I live in a pretty rural area, and have very limited internet choices. Why is that?

[Scuba]

[JustAnotherGen]

1. Add Frontier/Citizens and Time Warner to the List

My mom is literally at the end of the line for both of these in Monroe County NY.

She uses a MiFi from Verizon Wireless as that is her only option for fast internet.

[riderinthestorm]

2. I'm so not surprised. ..

I'm rural as well and although I've now had a hotspot for several years I vividly remember my many many years of dial up....



Going back is inconceivable

[kelliekat44]

47. It's all part of the gerrymandering plan. Keep those GOP districts uninformed and brainwashed by

Rush Limbaugh whose show is everywhere. I don't understand why so many don't understand this.

[B Calm]

3. I have to pay 60 dollars a month + tax for satellite internet and I can only

download 10 GB a month. Really sucks, but the only alternative is dial up which is extremely slow out here in the boondocks.

[mercuryblues]

4. If by limited choices

you mean 1 provider, yeah that is what I have. They know it and gouge us for shitty assed service.

[Scuba]

5. I have three choices (if you call satellite a "choice") all of which suck.

[mercuryblues]

11. I have 1

A friend who lives 1 mile away, also has 1 choice. A "competitor". I used the quotes because when they moved there they called my provider and was told they do not service their area. I called the company they found to see if I could get them and was told they do not provide service to my area. IOW they have split up the area and will not compete.

I have 2 choices for TV, direct or dish. Every couple of years we swap out for the new customer deal. It is all a scam.

[Thor_MN]

6. My dad's county got funding to fiber the entire county (Lake county in MN is LARGE)

The cable companies decided to tie it up for years with arguments over line placement on the poles. Cheapest to be lowest on the pole as it is easier to hang and maintain, and less likely to damage existing lines that would need to be fixed out of your pocket.

[jwirr]

20. Lake County is large and has a smaller population in much of the area. Their population lives mainly

in the towns. That is great that they did that. I used to live there. Great area.

[Odin2005]

53. That's pathetic and sad. We have had decent internet in rural Clay Country for years, now.

My mom gets 10mb/s.

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

7. K&R

nt

[BeyondGeography]

8. Which is another reason to love Chattanooga's best-in-the-world public Internet

and the way it makes corporations squirm:

“The success of public broadband is a mixed record, with numerous examples of failures,” USTelecom said in a blog post. “With state taxpayers on the financial hook when a municipal broadband network goes under, it is entirely reasonable for state legislatures to be cautious in limiting or even prohibiting that activity.”

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/30/chattanooga-gig-high-speed-internet-tech-boom

U.S. corporate Internet is 27th in the world in download speed:

http://www.netindex.com/download/allcountries/

[Go Vols]

48. There are a few towns public utility's in Tenn.

that provide 1gig up and down.

[phantom power]

9. If it weren't for the govt, rural areas probably wouldn't have electricity.

[Scuba]

10. Probably?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_Electrification_Act

The Rural Electrification Act of 1935 provided federal loans for the installation of electrical distribution systems to serve rural areas of the United States.

The funding was channeled through cooperative electric power companies, most of which still exist today. These member-owned cooperatives purchased power on a wholesale basis and distributed it using their own network of transmission and distribution lines. The Rural Electrification Act was also an attempt made by FDR's New Deal to deal with the crippling amount of unemployment.

At the time the Rural Electrification Act was passed, electricity was commonplace in cities but largely unavailable in farms, ranches, and other rural places. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt issued Executive Order 7037 on May 11, 1935, establishing the Rural Electrification Administration.[1] It was proposed by Representative John E. Rankin and Senator George William Norris. The act was signed into law by Roosevelt.

In the 1930s, the provision of power to remote areas was not thought to be economically feasible.

[TexasProgresive]

15. It was not economically feasible

In the phone business the phone companies were granted to be regulated monopolies but they had to provide service to any who asked for it. Besides REA funding and loans there were subsidies built in to fund rural telecommunication which never paid for itself.

