Google picks KCK/KCMO for ultra fast fiber network

[bobbyhawks]

why isn't anyone going after AT&T and surewest for avoiding the entire urban core with their fiber offerings?

It is a fair point, but AT&T and Surewest never claimed a desire to transform communities or to bridge the digital divide through global publicity campaigns. Everyone already hates those companies. Most people like or are excited by the way that Google generally chooses to innovate. Google is held to a higher standard. When an Apple device comes with a cheaply made button, people jump on that more than they would if it came from a competitor. Same with Google. Fair or unfair, you have a good reputation for a reason (most of the time), so there is a higher cost to maintain it, along with the higher rewards for maintaining it.

[bobbyhawks]

Update after a two weeks of school:
KCMO: 66/128 qualified. 8 hoods at 30%+. 16 hoods between 20% and 30%. 7 hoods between 15% and 20%. Of the 66 qualified hoods, 30 are 5% hoods, 35 are 10% hoods, and only 1 25% hood has qualified.
KCK: 29/74 qualified. 2 hoods at 30%+. 1 hood between 20% and 30%. 5 hoods between 15% and 20%. Of the 29 qualified hoods, 18 are 5% hoods, 9 are 10%, and 2 are 25% hoods.
Overall 95/202, or around 47% of all hoods are qualified. Google will likely reach 50% this week. The apartment situation is clearing up, and some larger hoods have spiked.

Update after three weeks of school, 6 days remaining:
KCMO: 76/128 qualified. 18 hoods at 30%+. 14 hoods between 20% and 30%. 16 hoods between 15% and 20%. Of the 76 qualified hoods, 33 are 5% hoods, 39 are 10%, and 4 are 25% hoods.

KCK: 43/74 qualified. 3 hoods at 30%+. 4 hoods between 20% and 30%. 10 hoods between 15% and 20%. Of the 43 qualified hoods, 22 are 5% hoods, 17 are 10%, and 4 are 25% hoods.

Overall 139119/202, or around 69%59% of all hoods are qualified. It does not look like Google can reach 75%65% without more manipulation of the numbers or apartment/rental issue resolutions. KCMO does not have any hoods with fewer than 20 more people to reach the threshold. The largest increases in KCMO appear to have happened on the high end of already qualified hoods and in the highest populated hoods with large apartment numbers. KCMO now has 48 hoods above 15% compared to 31 last week. This leads me to believe that the Google representatives aren't nearly as effective as the advocates within each community and/or that Google's marketing is more effective in areas where the threshold has already been breached. KCMO saw a 15% increase in total qualifications (even as apartment issues were resolved), yet the high end of the already qualified spectrum saw an increase in number of hoods above the 15% mark by 55%.

[IraGlacialis]

Business district seems to be going at a nice steady rate though (about 10 registrations per day). If that rate is kept up, it should (barely) meat the deadline; suck if it would miss it by just a couple registrations and Google doesn't decide to round up.

Sooner than I actually thought...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/3 ... 46956.html

Interestingly, the majority of the comments don't seem to be sympathetic to the article. Many even acknowledge that the neighborhoods missed the first time will likely be taken up the second time around when things get established.
Those that are negative either consider Google to already be an evil corp or are bitching about how unfair it is that this backwards town in Kansas got picked.

[flyingember]

why isn't anyone going after AT&T and surewest for avoiding the entire urban core with their fiber offerings?

Surewest has fiber downtown.
So does AT&T.

for business services.

[bobbyhawks]

Overall 139/202, or around 69% of all hoods are qualified. It does not look like Google can reach 75% without more manipulation of the numbers or apartment/rental issue resolutions.

Sorry, totally biffed the math on that one... It should have read 119/202 or 59%. Google crossed into 60%+ today. I think I also miscounted the total KCMO hoods, which should be 74 total. That would bring the Overall total to 117/202, or 58%.

122/202 is the current number, and it looks like a number of KCK hoods will still get there. They will probably reach 65% or slightly higher when all is said and done, unless something crazy happens.

I wonder how many cheapskates there are waiting until the last minute to see if their hood qualifies without their $10. I doubt it is a significant number, but I hope we see some of the skeptical/pessimists sign up at the last gasp.

[pash]

.

[FangKC]

All three Indian Mound fiberhoods in the Old Northeast have reached the goal. I'm really surprised that the Business District and Quality Hill still haven't reached their goals.

As of Sept. 5th, Quality Hill needs 131 more households. I figured it would have been among the first to reach the goal.

[heatherkay]

Quality Hill is almost all apartments, isn't it? The dual problems of renters not wanting to invest and landlords not wanting to bother/having exclusive contracts.

[FangKC]

I would think that having their apartments wired to the Google fiber network would enhance the value of the apartment.

[Pork Chop]

I would think that having their apartments wired to the Google fiber network would enhance the value of the apartment.

I agree and if they have an exclusive contract with another provider would that preclude them from getting the basic service to future proof their investment? Although, they would know better than I if it's actually worth the investment or not.

[lock+load]

So any idea how soon after this Sunday we'll have to make a decision on which plan we want? TV is still not looking very attractive. If they don't expand the channel line up soon I think they will see quite a few people either forfeit the $10 fee altogether or maybe sign up for the free internet option. $70 is pretty steep for internet- especially when no one knows what they are going to do with all that bandwidth.

