
Community-Owned Fiber Networks: Value Leaders in America - artsandsci
https://cyber.harvard.edu/publications/2018/01/communityfiber
======
d--b
Nice. Having read hacker news for years, I remember a lot of comments from
angry Americans who were offended by Europeans mocking them about their
broadband prices, and telling them that they were being screwed by big
American telcos who formed an monopolising alliance artificially keeping
prices up.

The comments used to range from "the country is just too big, the
infrastructure work doesn't compare" to "European broadband infrastructure is
paid by the states because of socialist-type taxation".

And finally, after years of municipalities fighting big telco, it is becoming
ultra clear that yes Comcast, TWC and co have been screwing the American
people for a looooong time.

And hopefully this is only the beginning, prices still have a long way to go!

~~~
rayiner
> And hopefully this is only the beginning, prices still have a long way to
> go!

Monthly non-promo rate for gigabit fiber:

Stockholm - Telia - 999 Swedish Krona (~$125)

London - HyperOptic - 60 Pounds (~$80-90)

Zurich - iWay - 79 Swiss Francs (~$80)

New York - Verizon - $80-90.

It's not clear to me that there is much room to go down in countries with
similar cost of labor. (Keep in mind that median household income in France is
about the same as Choctaw County, Alabama).

~~~
Retric
Looks like completion at work Verizon Fios charges far more than that for
lower speeds in MD and VA. However, NYC's is still twice what it costs in many
cities around the world.

~~~
rayiner
I'm not sure whether those other "cities around the world" are a fair
comparison. Install and operating expenses for fiber are dominated by labor
costs, and skilled labor in the U.S. is expensive. The median adjusted
household income in the U.S. is 90% higher than in Spain, and 40% higher than
in France. That's why I used London and Zurich as points of reference, rather
than say Barcelona (where, as you point out, you can get gigabit for under
$45/month).

~~~
Symbiote
Copenhagen - Hyper - 299 DKK; Gigabit - 349 DKK ($50-57).

That should be a fair comparison with London and Zurich.

I think there's some reason why it's so cheap, I remember someone explaining,
but I don't know what the reason was.

[https://www.hiper.dk/](https://www.hiper.dk/) \-
[https://gigabit.dk/](https://gigabit.dk/)

------
IronWolve
20 years ago, Spokane Washington had to redo its streets, so they laid fiber
downtown before repaving. This allowed ISP's and telecoms to plug in and run
very cheap ISP's and hosting services. Downtown telecom/isp exploded with
connectivity.

We found an older building had highspeed access due to fiber. We rented a
small office, (closet really), and paid for 100meg connection to an ISP on a
lower floor. Ran an entire ISP with dialup/dsl and hosting that was cheap, and
even offered credit card processing. Years before comcast or large telecom
offered DSL.

Ive seen over the years, Spokane have large backup hub for PNW banks and other
large bandwidth hungry companies move in. Hands on hosting services, Internet
turn key web hosting, etc. All in a midwest type town due to the availability.

Even across the border in Idaho, some smaller towns that now have fiber have
startups popping up due to cheap land, cheap bandwidth, and low cost of
living. I'm always seeing startups hiring big data dbas, network engineers and
programmers.

I just wish they would expand further into the very small rural towns. Wifi at
my folks small town community center is packed with people due to dialup being
the only thing available to the community. Either drive into Spokane, hope you
have Verizon LTE coverage, or pay for limitted usage sat.

~~~
komali2
When did governments stop caring about infrastructure as a direct investment
in local commerce?

~~~
adventured
The US will have to raise taxes dramatically at all levels, to do everything
that people want it to do (or figure out how to grow the economy far faster).
40-50 years ago, entitlements for example were a small cost for states and the
Federal Govt (a huge slush fund for the Federal Govt in fact, they wasted
trillions of dollars in entitlement money they were supposed to save). Costs
have climbed a lot in all regards, while revenue as a share of GDP has largely
not gone up with it.

