
Saying Goodbye to Louisville - seanclayton
https://fiber.googleblog.com/2019/02/louisville_7.html
======
maxxxxx
"For that, and many other reasons, we are deeply grateful to Mayor Greg
Fischer, the City of Louisville and its residents for their partnership and
spirit of innovation over the past two years."

That's why we can't trust Google with anything critical. They view the world
as an experiment they can quit anytime. Definitely don't buy a Google self
driving car or anything else you expect to work in a few years.

There is a good chance that businesses moved to Louisville because of Google
Fiber and they are being shown the finger "Thanks for indulging us, we got
what we wanted and you can go f... yourself".

~~~
porpoisely
You make a good point, but I think it's a corporate problem, not a google
problem. Expecting loyalty from businesses is pointless. Look at NFL
franchises. They'll move from cleveland to baltimore or Oakland to Las Vegas
or from LA to St.Louis and back to LA without a second thought. Look at the
rust belt where companies just left for "greener pastures". Or pharma
companies merging and moving their headquarters to europe to exploit tax
loopholes. Businesses are in it for themselves despite all the ads and PR
talking about how they care about the community.

~~~
mikeash
I have high confidence that Verizon will continue to offer fiber at my house
for years to come. “Will Verizon decide to stop serving this place?” was not a
question I had to ask when looking for a place to live. Expecting some
stability isn’t about loyalty, it’s just good business. Google is going to
start scaring people away from stuff they actually want to sell if they have a
history of abandoning things.

~~~
gowld
Does Verizon offer fiber in Louisville?

Google Fiber was more about scaring ISPs into investing in fiber, than serving
its own fiber. Once bribery and lawsuits failed to stop Google Fiber, ISPs
started to compete.

[https://thenextweb.com/google/2017/07/21/how-google-fiber-
wo...](https://thenextweb.com/google/2017/07/21/how-google-fiber-won-by-
failing/)

~~~
Corrado
Verizon doesn't really offer fiber in Louisville, it does have a presence but
its not large at all (~3 neighborhoods). AT&T ramped up their fiber roll-out
here over the last two years and have made great progress; I am currently on
their 1GB fiber plan and am enjoying the speed and prices. However, with this
latest Google announcement I'm fearful that the AT&T expansion will end and
the prices will rise. Hell, Louisville is in the list of cities announced for
AT&T 5G service, but you can't actually purchase it today and now I'm not sure
if it will ever arrive. I'm really not loving Google today.

------
robben1234
I can't trust Google. Every time they build something good (Reader, Inbox)
eventually they will kill it even despite users clearly opposing the decision.
And those are just web pages, here they're denying of ISP whole town which was
serviced before.

So for example how can I use their e-sim provider Fi if I know for sure in one
of my travels I will get a notification 'we are closing Fi next week. Find new
provider.'.

I use their Photos service extensively. But in a couple of years I know it
will get closed too, once they fully used it's capacities for training
internal ML models.

~~~
hk__2
> Every time they build something good (Reader, Inbox) eventually they will
> kill it even despite users clearly opposing the decision.

To be fair, users aren’t customers. People don’t have any right regarding your
product if you give them for free.

~~~
andrewla
Those are by analogy, but in the case of Fiber, which we're talking about
here, the users are customers. So what rights do they have now?

------
owenmarshall
To try and hijack the top post with some of the comments I've scattered across
this thread:

Google did _a remarkably poor job_ in Louisville, and it's absolutely no
surprise to me that they're giving up.

Google's strategy was to build a FTTH network with microtrenching. In
practice, this meant cutting a 2" deep groove in city streets, placing a fiber
optic cable in it, and using an expanding rubber gasket material to cover the
groove.

This failed in _spectacular fashion_. One of the best pictures was this:
[https://www.wdrb.com/news/belknap-neighborhood-residents-
con...](https://www.wdrb.com/news/belknap-neighborhood-residents-concerned-
over-sloppy-installation-of-high-
speed/article_4bc2a61e-8640-57f0-aba9-3dd4cb3d39e5.html)

... a fiber optic cable, barely buried under the surface of the road, exposed
after a few freeze/thaw cycles.