The most profitable subsidized the unprofitable like this:
Long distance subsidized local.
Business subsidized residential.
All urban subsidized rural.

Verizon and AT&T have succeeded in doing away with universal service for land lines. It is their business plan to move everyone off of land lines to cellular which is barely regulated. This is a dream come true for big telecom.

[JustAnotherGen]

26. The Millenials are driving that

The first blip on that radar was in Q2 2009.

The don't want land lines - they don't want to be wired. 3 of my last 7 new hires have been 25 and under. That's who will be driving the business in 10/15 years.

And it's punishment to these 20-somethings to get 'reorged' to the landline/cable side of the house.

It's a different mindset than what X'ers and older are used to.

[jeff47]

29. For phone service. For Internet, the prices and caps for cellular make it not an option. (nt)

[JustAnotherGen]

39. I think LTE and the Unsubsidized Device Models are changing that

I've long thought the consumer should just buy services - and not be tied to a device. The only thing you should 'buy' is a SIM card from the provider.

For years and years and years people go to PC Richard and Son for their T.V. and Land Line handsets. The caveat is that (I know for us with Comcast) we have to 'rent' the box. I think we should be driving tv manufacturers to 'one' technology which doesn't require that box at all. Just installation/wiring if the home doesn't currently have it.

People should go there for a wireless device - be it data or voice or voice/data.

Watch the 'financing' programs we are all offering now. Those are really the beginning of the end for the subsidized model. It was tied hand in hand to the move towards ARPA reporting to Wall Street.

Another caveat - that could potentially lead to the end of the stores - and store employees. But if you stand in a wireless store today you'll note most of those entering are in there for accessories OR FACE To FACE support. They are quickly becoming service centers. That also reduces the footprint for the carriers - as they won't need back room space to carry the devices.

The big box stores would carry the device - and take the hit on the theft.

The device manufacturers would most likely have to create IN COUNTRY centralized return warehouses to service and repair defective devices. So jobs would just move from low paying retail jobs -

To higher paying technical jobs.

[jeff47]

41. That presumes that the carriers will lower rates and raise caps.

And that's not going to happen. When one or two Netflix movies blow through your cap, cellular isn't a viable option. Especially when it costs about as much as a land-line ISP.

We basically have two wireless carriers in this country, AT&T and Verizon. Sprint and T-Mobile are more-or-less propped up by the first two in order to avoid monopoly regulations.

If we still had a real market for cellular service, it could compete well as an option for Internet service. Especially since it has no "last mile" problem.

But we don't, and the two remaining companies show no interest in lowering prices or raising caps.

[JustAnotherGen]

42. Are you sure

The wireless folks at one company - won't double cross the wireline one at another? Especially with the snorty laughing going on about their 'fasted wired service' getting punched with a $300 bill?

You under estimate the vicious aggression the employees at one are encouraged to engage in towards their in house competitor . .. you also under estimate - the total lack of regard for wired services.

The only way to kill em - is to well - kill em.

Divestiture is your friend. We need 4K competitive sim card providers fighting each other out for their piece of pie.

If VZW kills VZ - we'll get there.

BTW - I sit in HQ at a 'mother ship'. And let me tell ya - in my role?

Anything - I mean ANYTHING the wholesale team needs? I give 'em.

That's how you get your lowered prices. If VZW has only 4000K customers they are just selling wireless network to - then you can rest assured - those companies will tell lies on their own mothers souls to give you what you want.


The consumer is talking - I CAN hear you know.

It's just going to look a little different and happen quite a bit differently than you think it will.

Customers should be able to change their 'service' as easily as changing their sim card. If your future service provider screws you -then you throw out the SIM and get another.

[jeff47]

50. If that were true, I could buy a plan that actually handles the traffic I produce

Time Warner "helpfully" tells me how much data I sent over the network each month. I'm producing well over 100GB/mo - most months are 120GB to 130GB.