If the US had fiscally responsible politicians, it would have a modest public
debt, and trillions of dollars in a sovereign wealth fund derived from decades
of surplus revenue for eg Social Security. Infrastructure would be a non-
issue.

Simply put, priorities. You can do this (spending up), but you have to do that
(taxes up); or you can choose not to have that (spending down), and so you can
do this (taxes down).

Taxes are going up a lot either way, given the massive explosion in
entitlement costs inbound, or QE is going to handle it with inflation. The US
will hit a trillion per year in deficits in a few years, primarily due to
entitlement costs, and partially due to excesss military spending.

~~~
toomuchtodo
This is all accurate, with the caveat that we could still have univeral
broadband and other first world services provided to all if we cut back on
unnecessary military spending (a conversation for another thread!).

Quite a bit of the problem isn’t spending per se, but waste, inefficiencies,
and corruption (not to mention us dragging forward GDP, impoverishing the
future).

~~~
adventured
> with the caveat that we could still have univeral broadband and other first
> world services provided to all if we cut back on unnecessary military
> spending

Without question. The US could shave $200+ billion off of military spending
fairly easily, with no increased threat to its well-being.

However the US has superior broadband to Europe already. I don't see how the
US is failing at delivering first world service in that regard. It's
expensive, too expensive perhaps. If you adjust for wages, it's still too
expensive but not nearly so (the median EU wages are far below the US median
for example).

Japan is generally renowned for having very first rate infrastructure. They've
spent incredible sums of money in relation to their GDP on that over the last
~30 years. The US has nearly caught up to Japan on average broadband speeds
and distribution. That's a fact that seems to shock people when they hear it,
because for so many years the US broadband situation was ugly by comparison.

~~~
sounds
Can you share more information (or a link) on Japan's broadband penetration
and speed demographics?

~~~
toomuchtodo
[http://www.tiaonline.org/gov_affairs/events/Japan's_policies...](http://www.tiaonline.org/gov_affairs/events/Japan's_policies_on_Broadband_deployment.pdf)

[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8068560.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8068560.stm)

[http://www.soumu.go.jp/main_sosiki/joho_tsusin/eng/presentat...](http://www.soumu.go.jp/main_sosiki/joho_tsusin/eng/presentation/pdf/100408_1.pdf)

[http://www.survivingnjapan.com/2012/06/internet-in-japan-
bro...](http://www.survivingnjapan.com/2012/06/internet-in-japan-broadband-
high-speed.html)

------
rayiner
The study's methodology of comparing only the lowest-priced tier service isn't
that great, because it may be more indicative of the degree to which a
provider is willing to cross-subsidize service tiers rather than real cost
efficiencies. To take the top 3 providers from the chart on page 8: FiberNET
in Morristown charges $200 for gigabit, Sebewaing Light & Water charges $160
for 1000/100, and LUS charges $109 for gigabit. The "market rate" for
AT&T/VZN/CenturyLink is $70-90 (excluding promos).

There is also the question of what happens going forward. Quite some time ago,
Easton MD (on Maryland's eastern shore) put in a cable internet service
through its municipal utility. Today, you can get 200/10 for $100/month. Not
bad, but head a bit east to Salisbury, MD and you can get 1000/35 through
Comcast for $105 ($80 for the first year). That's the big fear with municipal
services. Upgrading head ends won't get you press like rolling out a broadband
service in the first instance will.

That being said, municipal broadband certainly has a place. Maryland is
spending a bunch of money building a fiber backbone in the rural parts of the
state, and municipalities are hooking into it:
[http://www.westminstermd.gov/419/Westminster-Fiber-
Network](http://www.westminstermd.gov/419/Westminster-Fiber-Network). These
are places that don't have the population and density to support potentially
even a single private provider, much less multiple competing ones.

~~~
TYPE_FASTER
I pay $85.99/mo for Fios for 25/25\. I started out at about $54, and they've
been bumping it up. I called and complained, and they said that's the best
rate.

As an existing customer, I cannot get the "gigabit internet for $79" rate
that's advertised on the website. That $70-90 rate for Verizon is the promo
rate, because it will go up over time after you join.

Ok, so I can switch to Comcast, and get the $44 rate for a year, and then
switch back, but that sounds...dumb.

