• AT&T doesn’t want to pay $100M fine, says throttling didn’t harm customers
    61 replies, posted
[QUOTE=lolo;48328805]Oh please, I'm sure they can make that back in a year or two.[/QUOTE] Lol, more like a couple of months. 100M ain't much to these guys
[QUOTE=sgman91;48358276]It has nothing to do with eminent domain. New providers can use the same underground channels and/or above ground electric poles for new infrastructure, but local governments and utilities often charge ridiculously expensive fees to do so, if they let them use them at all. Google execs have made multiple speeches about the problems they ran into when trying to build their new fiber networks. One of the main reasons they chose the places they did was because those cities, like Kansas City, allowed them to move forward without all the normal regulation. Here's a speech that the Google's vice president overseeing the fiber network implementation made before congress about this very topic: [url]http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/TestimonyofMiloMedin_1.pdf[/url][/QUOTE] You also have to remember that at the end of the day, it's not going to be Google maintaining these wires, it'll be the municipal government maintaining them. Companies rarely fork over the money to replace their own equipment unless it's in dire need. Also because one city decides, 'We're going to make an exception for this one company', doesn't mean they're doing it right. It means they're following the same broken program other municipalities do, 'we'll cheapen it for you if it cheapens it for us' excluding all competition from it. They weren't 'creative'.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.