If you click on no other link about Google Fiber in Louisville, click on this
one. This scene is repeated _all over the city_.

There won't be much in the way of "dark fiber left behind" because most of the
Google Fiber rollout was FTTH done ridiculously poorly.

And for the customers? The only company competing for residential gigabit
service is AT&T, which (wisely?) rolled out their service to high density
apartment areas and wealthy condos; for most residents, Spectrum or Uverse DSL
are the only real competitors.

Some cites:

[https://www.techrepublic.com/pictures/photos-how-google-
fibe...](https://www.techrepublic.com/pictures/photos-how-google-fiber-is-
using-shallow-trenching-to-outbuild-its-gigabit-rivals/18/) \-- Microtrenching
will save Google!!

[https://www.wdrb.com/news/google-fiber-announces-plan-to-
fix...](https://www.wdrb.com/news/google-fiber-announces-plan-to-fix-exposed-
fiber-lines-in/article_fbc678c3-66ef-5d5b-860c-2156bc2f0f0c.html) \-- uh oh,
things aren't so good...

[https://9to5google.com/2019/02/07/google-fiber-closing-in-
lo...](https://9to5google.com/2019/02/07/google-fiber-closing-in-louisville/)
\-- we give up, 2" of trench won't do it.

~~~
Jhndb
For my GDPR friends:

>[https://www.wdrb.com/news/belknap-neighborhood-residents-
con...](https://www.wdrb.com/news/belknap-neighborhood-residents-concerned-
over-sloppy-installation-of-high-
speed/article_4bc2a61e-8640-57f0-aba9-3dd4cb3d39e5.html)

[https://outline.com/etFHuX](https://outline.com/etFHuX)

>[https://www.wdrb.com/news/google-fiber-announces-plan-to-
fix...](https://www.wdrb.com/news/google-fiber-announces-plan-to-fix-exposed-
fiber-lines-in/article_fbc678c3-66ef-5d5b-860c-2156bc2f0f0c.html)

[https://outline.com/nxZPBa](https://outline.com/nxZPBa)

~~~
oh_sigh
Is outline.com GDPR compliant or do they just not care?

~~~
robk
No one really knows what's compliant

------
Talyen42
"That’s because we were trialing a lot of things in Louisville, including a
different type of construction method — namely, placing fiber in much
shallower trenches than we’ve done elsewhere."

Read as: We messed around with your street infrastructure using untested
construction methods, and it didn't work very well so WE OUT PEACE. You know
what they say, fail fast byeee!

~~~
selectodude
Move fast and break stuff, up to and including your sidewalks and roads.

------
ocdtrekkie
I can't even picture a scenario where another ISP just says "Hey, we're
packing up shop, you've got two months to find a new Internet provider". I
guess I suppose it's happened somewhere, sometime, but it certainly feels one
of a kind.

It's not a scenario I would have ever planned for, to say the least, but
anyone who has service with Google is probably used to it.

~~~
marcell
Is it that big of a deal? Most places have Comcast or similar. It takes maybe
a week or two to set it up.

~~~
jetti
It can be. A cursory search showed that the other fiber competitor in the area
is AT&T. Google Fiber was $70/mo and AT&T is $80/mo and that was for the
highest speed offered. With Google exiting the market, the fiber competition
is gone and it allows AT&T to raise prices, if they want as there aren't any
other options. It puts AT&T back into the fiber monopoly

~~~
criddell
$70 wasn't a sustainable price. The competition can use Google's withdrawal as
a fairly reasonable justification to raise rates to a sustainable level.

