
Google Fiber’s Next Stop: Austin, Texas - pash
http://googlefiberblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/google-fibers-next-stop-austin-texas_9.html
======
kyrra
For those wondering where Google will roll out, we don't have exact details,
but we have some information.

1) They said they will stick to Austin City Limits, which means within these
boundaries [1].

2) For those that followed up with how KC operated, Google runs their lines on
electrical poles and all places the city power company has lines. This is one
of the big things KC and Austin have in common: city owned electric utility.
With that google can run all their lines much easier. So, if you get
electricity from Austin Energy, you will likely be eligible to get Google
Fiber at some point.

3) Beyond that, it will be up to people like us to advocate in our
neighborhood to get people to sign up for the service. Whatever areas have a
large # of people pledge to sign up will be more likely to get it. To me this
means south and east Austin. But at the same time, north austin has a lot of
tech employees from Dell, Freescale, PayPal, and other large companies (though
many of those people may live in Round Rock).

[1] <http://www.zipmap.net/Texas/Travis_County/Austin.htm>

[1.1] (easier on the eyes map) [http://www.maptechnica.com/us-city-boundary-
map/city/Austin/...](http://www.maptechnica.com/us-city-boundary-
map/city/Austin/state/TX/cityid/4805000)

~~~
deltaqueue
I spoke with someone in Grande's (competing ISP) network planning division and
he explained that getting into new buildings downtown was very expensive /
difficult given Austin's telco requirements (have to dig up streets, etc.). Is
this also the case for Google's fiber layout, or is there any speculation that
buildings (condo and apartment) downtown will see this service?

~~~
beachstartup
what's expensive to the local isp is probably not to google.

------
pash
_> Our goal is to start connecting homes in Austin by mid-2014._

The timeline Google's followed in Kansas City suggests it will be another year
until service is available to a significant chunk of Austin, and likely well
into 2016 or beyond before the whole city is hooked up. Fiber to whatever
suburbs are invited to the party will likely follow after that.

But hopefully the build-out gets ramped up, both in Austin and KC, now that
Google's had some time to work out some of the early kinks.

~~~
clauretano
This is how it goes with most service roll outs. If the people in the suburbs
are really miffed that they aren't one of the first areas picked for Google
Fiber, perhaps they should consider the downsides of living in the sprawl.

Congrats to any Austin HNers on your freedom from [insert Austin cable
monopoly here]

~~~
unwiredben
We actually have a bit of a cable duopoly in a lot of the city. Both Grande
Communications and Time Warner run systems here, although Grande's build-out
area is a bit smaller.

~~~
bullfightonmars
I've been really happy with Grande, they provide the best cable internet I've
ever had (65/5 mb/s) for $70. Great uptime, with very consistent service. That
said google fiber at 1gb/s, yes plz.

------
specialp
Google here is doing what they do best which is sticking to their core
business of advertising/search while spending a bit here and there to disrupt
businesses that they see as threatening to their core business. It is to
Google's advantage to have fast pipes to their users.

Right now they are getting their intended result from people in the USA. If
Kansas City can have gigabit internet for a low price why can't I? The
consumers then will pressure their provider to do the same. However it is not
as easy for every other telco.

1\. They need to be profitable. 2\. They cannot cherry pick areas with high
density yet low costs of rollout/living like KC and Austin.

So I do not think Google will ever do this nationwide as it is a bad business
to be in with enormous red tape, capital expenditures and geographic
distribution. It is a smart move on their behalf to do this but people should
not get their hopes up for a nationwide distribution, it will never happen.

~~~
brd
"In business, I look for economic castles protected by unbreachable moats" -
Warren Buffett

I completely agree that its in Google's interest to have faster pipes. But I
think Google Fiber may just be another moat for Google, another way for them
to hinder their perceived threats.

This was an excellent write up on Google's strategy to build business moats
(from 2011): [http://abovethecrowd.com/2011/03/24/freight-train-that-is-
an...](http://abovethecrowd.com/2011/03/24/freight-train-that-is-android/)

~~~
OGinparadise
_But I think Google Fiber may just be another moat for Google, another way for
them to hinder their perceived threats._

When FB was asked about a phone they said that any phone user they'd get it
wouldn't move the scale given their 1 billion+ users. Same with Google, it's
extremely expensive to wire a significant number of their users, so they are
doing this hoping AT&T, Comcast etc upgrade their connection and match the
price. Which they might--in the areas where Google is entering. Personally, I
would not count of the price being, say $70 for a long time.