~~~
jermaustin1
I've had issues with Verizon letting me get the "New Customer" specials after
cancelling then re joining. They wouldn't give me the deals (even though they
mailed me them) because I had already had service through them.

~~~
bob_theslob646
Make an account in your wife's maiden name.

------
politician
[Offish-topic] Lately I've been thinking about solving the last-mile problem
through a free-space optics approach for suburban areas. Stick a mast on your
roof that can illuminate your neighbor's masts; relay to a FTTC node for
backhaul.

Sort of like an extended range LiFi / mesh setup. It's attractive because it
could avoid RF licensing entirely, but rain/dust/smoke is an issue.

Does anyone know if any company is doing anything like this right now?

~~~
whatshisface
Could any radio engineers weigh in on how practical ultra-directional radio
antennas could be for this? I'm imagining collimated radio beams (like lasers)
which could bypass the _need_ (not necessarily the existing legislation) for
spectrum regulation. What if every house had a few microwave drums on the
roof?

~~~
grahamburger
This is kind of starting to happen with 60Ghz radios becoming more available.
I think the problem with 'ultra-directional' radio antennas is that they're
actually pretty difficult to build and even when they can be built they're
very large. But with 60Ghz there is a lot of oxygen absorption, meaning that
the signal dies off really quickly in all directions meaning that it won't
interfere as much with other nearby installations. The equipment is just
barely coming on to the market, though.

~~~
walrus01
60 GHz PTP bridges have been around for 8 years or so, at 1GbE line rate.
They're not rocket science, exactly, but knowing how to properly engineer a
network with them is something that not every ISP can figure out.

~~~
grahamburger
Are you thinking of the siklu ones or someone else? I'm not aware of any that
have been around that long (not arguing just curious) I was thinking of the
IgniteNet and MiktoTik versions which I think are both more recent as well as
PtMP applications which (I think?) Aren't really generally available yet.

True on knowing how to properly use them! Although to be fair I think most of
the ISPs using them don't have a lot of use for really short, high capacity
backhauls they're often looking for distance in rural areas.

~~~
walrus01
Bridgewave shipped 60 GHz products 6 years before Siklu... Ignore the
Ignitenet, it's a USB 802.11ad dongle glued into a radome. It's a toy. The
Mikrotik doesn't have the reach to be a serious product. You can use "real" 60
GHz PTP stuff at five nines at 500-600 meters distance in a moderate rain
zone, the mikrotik is good for maybe 90 meters.

~~~
grahamburger
Ah yes I forgot about Bridgewave. Agreed on all points for infrastructure
needs. I would only add that when I read the OP (of this thread)'s comment I
imagined using very very short/inexpensive 60Ghz links from neighbor to
neighbor to create a kind of mesh. Possibly not what OP had in mind but it's
the way I interpreted it. For that use the MikroTiks might actually make a lot
of sense. (Very cheap and low range.)

Edit: Also since you're obviously knowledgeable about this stuff and I don't
see a way to contact you on your profile - I've been running a matrix chat
room around some of this stuff and would love to have you join!
[https://riot.im/app/#/room/#startyourownisp:matrix.org](https://riot.im/app/#/room/#startyourownisp:matrix.org)

------
wilwade
Just wanted to pipe in as I live in Chattanooga, TN one of the cities
mentioned in the report. $58 a month for 100/100 ($70 for 1000/1000 and $300
for 10000/10000\. that's right anywhere in the county you can get 10G/10G) and
a bill that is always correct.

I am here in part because of the fiber network. That said it is not just the
fast internet, but the quality of the service people. They have always shown
up on time and gone above and beyond each time. They know how to run a cable
properly (drip curve for example).

Plus they have a no data cap and net neutrality pledge.

Feels like most of the rest of of the country is in the dark ages on most or
all of those points.

------
nateberkopec
I live in a rural town in New Mexico of about 10,000 people. We get 50 megabit
symmetrical fiber from the local co-op for about $60 a month. I think the
fiber was funded by a USDA grant.

One of the nice things is not having to deal with big-co customer service like
Verizon or Comcast. You call up and you get a real person who lives in your
town.

------
jpbutler
Data point of one: I'm on one of these networks, here in Concord, MA, and it's
amazing. We already had municipal power, so it's the same organization and the
same bill. I've been running for ~4 years with no blips at all.

It's the first thing I recommend to people moving into town.

[http://www.concordnet.org/467/Broadband-Internet-
Service](http://www.concordnet.org/467/Broadband-Internet-Service)

------
fishmeat
So, are there anyone already doing this? From the attitude towards Comcast, it
looks like there will be lots of funding from people dying to get a better
alternative.

------
WillReplyfFood
Only slightly related, but is there a way to undo the range reduce in wifi
routers. Basically- my old WiFi Router would cover the whole building- and
after lightning strike - the newer model only covers a quarter of it. Support
told us to buy repeaters. Wich i guess, is what they want people to do.

Are there ways to restore the transmissionrange of the old models?