~~~
metildaa
Centurylink is offering gigabit for $65 flat (no taxes or fees) across its
footprint, and 100Mbps for $55, 40Mbps for $45. At $70 a month Google was
significantly above the average price people paid for internet, but they were
offering a premium product (gigabit). Had they offered slower, more affordable
tiers to residences that didn't initially jump, they likely could have broken
even.

The problem with overbuilding is uptake rates, its not good to only capture
28% of the market or similar, you really need 40+% to break even. The City of
Tacoma ran into this with their cable network, and so has Google. Webpass is
Google's fix for that, only targetting larger buildings where a 10% uptake
rate gets them in the green.

~~~
owenmarshall
> Centurylink is offering gigabit for $65 flat (no taxes or fees) across its
> footprint

Oh word! They are in Louisville? Where do I sign up?

Hint: "average prices" for high speed internet mean very little in the USA as
those prices vary wildly. I pay $30 less for 300Mbps service than a remote
coworker does for 75Mbps - from the same company.

~~~
metildaa
Centurylink isn't in Louisville, was just trying to highlight how Google Fiber
has encouraged average speed per dollar spent to rise, and how other large
providers are getting financially solvent wen running fiber.

Most of Centurylink's territory has only halfhearted competition from the
local cable company (Comcast, Charter, Wave), and they just recently lost a
lawsuit where the state AGs from Oregon, Washington, Minnesota and a few other
states ganged up and prosecuted them for hidden fees and malicious billing
practices, thus why they are on the straight and narrow now, with the price
you see being exactly what you will pay.

------
coryfklein
Am I the only one going to say it?

Kudos to Google Fiber for actually trying to innovate in a stagnant industry.
I'm no insider here, but I suspect the micro-trenching did go through internal
testing which looked promising before they approved it for real city use.

If the micro trenching had been successful we'd be cheering for Google for
finding an innovative way to bring fiber to more people. Turns out it didn't
work in their one trial city and since they discovered this at a time when
Google Fiber is no longer expanding it is no surprise that they don't "re-
open" Louisville and retrench the entire city.

For a community that celebrates failure as a natural consequence of
innovation, I'm surprised at all the negativity here. Not a mention of the 2
months of free gigabit internet they're giving to customers. Yea, Google Fiber
is just a bunch of soulless profiteering corporate jackasses /eyeroll/.

~~~
haylcron
I have family in Louisville and visit on a regular basis and have seen the
issues firsthand. The microtrenching has caused and will continue to cause
damage to the streets. The rubber sealant is commonly free from the trench and
potholes form quickly. These are fixed by tax dollars and there is not a quick
fix short of repaving every street.

The community here isn’t digging on Google trying to innovate. The anger comes
from a highly successful company taking a risk, seeing it fail, and just
peacing out leaving others to clean up the mess.

~~~
coryfklein
Did Google Fiber agree to do the road maintenance going forward? Sounds like
the city council was probably the group that decided to shoulder the risk of
damaged roads.

If Google Fiber misrepresented their microtrenching then that would certainly
be fraud and they would be liable for damages.

------
crushcrashcrush
Can post-2010 Google execute on anything "all the way" through?

Is there some sort of institutional ADD?

~~~
rifung
> Is there some sort of institutional ADD?

I work at Google, opinions are my own.

Obviously this is my personal take, but I don't think that's what it is.

To me the issue is the performance/rewards system. Imagine you're someone high
up and in charge of 10 projects, all asking for headcount/resources, while you
have a limited amount to give. Presumably you're going to give more
headcount/resources to the projects that are growing faster. If the
differences in growth are substantial, maybe you'll decide to actually just
let some projects die so their teams can be absorbed into the other projects
with better prospects.

Google's performance system is an attempt at being really objective, and it's
hard to put a precise value on goodwill lost by discontinuing a product. Not
only that, but the effects of discontinuing a product are felt company-wide as
opposed to by an individual. Nobody is going to look up who decided to
discontinue a product after all.

