form at closing. My closing docs are over 50 pages long and one page is a form with disclosures on it.
How far away are their neighbours? Why can't they share wifi?
Why is this all about massive underground construction when you could just run a CAT6 wire from an adjacent house and bury it 1ft underground if you think it's unsightly?
Isn't DSL a thing in the US? Presumably these house do at least have landlines? It wouldn't give you amazing speeds, but certainly better than 15Mbps downstream (and more reliably too)...
It was only after closing on the house in July 2019 that they learned the bad news.
and then...
Cohn told us the sellers disclosed in documents before the sale that Internet wasn't connected at the home
Which is it?
Likely they didn't read the disclosure form at closing. My closing docs are over 50 pages long and one page is a form with disclosures on it.
That's their fault, then. Our closings could have gone quicker, but I wasn't going to let myself miss anything out of desire to get out of there quicker.
Pay for your neighbor 's internet if they let you run an Ethernet cable to your house?
Or simply pay for another modem on the same cable drop, and pay the neighbors $10 a month to host it.
Pay for your neighbor 's internet if they let you run an Ethernet cable to your house?
Or simply pay for another modem on the same cable drop, and pay the neighbors $10 a month to host it.
You can do that (have two modems in the same dwelling on the same cable drop?)? I didn't know that was something you can get.
When Zachary Cohn and his wife bought a house in the Northgate neighborhood of Seattle, Washington, they didn't expect any trouble getting home Internet service.
What's not clear from my reading is whether Comcast told them service was available at that address before they bought the house. Buying a house without checking if service is available at that address is like buying a house without checking if it has city water or a well, i.e., moronic.
When Zachary Cohn and his wife bought a house in the Northgate neighborhood of Seattle, Washington, they didn't expect any trouble getting home Internet service.
What's not clear from my reading is whether Comcast told them service was available at that address before they bought the house. Buying a house without checking if service is available at that address is like buying a house without checking if it has city water or a well, i.e., moronic.
It's probably already been addressed somewhere in the comments, but if you think that Comcast's address locator system is accurate, think again. In fact, almost every ISP's locator system sucks - Verizon, Comcast, Mediacom, AT&T, all of them. I've been in places where the lookup says you're good. A call to an order specialist says "You're good." Then 24 hours before the scheduled truck roll you get a message saying they can't complete the request because they don't service your area. It's happened to many people and will continue to happen.
When I was purchasing a home, I checked that the house could get FTTH before I even made an offer. Sounds like they didn't do their due diligence before the purchase.