Time Warner's plan is unlimited, and costs $35/mo.
AT&T's largest data plan is 100GB/mo. For $400/mo. And I'd still have to pay massive overage charges.
Verizon Wireless's largest data plan is also 100GB/mo. For $750/mo. And again, I'd still have to pay massive overage charges.

So for at least ten times the cost, I could move to getting my Internet service from a wireless carrier.

That isn't competitive. That isn't even remotely close to competitive.

[JustAnotherGen]

51. What do you do with all of that data each month?

100 GB - For $710 (data only plan) was supposed to be small business play on a hot spot.

I wonder how many customers are really using that much?

You keep writing - IF that were true. <--- Correct. Today. That's not true today.


But - You are going to have to unleash the future here.

What I've written - is what the future is going to look like.

Do you remember the old 10 - 10 - 220 Commercials? The 220 was a CIC code. Carrier Identification Code for your long distance service. In the future - your CIC code will be a SIM card.

And the real battle will be for the consumer getting the prices of those devices down. The prices the 'Carriers' pay today are 500k to a a million device deliveries. The Carriers won't be able to step in on that one. It won't be their domain anymore.

All of the OEMs and ODMs are going to have to find a way to bring their prices down so that the consumer can afford to buy their products.

You don't have to believe it. You can say it's never going to happen. Tell that to all those phone operators that got laid off at the telcos 20 years ago - because they couldn't pick up provisioning/network analysis and implementation.

Me I'm looking forward to it. I remember being at a CLEC as a Carrier Acct Manager in Foley Alabama years ago - and they couldn't build the cubes fast enough for their employees. It's fun, it's exciting and it's like the Wild Wild West.



I'm just saying - I'm a 'back fill'. It's a team of folks in their late 30's to mid 40's and well - when the business gets handed off to us.

It's happening. Whether you like it or not.

[jeff47]

55. Lots of things. That's kinda the point of having lots of bandwidth.

I wonder how many customers are really using that much?

One movie is many gigabytes. 10 to 20 movies with streaming overhead is 100GB. A night of streamed TV is many gigabytes. Video games are many gigabytes to download, and then use more bandwidth when you play them online. And so on.

You keep writing - IF that were true. <--- Correct. Today. That's not true today.

And my point is it is nowhere close to being true. Verizon can't handle it for 21 times the cost.

If cable's capacity and prices never change, then in theory Verizon could get the cost down to something remotely competitive. But it's not only cellular technology that's moving forward. Verizon is already 20 times behind Time Warner, and both of them are sprinting forward.

And the real battle will be for the consumer getting the prices of those devices down

Which would require actual competition. The 10-10 numbers you cite created competition for long distance coverage and drove prices down. There were many different options, so consumers could switch frequently and get prices down.

Two real companies is not competition.

It's happening. Whether you like it or not.

Why the heck would you think I would not like it? I burn through 120GB/mo. I don't want to be chained to the fucking assholes at Time Warner, but there are exactly zero other reasonable options.

[JustAnotherGen]

58. And all of those reasons you came back with

Are why it has to be done.

When you decouple device, distribution, warehouse, FIT, reverse logistics, centralized returns, etc. etc. everything equipment related -

You can be a whole saler. Strip all of the overhead away and focus on the network and connectivity. That's how you do it. That's how you become nothing but a network provider that the end user (consumer) never sees.

You gotta understand what a divestiture option would look like. You had those 4K clecs in 2000 because of it. It created super 'back end' carriers that to this day - Have unlit fiber laid all around the US. All over the place.

If land line companies REALLY felt they could rise up - they would be buying, lighting, and reselling today.


I know it's frustrating - I'm just trying to tell - what is won't always be. I'm from Rochester NY originally. I can walk down Clinton today - and take pictures of what ONCE was - once upon a time - Xerox, Kodak, B & L, Hudson Hotel Managment Company . . . Just because the environment is the way it is today - doesn't mean it's going to stay that way.