~~~
ocdtrekkie
I guess my question is: Is management there not realizing this is a huge
crisis point for them? Clearly, you can make a mistake in performance rewards,
but the question is, why hasn't it been fixed? Surely people at the C-level
have to have noticed Google is getting a reputation literally defined by
sudden product termination, and that the whole company is harmed every time
any given product is shut down.

I would think this would be a top TGIF question almost every week at this
point (because it seems that's how often Google product shutdowns are in the
news).

~~~
rifung
> I would think this would be a top TGIF question almost every week at this
> point (because it seems that's how often Google product shutdowns are in the
> news).

Actually this week (!) was the first time my question was upvoted enough to be
asked and it was exactly about this.

My impression is that they are aware but willing to trade our reputation for
the ability to experiment or be more aggressive in funding more successful
products

------
yohannparis
And this is why public sector or PPP are better than private sector for
necessities. You expect access to Internet to be stable like water or
electricity, but clearly that wasn't the case with Google.

~~~
haasted
It's quite a leap from having an ISP (unusually) shut down its service in an
area to concluding that internet connectivity should be a public utility.
Surely there must be some middle ground.

~~~
qeternity
It's funny because the best arguments for internet being a utility have
nothing to do with government reliability (or lack there of) but rather
economic arguments like natural monopolies. It seems like OP just has an anti-
market agenda.

~~~
TeMPOraL
Both perspectives support each other. Natural monopolies are one thing, but if
you want people to have stable and reliable Internet - as most tech companies
do - then it's best when Internet access is not something companies are
allowed to differentiate on.

------
andrewla
It sounds like what they're saying is that they botched the installation and
would have to redo it. It seems like the responsible thing to do here is to
just go ahead and redo the installation. It can't be worse than the cost to
expand to a new city; all they have to do is abandon their current
infrastructure and replace it with the new (I know that "all" underestimates,
but still).

This is a case where to maintain customer trust, they should suck up the cost
themselves rather than trying to recover it through the one-time customer fees
that they used at rollout time.

~~~
bluntfang
>It can't be worse than the cost to expand to a new city; all they have to do
is...

hey guys, i found the project manager!

------
axaxs
I'm from Louisville. From my perspective, I never expected to see Google
Fiber, and I guess this confirms it. After reading about how all of KC moved
so slowly after its initial deployment, it was telling when Fiber rolled out
here that it only covered a tiny portion of our downtown-ish areas. This is
not a high income area, nor is it all that dense population wise(then again,
neither is the city). After the combination of the county/city, Louisville
became a physically rather large city. I don't think it would have been worth
the investment trying to cover it, and covering only a portion is only bound
to irritate people.

That said, I appreciate them in that they really lit a fire under
TWC/Charter/Spectrum. If I remember right, we were 10down/3 up when fiber was
announced (possibly 30 down, depending on when). Our base is now 200 down.

------
ProAm
> This decision has no impact on our operations in any of our other Fiber
> cities,

...yet.

Just more evidence you cannot rely on Google for long term product outside of
search.

~~~
vsh
> product outside of search

...yet

------
takeda
This is sad news for me even though I'm not from Louisville. Backing out of
existing market shows that it's even less likely now for them to enter new
ones.

The main issue is that current companies have extreme control over market
thanks to regional monopoly. They can squeeze as much of money from users,
because there is no real competition. When a new company enters specific
region they can up their speeds, lower price (and even operate at a loss in
that specific region), so a competitor will have to leave.

The solution to this requires regulation, and basically a law should mandate
to allow leasing infrastructure (the fiber) to others, of course not for free,
but for a fee.

Currently if we would have great scenario when we would have 10 ISPs available
to choose from, we would need 10 fiber cables to every home. That means if
someone chooses one, 9 of them are not used, and all the effort to lay the
cable and getting permits was just waste of money. If this is expensive to
even company that has "unlimited" amounts of money, like Google it's
unrealistic to do for everyone else.

Leasing the physical infrastructure is the key to bring competition back in
that market.

