Well, if you slice up a pie everybody gets pie, but if you slice up a football then nobody can play.
If you’re looking at a rural community with a few hundred to a couple thousand households, and you make service open access then there may be not enough customers for any one provider to build a business around. It may be more like slicing the football than the pie. You’ll end up with a big company monopoly anyway because the bigger company can afford to operate at a loss and wait for the one-man bands to go out of business. I’m not saying it’s a bad idea, I’m just saying I don’t think it’s a one size fits all solution. From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> On Behalf Of lists gogebicrange.net Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2023 9:21 PM To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC Proposes $62 Million penalty against Q Link Wireless for violation of EBB program rules Forest, I agree with your idea. The main problem is that we have lobbyists in this country and there is way to much money to be made building subsidized proprietary fiber. Wow I am sinical in my middle age! Brandon From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com <mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com> > On Behalf Of Forrest Christian (List Account) Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2023 7:44 PM To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com <mailto:af@af.afmug.com> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC Proposes $62 Million penalty against Q Link Wireless for violation of EBB program rules Not exactly the same type of subsidy program, but I'm starting to belive that the government needs to migrate almost all of the build out subsidies to put equal access fiber in the ground. That is, the subsidy is only for the fiber build. Single strand or two from each house to a concentrator box and then a excessive number of backhaul/middle mile strands. Then any isp can use the resources that are built. The price to use the resources must be effectively zero and rules must be in place to limit the percentage of middle mile strands that a single provider can use. You get paid if you build to spec. Once it's been independently verified that you built it then you get paid. Not before. Eliminates fraud and Eliminates the government subsidizing one provider which often eliminates the possibility of competition. Makes it easy for a provider to enter an area (drop a OLT in a cabinet). There are several countries (some rural) that adopted this pattern with good results. Obviously the details would matter here, but I'm tired of programs that have so many rules that only the big providers can really apply. Or if you do win as a small provider the cost to operate inside the grant guidelines often make it not worth it. On Sun, Jan 22, 2023, 5:12 PM Jan-GAMs <j.vank...@grnacres.net <mailto:j.vank...@grnacres.net> > wrote: ditto that one On 1/22/23 13:54, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote: interesting reading. glad we didn't participate in the connected device program ----- Original Message ----- From: Steve Jones <mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <mailto:af@af.afmug.com> Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2023 9:12 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC Proposes $62 Million penalty against Q Link Wireless for violation of EBB program rules Weird stuff to redact. Seems this should all be public info since it was the publics money. Monetary recompense is nice and all, but until we start executing owners in the town square, violently, every program will be scam full. Maybe we dont execute everybody, but we cut off their hands that were in the cookie jar and use images of their nubs to remind would be thieves that their ability to rub one out will be greatly diminished. Could even offset some of the pilfered funds through auctions of their fingers and various hand bones. On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 2:52 PM Tim Hardy <thardy...@gmail.com <mailto:thardy...@gmail.com> > wrote: <https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-23-2A1.pdf> docs.fcc.gov <https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-23-2A1.pdf> So many redactions, it’s like reading the Mueller report. <https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-23-2A1.pdf> Sent from my iPad <https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-23-2A1.pdf> -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com <https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-23-2A1.pdf> <https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-23-2A1.pdf> _____ <https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-23-2A1.pdf> -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com <https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-23-2A1.pdf> -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