BTW - that's cool how you consume content. We can't even figure out the cable from the blu ray to the cable box (got lost in our move last year) to rehook up for Netflix. *hiding head in paperbag*.

I had to marry a man who makes his living with iron and earth and metal and fire. He just HAD to a marry a woman in technology - who only cares about the profit and bottom line.

[jeff47]

59. And what do you think the cable companies will be doing during that time?

Your model appears to require the wired providers to not advance while the wireless ones do.

With Docsis 3 modems, cable companies are already suppling 100Mbit connections with no cap for 1/7th the price Verizon charges for 24Mbit and a 100GB cap. Movies are going to only take more bytes. Games are going to take only more bytes. More people will want to stream content. And there's zero indication that Verizon and AT&T are moving to handle that - caps mean they can't, and caps make them piles of cash.

So in your theoretical future where Verizon is offering 100Mbit connections with a 1TB cap, cable will be offering 1000Mbit connections and no cap. And I'm stuck with the assholes at Time Warner.

As for "wholesalers", that's what the Internet already is. Time Warner's only supplying me the "last mile". The rest runs over other people's networks.

The problem is even after LTE means Verizon finally has SIM cards to swap out, there's still only one other company's SIM card to put into that slot.

[JustAnotherGen]

60. Not if there is divestiture! ;-)

The problem is even after LTE means Verizon finally has SIM cards to swap out, there's still only one other company's SIM card to put into that slot.

Open it up - make it competitive. Open it up! Why can't you have reseller called Heard and another called Cubic and another called Polycom and another and another.

Why are you so intent that wireless just die? Tell the truth? Do you work in building 1 or 2 or 3? (I'm teasing you here)


And I hate to break it to you - but until the Verizon FIOS teams gets off their dead asses and sells through what has already been laid down - ain't no money being given to them for development.


And yep - in my world.. . my daily world - the side of the house that makes the money - is who gets the development.

I'll send you PM

[jeff47]

62. It's already open.

Why can't you have reseller called Heard and another called Cubic and another called Polycom and another and another.

You already have a reseller named "Sprint". And another named "T-Mobile". They aren't doing very well compared to AT&T and Verizon.

Why are you so intent that wireless just die?

I'm not. I'm saying wireless shows no evidence of moving to realistically serve the home Internet market.

[JustAnotherGen]

63. That's not enough

It's not open. Not by a long shot.


If it were open you'd have a full carrier services org chart.

Right now who do you have - Cricket. That's one. Tracphone that's another. Page Plus. That's another. And those are all prepaid.

Nothing says it has to be prepaid.

Wholesale is not what you are talking about - and it's not 'open'. Not by a long shot.

[TexasProgresive]

30. I agree with what you are saying but it is a money trap

Once Verizon and AT&T get most on cell phones they can then raise rates and enforce draconian metered service. It is what they have always wanted but couldn't have.

[JustAnotherGen]

31. I don't know about raising rates

The consumer will revolt. And - that's not the ARPA model.

In the ARPU model - yes - but ARPA? No.

The reward there is low churn and steady usage. And keep in mind - the Millenials won't have the disposable income of the x'ers in their lifetime.

I'm the bridge there - in that I get teased for keeping my wired internet to use Skype - and have shown them a picture of my phone at home. We use vonage as my husband's family is mostly in Italy. They have the best rates for international calling plans.

[TexasProgresive]

33. You may be right about rates

They are getting way more bang for their bucks with cellular over copper.

[frazzled]

17. Yeah, but look how long that took

1935 was more than 50 years after the Edison Electric Illuminating Company opened its Pearl Street Station in 1882, allowing homes and businesses in New York City to purchase electrical power at a reasonable price for the first time.

I live in a the third largest city in the United States and until this past month had only one choice for Internet service also (DSL, since my building was not wired for cable but rather satellite). Yay, we just got fiber optic in our building and we've switched over.