------
tanilama
Seriously. Google messed up REALLY bad on this one. It would really difficult
for many customers to come up with a contingency plan under 2 months.

Google should NEVER be trusted with other infrastructure projects going
further. Infrastructure isn't some forprofit companies trial-and-error
playground, it is about stability and promise to the local residents, it is
not about money and certainly not an experiment.

~~~
lotsofpulp
At least they tried. Infrastructure such as fiber to the home should be the
realm of governments, as everyone can benefit from it.

~~~
tanilama
They tried and blew away my trust in any of such innovative, pseudo-altruist
initiative from silicon valley companies. The disruption their action might
bring is much more than cancelling their internet service products.

Can't really joke about their words that 'the last 2 months are on us', like
it is something worthy of cheering up..

------
macinjosh
This development implies that one should not rely on Google for anything. Even
you're paying them for the service. They are so large they don't have to care
about their users/customers.

------
tylfin
This is why I'll never use the Google Cloud. Sorry my business does not move
as quickly as your decisions.

~~~
sciurus
Although as always they have language giving themselves some wiggle room, most
services in GCP would get at least a year of advance notice.

From [https://cloud.google.com/terms/](https://cloud.google.com/terms/) :

7.2 Deprecation Policy. Google will announce if it intends to discontinue or
make backwards incompatible changes to the Services specified at the URL in
the next sentence. Google will use commercially reasonable efforts to continue
to operate those Services versions and features identified at
[https://cloud.google.com/terms/deprecation](https://cloud.google.com/terms/deprecation)
without these changes for at least one year after that announcement, unless
(as Google determines in its reasonable good faith judgment):

(i) required by law or third party relationship (including if there is a
change in applicable law or relationship), or

(ii) doing so could create a security risk or substantial economic or material
technical burden.

The above policy is the "Deprecation Policy."

~~~
ocdtrekkie
That is a wide enough loophole to drive a truck through. And it would apply to
Fiber here as well, fixing the roads and fiber runs in Louisville would be a
"substantial economic or material technical burden".

Aka, it costs a lot of money, and they don't want to spend it.

~~~
macintux
Heck, even the continuation scenario has a major caveat: “commercially
reasonable efforts”.

So they can easily decide not to stick with it for a year, _or_ they can
decide to continue to provide service without, say, any technical support.

------
joshstrange
I never wanted to move to Louisville (from Lexington, KY) but fiber was a nice
selling point. Now I'm just hoping our own Lexington MetroNet keeps chugging
along so I can leave Spectrum when I buy a house.

------
yingw787
I'm going to go out on a limb here and conjecture that this isn't a typical
Google pullback like with todo list apps. There are significant
financial/intellectual capital outlays required for nationwide-scale ISPs, in
addition to operations and maintenance expenditures over time. Pulling back is
a significant sign Google Fiber has already reached its high-water mark.

Sadly, I think Google's pulling back because it more or less got what it
wanted out of the telecoms in terms of network service, repealing net
neutrality and regulatory capture increases Google's competitive moats, and
because corporate lobbying may be cheaper, more flexible, and have greater
returns: [https://gizmodo.com/googles-parent-company-spent-more-on-
lob...](https://gizmodo.com/googles-parent-company-spent-more-on-lobbying-
than-at-t-1822394224)

On that note, here's a how-to on starting your own ISP:
[https://startyourownisp.com/](https://startyourownisp.com/)

------
officemonkey
"We would need to essentially rebuild our entire network in Louisville to
provide the great service that Google Fiber is known for, and that's just not
the right business decision for us."

In other words, "we fucked up and so we bailed." Google is like the bad first
husband you should have never married in the first place.

------
chappi42
Will Google repair the streets? Saw one picture with rubber gaskets coming out
and it looked very bad :-(

------
ACow_Adonis
That's a lot of words to not actually tell you why they're pulling out of
Louisville.

"not living up to the high standards we set ourselves" is about as helpful as
hearing over public transport intercom "there has been an incident".

