On 12/20/2010 1:30 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Dec 20, 2010, at 11:16 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
And yet, I don't know of any location in the US with two cable
operators. You see, these rules weren't changed to provide for a
second cable TV plant to be put in the ground, even in the FCC knew
that cost too much. Rather, if you read carefully the problem was
that Verizon, AT&T, and Bell South (all mentioned by name in the
article) wanted to deliver video over FIOS/DSL. Most areas had
coverage rules, to be a cable provider you had to pass 95%+ of the
houses or such, and these folks didn't meet many of the local rules
and went to the government for help.
I think that I recall encountering one or two such places in the past,
but, I cannot recall them to make a specific citation. Certainly it is the
exception and not the rule.
Owen
Cedar Rapids, IA is served by both Mediacom (incumbent/original cable
company) and Imon (spinoff from McLeodUSA where they used to be called
McLeodUSA ATS). As well as having Qwest for telco service.
ATS started as an overbuild to compete at the local level in MCLD's
hometown. They were started circa 1997, and are still in business
today, so they survived the last 2 bubbles. And they caused Mediacom to
keep prices down, and compete to offer additional services in Cedar
Rapids long before they were available in other cities in their footprint.
So examples of competitive overbuilds being successful do exist. Maybe
Google's fiber build will inspire some other companies to try to compete
in this fashion.
Full disclosure: I worked for MCLD from 98-05, and in the ATS division
from 00-05.
Jeremy