Keep pressing your representatives for access. It will come, but it will take time. Just remember, most of the large cities are not yet even set up for high-speed services.

[lumberjack_jeff]

43. Absolutely true.

And in fact, public utility districts in my state are prohibited from offering broadband because of telecom lobbyists.

[TexasProgresive]

12. WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA?

of course. I too live in rural America and you have the choice of Exede or Hughes or dial up. Some neighbors closer to town can use a radio link but it doesn't make it to where I live. Verizon wireless is not an option, AT&T if my cell phone is any example is sketchy, slow or nothing-at least the phone part works consistently. The use of Verizon or AT&T is very limited data and as expensive as Exede which gives me 10GB per month at $50.00. I think the cell hot spots around here limit you to 2 GB per month.

I guess I could move to town for faster internet or just move to South Korea.

[NorthCarolina]

13. My choices in Charlotte: Time Warner, DISH, DirectTV.

AT&T has a presence in Charlotte, but not in my area.

[Zoonart]

14. NOT EVEN

I live in the NY Hudson Valley, 60 miles north of NYC and only have two choices for internet; Comcast and Verizon, neither of which can provide me with cell service to my home. That's right... 60 miles from NYC and you "can't hear me now".

These internet companies need regulation. They are thieves!

[tridim]

16. Elon Musk’s Next Mission: Internet Satellites

http://online.wsj.com/articles/elon-musks-next-mission-internet-satellites-1415390062

Dude's gonna get it done in spite of AT&T et al.

[HereSince1628]

34. and probably more doable than a highspeed transit system in California

[Brickbat]

18. Amazing how much better my one option improved when the (rural) county I live in put together

a public-private fiber optic partnership. Can't wait to make the switch.

[Betty88]

24. I found that to be true too

I live in Brooklyn, for years we have had just Time Warner. Verizon is coming, very slowly to the area. Suddenly I have faster internet speeds available at the same price I was paying for 15mb I now get 30. Thing is they don't tell anyone you have to find this out when you call and are lucky enough to get a human that notices. I had to replace my modem, which is probably why they don't want to advertise it. But man I was down at the office next day to get my new modem and my new faster connection. Still can't wait for Verizon

[closeupready]

56. Ditto to everything you wrote - then last summer, Verizon finally

became available to my building (maybe the whole area switched?).

I was on Verizon FiOS like white on rice, as they say, lol. LOVE my FiOS! It's almost an addiction.

It's not cheap, but I think in terms of entertainment value, it's the best value available. JMHO.

[PeoViejo]

19. Executive Order 7037 on May 11, 1935

This is how shit gets done.

[Old Codger]

21. My place

150 yards from my back door is the main fiber cable for all Qwest phone traffic for eastern Washington and Oregon. along the road in front of my place is a fiber cable owned by Frontier... I am blessed with shitty DSL at "1.3mbs" (last month the only time speed came close was at 1 am on the 12th) average is .77 and usually a lot lower than that..

I am surrounded by potential high speed and no on has plans to do anything about it.

[certainot]

22. they get lots of senators

and win lots of other elections that way.

as is, republican radio dominates politics in most or all rural areas. republicans would start losing big time if people started getting high speed radio alternatives.


at the moment there are no free alternatives for politics while driving or working in most parts of the US

[hunter]

28. That's a really interesting observation.

Rural people without high speed internet have very limited news sources, all controlled by a handful of corporations.

Even with satellite television and radio, channels on the lower subscription tiers are extremely limited.

[certainot]

36. a lot of liberals think high speed competes with talk radio and will

soon make it ineffective, and therefore not worrying about

it's not going to happen soon, and maybe by design

[freebrew]

23. Rural here , too...

$60 a month, was supposed to be $40 after 2 years, but exede won't honor the terms the installer offered.
Local cable co. won't come here(except with a $2700 fee) because I'm 1/4 mile off the road.