~~~
owenmarshall
As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words.

[https://imgur.com/a/7lHiWZR](https://imgur.com/a/7lHiWZR)

That's a picture of a road post-fiber install. The groove is where the fiber
was placed. That black snaking rubber was what they sealed it with.

Now imagine that, but across their entire service area.

~~~
WhatIsDukkha
Source?

If that's accurate, it's comedic anyone thought that would work.

~~~
owenmarshall
I live here - that's almost exactly what it looks like outside my kid sister's
apartment ;)

For a local news source: [https://www.wdrb.com/news/belknap-neighborhood-
residents-con...](https://www.wdrb.com/news/belknap-neighborhood-residents-
concerned-over-sloppy-installation-of-high-
speed/article_4bc2a61e-8640-57f0-aba9-3dd4cb3d39e5.html)

Here's an article proclaiming that this is how Google would "outbuild their
rivals": [https://www.techrepublic.com/pictures/photos-how-google-
fibe...](https://www.techrepublic.com/pictures/photos-how-google-fiber-is-
using-shallow-trenching-to-outbuild-its-gigabit-rivals/18/)

I cannot possibly oversell just how terrible the work was here. Yes, that is
indeed a fiber optic cable two inches under a city street, covered only by
expanding foam rubber. Yes, someone really did think "yeah, this'll be just
fine."

------
itronitron
Google Fiber has suffered from a lack of imagination, or just good ole' plain
market analysis, in figuring out how to roll out fiber to larger areas around
their 'fiber cities'. Google Fiber in Austin is limited to a very small area
which oddly enough is probably not where most of the residential demand is.
Somehow I doubt that they ever asked homeowners what they would be willing to
pay for a fiber connection.

------
janvdberg
What was the problem? When I click the "encountered challenges" link I get a
451: Unavailable due to legal reasons (I am from the EU).

~~~
ocdtrekkie
This link makes it sound like their installation work was faulty and they were
going to have to redo it all: [https://www.wdrb.com/news/google-fiber-
announces-plan-to-fix...](https://www.wdrb.com/news/google-fiber-announces-
plan-to-fix-exposed-fiber-lines-
in/article_fbc678c3-66ef-5d5b-860c-2156bc2f0f0c.html)

Since that was only a few months ago, my guess is they decided to just pull
out instead.

------
bigfatfrock
What's going to happen with all of that now dark fiber sitting in Louisville,
I wonder?

~~~
owenmarshall
A two inch trench was cut on city streets, that fiber added, and then covered
by a flexible rubber seal.[1]

I can't imagine _anyone_ would want to touch that "dark fiber". It was in
terrible shape six weeks after they put it down, before winter hit the city.
The picture on this article looks like it was taken relatively soon after
installation [2] - I've seen streets where the rubber seal has expanded and
curled up over top of the groove that was cut.

[1]: [https://9to5google.com/2019/02/07/google-fiber-closing-in-
lo...](https://9to5google.com/2019/02/07/google-fiber-closing-in-louisville/)

[2]: [https://www.wdrb.com/news/google-fiber-announces-plan-to-
fix...](https://www.wdrb.com/news/google-fiber-announces-plan-to-fix-exposed-
fiber-lines-in/article_fbc678c3-66ef-5d5b-860c-2156bc2f0f0c.html)

~~~
thinkaway
Does google fiber not work in cold weather? Seems all the cities are warmer
than Louisville.

~~~
jlgaddis
Not very well.

When it gets cold enough, the water in the ground freezes and expands and
basically "squeezes" the fiber. The "1"'s, which are long and skinny, can
still slide right through the fiber but the fatter and wider "0"'s sometimes
get stuck. This causes the fiber (Internet pipe) to get clogged and,
eventually, stopped up completely, similar to how car crashes on the
Interstate can quickly bring vehicular traffic to a standstill.

