

De Blasio Makes $70M Commitment Toward Universal Broadband In NYC - simas
http://techcrunch.com/2015/05/04/de-blasio-broadband

======
smileysteve
That seems like not nearly enough money for an underground fiber network.

~~~
Zikes
Some of those costs can be minimized by installing fiber while other utilities
and maintenance operations are being performed. Some cities have adopted a
"dig once" policy for this, saying every time there is a dig then fiber must
also be installed if it is not already in that location.

I would also be surprised if a city like New York didn't already have a fair
amount of dark fiber available.

~~~
splitrocket
Almost every residential and commercial building in NYC has fiber running in
front of it: [http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/06/09/verizon-will-
miss...](http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/06/09/verizon-will-miss-
deadline-to-wire-all-of-new-york-city-with-fios/)

That last few feet? Dependent on landlords.

------
uptown
"The way this plan will work is that $25 million will go toward new wireless
corridors, which will deliver free or low-cost access to 20,000 low-income
households. Another $7.5 million will go to upgrading or expanding at least
five existing wireless corridors. Then $1.6 million in state funds will focus
on broadband around industrial zones for at least 500 businesses."

It's too bad his plan ignores the monopoly TimeWarner has over service to most
of his city's customers. If more competition were introduced beyond the
sporadic RCN and Verizon FiOS available to some buildings, it might bring down
prices for all. I agree that universal broadband access is a net positive -
but when the only innovation being introduced is a subsidy it's debatable
whether state tax money should be spent to ensure his constituents have free
access to watch Netflix and play Candy Crush.

~~~
rayiner
Competition won't change economic reality. Verizon's average revenue per wire-
line user is $125/month (mostly FiOS), and the operating income margin on that
is 1-5% in any given quarter. Unless a competitor had fundamentally different
economics than Verizon, there's no way it could profitably serve those low-
income communities.

The city's approach, direct spending focused on deploying cheaper wireless
technologies, is the least distortionary and most cost-efficient way to
proceed. Better still would be just giving those poor neighborhoods cash and
letting them decide whether to spend it on broadband, or food or clothing.

~~~
humbyvaldes
The only thing that changes economic reality is competition.

~~~
r00fus
And in most cases, competition requires a (somewhat) level playing field - a
job for government.

If you only rely on the Elon Musks of the world to disrupt entrenched
interlocking cartels, you'll end up waiting decades to balance the
inefficiencies of that market if you're lucky.

