Ars OpenForum

O

optik1

Seniorius Lurkius
45
  • #34
    [url=http://meincmagazine.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=28912227#p28912227:3guc0tla said:
    SunnyD[/url]":3guc0tla]
    [url=http://meincmagazine.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=28912211#p28912211:3guc0tla said:
    optik1[/url]":3guc0tla]
    [url=http://meincmagazine.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=28912193#p28912193:3guc0tla said:
    ChickenHawk[/url]":3guc0tla]Nothing stoping Comcast bringing their "great" products to new cities...

    ...except that they'd have to compete.
    Click to expand...

    That's simply not true. Even if the local government allowed them to install duplicate infrastructure (most wouldn't, as I understand it), they would have to build out the entire cable network from the ground up, the cost of which would make competing with the existing provider impractical.
    Click to expand...
    Most local governments WOULD allow and even welcome it in this modern era. The difference being that back when cableco's were first moving in, towns were a little different in their thinking and were more than happy to lock up with a 20, 30, 50 year or longer exclusive franchise agreement written by and for a single provider. Those very agreements that those same municipalities are coming to regret as they are now languishing with old plant and no upgrades in sight.
    Click to expand...

    You're basing that on what? There are still laws blocking municipal broadband. Even if the local governments were more than happy to allow new providers in, which I still sincerely doubt, that still doesn't address the problems with the cost of building an entire cable system from scratch. That would probably have to be subsidized with tax dollars, and I don't think any of us want our tax money to be used to build Comcast a new network.
     
    Upvote
    -27 (4 / -31)