Search
User login
Popular keywords
Popular content
Syndicate
Is Iowa the telecom battleground?
Submitted by acohill on Mon, 08/22/2005 - 10:28.
Iowa may be the new battleground for broadband. Successful projects like the Cedar Falls fiber system and the statewide Opportunity Iowa project has shifted the battle from Louisiana, where the phone and cable companies lost a battle against the city of Lafayette.
The most interesting thing in the article is the arrogant attitude of the president of Quest:
Max Phillips, Iowa president of Qwest Communications International Inc., said the interests pushing the community fiber programs are misguided because people should focus on the speed and quality of service, not the medium that carries it.
"They propose building a four-lane highway to every home in town," Phillips said, "when what they really need is a sidewalk."
Actually, towns and cities should be focused on the medium, and let the private sector offer a variety of services with varying levels of quality and service. By providing a communitywide transport medium, Qwest's monopoly status is broken, and that's what Qwest really hates.
Even more telling is the remark that citizens deserve nothing more than sidewalks. That's a nice sound bite, but the communities of Iowa are in an economic development battle with whole countries that are building "four lane highways" to homes and businesses.
What Qwest has decided is that the communities of Iowa should have sub-standard, noncompetitive broadband services so that Qwest can preserve its monopoly status. Let's hope the citizens of Iowa educate their lawmakers about the wrongheadedness of this approach.
Is Iowa the telecom battleground?
Iowa has become a battleground for government owned Internet vs. Free Enterprise.
As a taxpayer, it is ludicrous to see a government compete in the private sector world that is as risky as telecom. Remember XO, MCI, Worldcom, Adelphia? Those were pioneers in the race to deliver high speed Internet to Americans. They also had failed business plans.
I don't want to see my taxes at risk to deliver 100Mbps to my living room when I can pull 7Mbps on a DSL line or 10Mbps on cable modem for around $50.
The government's job is to protect its citizen’s life, liberty and property. It should not interfere with private industry. If anything, it should work with the private sector. Why wouldn't a community prefer to have a $8 million network build out with a cable or phone company instead of spending $24 million to compete?
With around 60% of the homes in America owning computers, that leaves 40% of the residents risking tax money for services they won't benefit from.
The cities are being duped by Clark McLeod (Formerly of the bankrupt McLeod USA) Fiber Utility of Iowa. FU Iowa is going to bury the fiber, send the bill and walk away. I appreciate the genius in this plan, as an entrepreneur, but I am shocked at the city leaders that are drinking the Kool-Aide of the magical, golden thread. This magical thread is promising an influx of business, happy citizens, and a myriad of other myths.
If a company needed fiber in order to locate to a community, wouldn't a private sector company, who's job it is to make as much money as possible for the share holders, jump all over the opportunity if they worked with the economic developers? Or is that the role of the 82 year-old grandmother that lives by herself, with no computer - for the good of the community.
Iowa is not a battleground for telecom. It has become a bazaar of merchants pedaling their wares. A vagabond has come up with a better way of fleecing taxpayers with promises and dreams. Iowa does not need the beans this group is pedaling. This is no opportunity, Iowa