(Source: I was the Senior Network Engineer for a FTTH ISP, until just
recently.)

~~~
dhimes
OMG that's hilarious!

------
Thaxll
Another good example of "smart engineering can't solve every problems".

~~~
sudosteph
This is even worse in a way. They specifically caused these problems because
they believed their engineers were so smart that they could rely on their
novel microtrenching technique to deploy the fiber for a fraction of the cost
of the competitors.

I just don't understand why they didn't spend more time testing it on their
own resources before rolling out to actual customers in a major metro area.
We've all seen potholes, roots coming through streets and sidewalks. Just
crazy to think they thought this was ready to be deployed at scale...

------
taurath
"Its not up to our quality standards, so instead of fixing it we're going to
pull out". What a corporatespeak way to say you're giving up on your
customers.

~~~
itronitron
If I'm not getting an A, then I'm not taking your stupid class.

------
dogecoinbase
_This decision has no impact on our operations in any of our other Fiber
cities, where we continue to sign up and install new customers every day._

This is just irresponsible of Google at this point. This entire project has no
momentum and isn't going anywhere -- why are they still signing people up when
it's obvious that they'll just cut them off eventually as well? In the
meantime, they prevent any of these cities from taking control of their own
connectivity.

They should help the cities form nonprofits to run the fiber networks, then
gently remove themselves from the situation.

~~~
VectorLock
I'm curious how much physical infrastructure Google Fiber is leaving under
streets. In Louisville were they using someone else's fiber or will there be
actual dark strands under Louisville now?

~~~
bri3d
They're not leaving much fiber under the streets in Louisville, which is the
whole reason they're pulling out - they attempted a low cost "microtrenching"
strategy where they cut a small groove in the street pavement itself and tried
to run the fiber through that. It was pretty much an abject failure and I
doubt anyone will want the infrastructure as it's unlikely to function in even
a few months.

They're still "microtrenching" in other markets but at a much greater depth
(6in rather than <3in) and with a different cover strategy (asphalt
replacement over sealant rather than sealant only)

~~~
VectorLock
This microtrenching would be amazing if it could make its hands into people
wanting to make open municipal networks, if it could actually work.

------
apexalpha
So what happens to the infrastructure? There's fiber optics in the ground
right? Do they give it to a local ISP?

~~~
remir
Some of it could be re-used, but from what I understand, lots of fiber could
become worthless because of the failure of their micro-trenching "experiment".

------
imjustsaying
I wonder how many of the people saying 'See? Can't trust google with anything'
use Gmail accounts.

------
mberning
10 years ago I would have jumped at the chance to sign up for Google Fiber.
Today they could not pay me to use the service.

~~~
takeda
Oh c'mon with the exaggeration. I would still use them (even if I had to pay),
it doesn't take that much time to switch. The major issue though will affect
most people in Louisville, since it's almost guaranteed that AT&T will
increase its prices. Thanks to Google Fiber at least for limited time, people
there enjoyed fast and relatively cheap internet access.

------
CyanLite2
TLDR: Google isn't as good at paying off politicians as well as AT&T and other
ISPs are.

------
Zecar
I fully expect my ATT Fiber to go up in price or down in transfer allotment as
a result. What a shame.

------
genzoman
ATT offers fiber internet in Louisville. After Google found out they wouldn't
be the only provider offering the service, they bailed.

------
samfriedman
One thing missing from this post: why?

After "Advancing our Amazing Bet", it became clear that the level of
regulatory obstacles Google needed to overcome made it too cost-prohibitive to
continue their rollouts. But what factors are forcing them to pull out of an
already established market?

Is the ISP environment so hostile as to squeeze even the biggest players out
of town? Is Google slowly ramping down even existing Fiber operations? What's
going on behind the scenes here? If the microtrenching issue is driving this,
why can't Google of all companies put up the investment to re-do it right?

There's failing an experiment, and then there's realizing something is sub-par
and putting in the work and money to make it right for your customers. I feel
like Google has misconstrued the two here.