[bobbyhawks]

So any idea how soon after this Sunday we'll have to make a decision on which plan we want? TV is still not looking very attractive. If they don't expand the channel line up soon I think they will see quite a few people either forfeit the $10 fee altogether or maybe sign up for the free internet option.

After September 9th, we will announce when you should expect us in your fiberhood and send more details about choosing your package.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/avail- ... 2012-09-05
I agree about the cable. Letting people choose before lining up ESPN and HBO would be a major faceplant. It sounds like Avail-TVN has assisted other small cable providers with content negotiations. It is hard to tell how much of this deal is for On-Demand services, and how much of it is for Avail's multiplatform content negotiation history. It also appears a bit late in the game to be signing up an On-Demand provider. I hope this is not an indication of how green the Google TV offering will be once it arrives.

$70 is pretty steep for internet- especially when no one knows what they are going to do with all that bandwidth.

If all you are interested in is "internet," then Google Fiber is probably not for you and there will always be cheaper options. If you are interested in what is perhaps the best deal for the speed delivered in the entire world, then Google Fiber is for you. It's like the difference between spending $50k for an actual Delorean, or $70k for a real life version of the Back to the Future, time-travelling Delorean. And I think that Google has been pretty forthright with their bandwidth management strategy. Essentially, deliver the bandwidth, and don't treat any type of traffic differently. When the Internet is playing catchup with you, maxing out the speeds will be reasonably tough to do in the short term, so I doubt congestion will be an issue in the project's infancy.

[lock+load]

If all you are interested in is "internet," then Google Fiber is probably not for you and there will always be cheaper options. If you are interested in what is perhaps the best deal for the speed delivered in the entire world, then Google Fiber is for you. It's like the difference between spending $50k for an actual Delorean, or $70k for a real life version of the Back to the Future, time-travelling Delorean. And I think that Google has been pretty forthright with their bandwidth management strategy. Essentially, deliver the bandwidth, and don't treat any type of traffic differently. When the Internet is playing catchup with you, maxing out the speeds will be reasonably tough to do in the short term, so I doubt congestion will be an issue in the project's infancy.

$70 is a pretty steep price for what most people currently see as just "internet." Most people have no idea what they can or will do with that speed, myself included. I'd be happy to pay a little more for it, but $30-40 a month? We'll see.

[taxi]

The way I understand it, you can get regular/current rate broadband for the $300 connection fee, which I think you can spread out over several months with $25 payments, then it is free for 6 or 7 years. Sure as hell beats the $45 a month I pay to TW.

[Pork Chop]

The way I understand it, you can get regular/current rate broadband for the $300 connection fee, which I think you can spread out over several months with $25 payments, then it is free for 6 or 7 years. Sure as hell beats the $45 a month I pay to TW.

That's correct, 5 meg down and 1 meg up for 7 years for $310 (includes the pre-registration fee).

[bobbyhawks]

I'd be happy to pay a little more for it, but $30-40 a month? We'll see.

If you are paying $30 for internet, you would see a big difference in your speed with Google Fiber. $30 is DSL pricing. The average cost/Mbps in the US is $5.06, so a 5 Mbps connection (within which you WILL notice speed issues) is ~$25. If all streaming were treated equally by ISPs, you would still need a connection of ~8-12 Mbps to enjoy consistent HD video (at a minimum), which would translate to ~$40-$60. Anyone with this level of connection will tell you that service is not consistent at all, and that HD video is not possible during some peak usage time periods. For $70, you get a speed that is so far advanced, you can rest assured that 99% of the lag issues occuring on the internet are probably due to quality of service issues on the provider's behalf.

If you are just checking email and do not play games, watch video, upload files, download music, use the cloud via iTunes or Amazon or Google, etc., then the $70/month may not be for you. The $300 fee, though, spread across 7 years, is $3.60 per month without a contract. At any point in that period, you can simply call Google to flip on the switch for the fastest internet in the land without requiring further installation, so I fail to see why someone would not install the "free" version. Taxes and fees on your current ISP bill cost more per month than the basic fiber offering.

[lock+load]

I pay Time Warner $35/month for 15 Mbps. I imagine most with any sort of bundle pay a similar price, or could if they bothered to call TWC and ask for it.

But, I suspect if I try to cancel my internet and keep just TV with TWC, I'll find that the real price I am paying for the internet is even less than the $35/month. They are going to jack my TV rates up.

I will definitely get at least the basic fiber installed, but I suspect that Google is not counting on a lot of people who can afford the fiber speeds instead opting for the free and slow option instead.

[flyingember]

I have a really old deal that's no longer available with Time Warner.

For me it will be a 30x increase for a $10/month increase.

Without my special plan it would be a 30x increase for a $20/month decrease.

I have a hunch that phone service is the real profit source but that someone paying for a 30mbit Time Warner connection without any plan discounts is really profitable for them.

[bobbyhawks]

I currently pay around $145 for HBO, Showtime, one really old HD DVR, and Turbo Internet. The Showtime is a recent and temporary free addition. I can't leave them fast enough for $140+. I'm even willing to pay more for Google's services if they don't leave out some key channels, but there is little change in price from my perspective for a 100x better product.

There is no way that I should have to get "a good deal" or complain and threaten to leave on an annual basis to get a fair price. I have been unwilling to sign a contract with TWC because there has never once been an indication that they are progressively improving things into the future (unless they have to). This is where I believe Google's transparency and desire to exploit emerging technologies will be a nice change of pace.

[pash]

.