~~~
dragonwriter
> Same with Google, it's extremely expensive to wire a significant number of
> their users

Recent published estimates have been that it would about $11 billion to roll
out nationwide in the US. That _is_ a lot of money, sure, but _less_ than they
paid for Motorola Mobility recently. Not prohibitively expensive for Google.

~~~
OGinparadise
_Recent published estimates have been that it would about $11 billion to roll
out nationwide in the US._

Maybe $110 billion, $11 Billion doesn't go far in US

~~~
dragonwriter
> Maybe $110 billion, $11 Billion doesn't go far in US

I've gone and rechecked, the $11 billion number from recently published
estimates is for a nationwide rollout to a scale comparable to other
nationwide broadband providers "passing" about 15% of homes, and is exclusive
of costs of actually acquiring customers.

~~~
OGinparadise
Nationwide and 15% of homes is kinda different. I say this because Verizon did
spend tens of billion on FIOS and barely reached tens of millions of people.

Also doing it in a few cities as an experiment and doing it as telecom
provider are very different too (heavily regulated and extremely expensive).
Just imagine what it takes to dig in Manhattan with all the permits, payments,
licenses, unions etc etc...

------
6thSigma
Now AT&T is announcing that they are building a 1Gbps fiber service in Austin
as well.

[http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/09/att-1gbps-fiber-
internet-...](http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/09/att-1gbps-fiber-internet-
austin-texas-official/)

~~~
k3n
I've heard a lot of things from AT&T customers, and "satisfied" is never one
of them. This is too little too late, and I'm pretty sure that most of their
current customers can't wait to jump ship -- regardless of whatever carrots
that they bring out at the last minute.

~~~
kyrra
Uverse has been solid for me. I've had them for 4 years now and they've had
very limited downtime (a lot less then I had with TimeWarner). I'll happily
move to Google Fiber, but Uverse has treated me just fine. While I wish their
upload speeds were faster, but I haven't really had any options that were
faster.

What issues have you had with them exactly?

~~~
bconway
Maybe you're referring to Internet access only, but the over-compressed
picture quality on Uverse is horrible, especially compared to easily-obtained
OTA in the Austin area.

~~~
CrazedGeek
Hm. I don't live in Austin, but Uverse here in Oklahoma City has fine quality
(about equivalent to OTA). (It's night and day with the other TV provider
here, Cox, whose picture quality is terrible at best.) Also concur with GP
that their internet service is pretty decent (although a bit overpriced for my
liking).

------
BryanB55
I'm in Austin and can't wait. Unfortunately I think I'm going to have to
continue to pay TimeWarner for another 1-2 years at least.

I'm interested to see where the first 'fiberhood' is going to be in Austin.
South Austin, 78704 would be awesome. Any Austin people on here have any
guesses?

~~~
j4ustin
I would bet you'll be in the first (or second) roll out of fiberhoods. My best
bet is UT Austin and downtown first, plus surrounding neighborhoods. Then
they'll move West, then South.

------
DoggettCK
Announced the day after I signed a contract on a house outside the service
area. It was clearly me holding you back the whole time, Austin. I'm so sorry.

~~~
iamdave
You can redeem yourself by washing your car and summoning the rain gods. That
little sprinkle we got last week was a bit of a tease.

~~~
DoggettCK
I literally did get my car washed last week, and the next evening, we had
water 10 feet past the doors at work. Willie Nelson never should've built this
place below the parking lot.

This is the worst superpower.

------
BryanB55
This is kind of funny... AT&T suddenly decided to offer a 1gb network:
[http://www.att.com/gen/press-
room?pid=24032&cdvn=news...](http://www.att.com/gen/press-
room?pid=24032&cdvn=news&newsarticleid=36275)

~~~
clavalle
"This expanded investment is not expected to materially alter AT&T’s
anticipated 2013 capital expenditures."

This is what pisses me off. Telcos have the capability and it won't even hit
them that hard, financially. They just want to drag their feet to eek out
whatever extra sliver of profit they can out of the current status quo.

~~~
caw
In big-co speak that could mean either it's close to free, or they're
rearranging their capex to prioritize Austin in order to compete (e.g. someone
else isn't getting upgrades)

~~~
gonzo
Or that AT&T already has a TON of fiber in the ground in Austin, from back in
the 90s.

~~~
caw
Even if they have dark or underutilized fiber it doesn't mean that it's a 0
expenditure. So you don't have to rip up the street, but optics are pretty
expensive. That's not even counting a need for new switches if it's not 1 Gbps
capable.

------
enraged_camel
I realize this is very much a "first-world problem," but I find it infinitely
frustrating that Google Fiber will probably never be available where I live
(Long Beach, CA). Apparently this is because the various environmental
regulations in California make it prohibitively expensive to deploy it here.

On the one hand I like the environment. On the other, I'm on DSL. :(

~~~
ericabiz
The great thing about working for an Internet company (I'm assuming you do
since you've been on Hacker News for a while) is that you can really live
anywhere. I moved my most recent startup to Austin after living in the Valley
for 10 years and SoCal for 2. I'm already ridiculously happy with the move.
And it seems like much of California is following me here--we are even getting
an In-N-Out Burger this year!

Austin is a great place to run a company. Lower cost of living, lower taxes,
and now Google Fiber. Plus the people here are amazingly friendly. I'm happy
to compare/contrast vs. the Valley or SoCal--shoot me an email (email in my
profile) if you have questions.

