Originally published: January 7, 2010
Last updated: January 7, 2010 - 3:59pm
[Commentary] The truth is that publicly owned networks do quite well. Communities typically borrow from outside investors to build the network and pay off the loans over a 15-20 year period with revenues from phone, television, and broadband services (for wired networks). These networks have eased telecom budgets (e.g. by increasing speed to schools while dramatically cutting costs) and encouraged economic development. Nationally, they average high take rates—a measure of how many people take service on the network. State barriers to publicly owned broadband networks may benefit monopolistic cable and telephone companies but can cripple communities within those states. Of course, such policies also give a competitive edge to cities in other states who have moved ahead.
- New Report Concludes: To Be Competitive, Cities Must Own High Speed Information Networks
- Stimulus to increase rural broadband may not be enough
- ITIF municipal broadband debate reveals strong passions on both sides
- Public ownership of broadband access is best
- Who decides what you can watch on your television?
- Law Curbing Muni-Broadband Advances In North Carolina
- Community Broadband Beats Cable, DSL Companies in Speed, Price
- RUS Seeks Input on Telecommunications Modernization, Distance Learning and Telemedicine
- Publicly Owned Fiber Networks Spur Competition
- Publicly Owned Broadband Networks: Averting the Looming Broadband Monopoly
- Community broadband networks provide a public service
- Comcast vs. Community: The Future of Broadband Competition
- Why Are There No Big Cities with Municipal Broadband Networks?
- Why Your City Should Compete With Google’s Super-Speed Internet
- Bill would limit North Carolina cities starting broadband