DTV is gone, use antenna only. Old movies are good sometimes. News is better here(the interwebs).

Seems there was a local network, but I think exede bought them out.

[GoneFishin]

25. I think one aspect of their business model is to maintain an artificial scarcity of service to limit

competition and keep prices high.

I think if DSL, high speed cable, and two dish companies all serviced everyone everywhere some price wars might have broken out by now.

I have one option, and I am paying $60/month for spotty service.

[jeff47]

27. Not rural, but still have one option.

The builder of the neighborhood negotiated with a tiny phone company for phone service to our neighborhood. As a result, they own the phone lines, and since they're tiny they don't have to let AT&T use them. And since that phone company is tiny, they don't have the money to upgrade their service. So they can beat dial-up with their DSL....but they aren't really "high speed" anymore.

As a result, our only high-speed option is Time Warner.

Reaaaaly hoping Google decides to roll out fiber here. Just so we can have some competition.

[dmosh42]

32. Many years ago, the local phone cos were granted "natural monopolies over regions....

throughout the country, but in return these monopolies had to provide universal service, meaning even if they had to run cables to remote places, they would do it to provide that service to all. Once the breakups started in the 80s, that commitment became whatever provides a profit. So these phone and cable companies only put in the latest technologies where the volume is high enough for it to pay for itself. Good old free enterprise!

[Historic NY]

37. Where I live the town won't let FIOS broadband in because they won't

pony up fees to the town. Were stuck with Time Warner who has a monopoly. Verizon put in all new FIOS service into my house for my land line. With FIOS I would see a drop of 40 - 50 a month in a combined package.

I'm thinking about dropping their cable and going to dish or other. I'd keep just the broadband.

[tclambert]

40. A free market inevitably leads to monopolies and cartels. We want a competitive market.

Republicans and business people love to conflate these two very different things. A competitive market requires active government oversight to make sure fair competition takes place. In Adam Smith's classic work "On the Wealth of Nations," he protests the evils of monopolies and praises the virtues of competition. Sadly, he used the phrase "free market" to describe the competitive market, and those who want to destroy competition so they corner the market love to confuse the terms so they can spin the arguments around backwards. That includes pretty much all business people. They hate competition all the while singing about its advantages.

[marlakay]

44. I live rurally in small town

Have high speed internet and cable with localtel a community small company, left charter for them. It is great, saves a few bucks but it's not the money they answer the phone, come right away, helpful etc.

[dembotoz]

45. watch the fcc today

some time ago att put in a request TO THE FCC per the abandonment of the copper telecom plant to go to internet based product.

supposedly today
the fcc is supposed to issue the initial guidelines as to how this would be done.
-this has the potential to make things real shitty for consumers and small business alike.
REAL SHITTY

when issued, there is supposed to be a period for public comment.

stay tuned

[WillyT]

46. Huge K & R !!!

[Tsiyu]

49. Of all the things I will miss about TN, my phone co-op is the most dear.

Some of you remember me being the dial-up queen. This year, our little mountain co-op got a grant for rural fiberoptic. I ordered high speed internet (gift from family) and they said, "Wait another week and we'll shoot the fiberoptic down your road."

It is pure awesomeness. They install a battery pack so if the power goes out, I still have internet. Longest it's gon out is 6 hours and I had internet the whole time.

I love my co-op. I earn money every year and they are sweet with great tech support.

Now, the little towns can't get switched because it's so expensive, but out here in the wildlands the grant paid.

Thanks, Obama!

[JEFF9K]

54. Welcome to capitalism!

[Zorra]

57. I live in a rural area also, and have a local, small company internet provider.

We have to subjugate large corporations, and regulate them into submission to the people's will and needs.

[cyberswede]

61. This is obnoxious. The telecomm companies need to suck it up.

We have a very small local phone/internet company, which serves our community very well - with fiberoptic, no less.

Fuck the big corporations.

[woo me with science]

64. K&R