~~~
walshemj
Don't use repeaters each hop cuts the bandwidth in half

Use power line to connect to the router (for wired hosts) or have multiple
AP's plus power line as the DS for your mobile devices.

Which band are you using now, 2.4 is slower but has better range 5Ghz is
faster but shorter range also look at congestion are you using the same
channel as the next house

Why can't you use your own router/ap? get one with external arenas and
firmware (eg ddrwt) that can adjust tx power

------
RyanShook
Would love a how-to of community organized fiber. Seems like a simple concept
with a ton of paperwork and hoops to jump.

~~~
grahamburger
Not exactly what you're looking for, but I've been working on
[http://startyourownisp.com](http://startyourownisp.com). It's focused on
wireless rather than fiber but could still be applicable.

~~~
RyanShook
Great resource, thank you.

------
samch
...but it’s illegal in North Carolina.

[https://www.wired.com/2011/05/nc-gov-anti-muni-
broadband/](https://www.wired.com/2011/05/nc-gov-anti-muni-broadband/)

------
agumonkey
this was on HN not long ago (legends of the ancient web)
[http://archive.is/9evG0](http://archive.is/9evG0)

told how early radio was even more community than business, time to loop the
loop

------
greedo
Lincoln Nebraska, Allo rolling out FTH throughout the city. 1Gb/sec for $90.
Spectrum is trying to compete, but failing dramatically. No sympathy for the
devil.

------
samirillian
So...this is deregulation working?

~~~
matt4077
Only in that alternative reality where "preventing municipal fibre networks"
is the sort of regulation that the Republican Party wants to de-regulate.

In reality, it's among the only regulation they like. Plus preventing Tesla
from selling directly to consumers, and making government just small enough to
fit in your bedroom.

------
duncan_bayne
Semantics is important here. Most of these projects aren't community owned,
they are socialised: taxpayers are compelled to fund them.

It may seem like a small difference, but it's not - there are moral, economic
and engineering consequences to forcing people to subsidise your broadband
use.

Imagine if people referred to State-owned factories in Soviet Russia as
"community owned". That would immediately, and correctly, be criticised as
propaganda.

~~~
rayiner
Most of these systems are not socialized. They're from municipally-owned
utilities that recover their expenses from ratepayers, not tax dollars.

~~~
ams6110
And if they don't recover their expenses?

It's like transit systems. Ostensibly the user (fare-payers) are funding the
system. But the true costs far exceed the amount collected, so in reality they
are subsidized by the taxpayers.

~~~
duncan_bayne
In other words, the worst of both worlds. Taxpayer funded - so people are
forced to pay for systems - and then 'user pays', so you pay a _second_ time
to use a system that you've already paid once for. Neat :(