~~~
bratsche
I live in Dallas and I like the lower cost of living and everything. But now I
wish I lived in Austin. :)

The thing I hate about both Dallas and Austin is driving. I used to live
northeast and could walk everywhere much easier. Austin seems to be pretty
bike-friendly though, and Dallas is becoming more so.

~~~
natrius
If you choose where you live and work carefully, living without a car in
Austin isn't so bad. In particular, car2go is a godsend. That plus my bike and
the bus get me around.

~~~
intopieces
I would agree with you if it weren't for the heat. And don't give me anything
of that "It's a dry heat" bullshit; >90 days in a row over 100 degrees is
enough to make the city turn into Do The Right Thing.

~~~
natrius
My office for the past few summers has had a shower, so I biked most of the
time. Riding the bus isn't bad either as long as you can wait in the shade.

------
wesray
Love it, Austin is such a great tech bubble right now, this will just continue
the trend for a long while, they picked a great spot to do this (mainly
because I live in Austin, lol)

~~~
xradionut
Austin is in a state, (Texas), with a lot of pending issues coming to roost...
education, traffic, migration, water/drought, social safety net. As much as I
love my native state, I don't see any leadership addressing these.

~~~
dr_doom
It's important to note that California is just as bad or worse in a lot of
those areas.

All the things you mentioned are pretty bad in California. Public education is
terrible, traffic is outrageous, there is a huge immigration 'problem', and
the forest fires are pretty bad. To each his own but Californian leadership
isn't really that great.

I just can't decide who is worse Perry or Brown.

~~~
tufyjggbfhry
Nyc also had a pretty bad immigration problem. Those pesky italians and their
mafia. The Irish were no better. And on top of that Mexicans are no arriving
in droves. When will it ever end? When?

~~~
xradionut
Most of the current migration into Texas is from California and NY. How can I
tell?

They are constantly bitching that Texas isn't California or NY.

~~~
gaahrdner
Don't forget Florida!

130,000 people are expected to immigrate to Austin in the next 2 years.
Insane!

~~~
tomrod
It's going to be _awesome_. Austin is growing like crazy.

------
juddlyon
This is going to be awesome, I feel lucky to live here (double lucky that my
neighborhood is a prime target).

I'd love to connect with some hackers in KC to hear how Google Fiber has
affected them. Does anyone have any resources about KC startups, what Google
Fiber opens up, etc.?

------
stephenhuey
Google, come launch in a small subset of Houston! I'll bet the city would love
to make a deal for you to deploy in EaDo. START Houston is there and it'd
attract significant investment to an underutilized area literally a few blocks
from downtown that Houston is eager to develop.

------
dkhenry
I really want to see the ROI google is planning on having for theses projects.
If my calculations[1] are correct they only need something like 200,000
customers to sign up to get a ROI of one year on both roll outs.

~ 100M for both rollouts @ $70 per customer per month

~~~
meritt
I'd argue Google's ROI on the service itself a very small piece of the pie and
almost irrelevant. Google gains most of their revenue from advertising on
their properties. More people online + faster access = more advertising
revenue.

Especially in a market like Kansas City which is dominated by TWC who is
notorious for misrepresenting bandwidth, throttling against high bandwidth
sites (youtube & netflix) and has noticeable capacity issues during peak usage
times.

~~~
mikeash
I imagine they're aiming for a high multiplier effect, too. Even if Google
Fiber never reaches a large percentage of the American public, its mere
existence may spur action on the part of other ISPs. For every Fiber customer
Google signs up directly, they might indirectly obtain much better internet
(and thus more advertising revenue) for maybe 10 other people using other
ISPs.

~~~
dkhenry
but what do you do if that multiplier doesn't appear ? From what I have seen
even when Verizon started a massive rollout of FiOS it didn't spur other ISP's
to offer a competing service, they just relied on the fact that rolling out to
_every_ market would be cost prohibitive. It looks like with Google Fiber the
existing ISP's are taking the same track.

~~~
mikeash
I don't know, my Comcast offerings got substantially better over the last few
years before I moved, going from 6/1Mbps to about 20/5, and I could have had
well beyond 100Mbps down by the end if I felt like paying for it.

~~~
dkhenry
FiOS clocks in at 150+ Mbps and starts at 25/25 Comcast is the prime offender
in the you have no other options game.

~~~
mikeash
I'm quite aware in both cases, as I have FiOS now, and Comcast was the only
game in town at my old place.

My point, which you seem to have missed, or at least not addressed, is that
Comcast did substantially improve their offering while Verizon was rolling out
FiOS, even though they remained the only real broadband provider in my area.

------
ippisl
I wonder if we'll see a counter measure by cable companies: offer google to
run their tv ads and build them set top boxesand share profits, while google
stops this broadband stuff ? That would be interesting.

------
rdl
I wonder how hard it would be to get both AT&T gigabit and google gigabit in
the same place.

------
phireph0x
Google, Tulsa, Oklahoma is waiting with open arms.

------
sarde
Google, Chicago wants gigabit speeds:P

------
yoster
I'm so jealous.

