March 2017

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

« This is great, let's make it worse | Main | TW, runningish »

Mar 30, 2011

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

JustCorbly

Wonder if any NC Republicans are happy it didn't come here, considering their insistence that cities have to play second fiddle to the corporate monopoly provider?

ew

Asheville Citizen Times online headline:
Google chooses Kansas City over Asheville for new network

The story does mention that 1100 other cities didn't make the cut.

Ed Cone

EW, Philly papers were famous for that kind of perspective -- we used to refer to a certain type of headline as "Pope Shot; Sixers Win", or, "Delaware Valley Couple Injured in Nuclear Holocaust."

Hugh

I don't think infrastructure had anything to do with Greensboro's loss. Racial enmity, ridiculous city politics and a lawsuit rampant mentality among public servants are reasons enough.

Besides, Kansas City has better restaurants.

Then again, Asheville being Beer City was a plus.

Billy Jones

From the linked article: "In selecting a city, our goal was to find a location where we could build efficiently, make an impact on the community and develop relationships with local government and community organizations. We’ve found this in Kansas City."

Now you know what Greensboro doesn't have.

triadwatch

hopefully the transparency will be there to see what the contracts entail but am sure it will be a huge cost to the city once the contracts are signed.

Billy Jones

triadwatch wrote: "hopefully the transparency will be there to see what the contracts entail but am sure it will be a huge cost to the city once the contracts are signed."

Ditch diggers and linesmen expect to get paid well for their services.

Ed Cone

Yes, KC was chosen over more than 1,0000 cities, but clearly this decision is evidence of Greensboro's awfulness.

TW, where do you see the huge costs to the city coming from?

triadwatch

ed per this statement
"Google said on Wednesday that it has signed a development agreement with Kansas City and expects to begin offering service in 2012, pending approval from the city's board of commissioners."

it would be interesting to see that development agreement and what it entails. Also , the commissioners need to take a fine tooth comb at this agreement

this from blog gigaom

"When I said that Google’s plan was audacious, I said so because of the cost. For starters, Google wants to offer 1 gigabit-per-second speeds to some 50,000 to 500,000 people. At 2.6 people per household, that roughly translates to between 20,000 and 200,000 homes. Our friend Ben Schachter, Internet analyst with Broadpoint AmTech, estimates that it will cost Google between $3,000 and $8,000 per home, or roughly $60 million to $1.6 billion, depending upon the final size and footprint of the network. If Google reaches, say, 100,000 homes, it would cost the company about half a billion dollars."

Let's see how much incentive money is involved on the local and state level and what is in the development deal with the city.

Billy Jones

I'm with TW, this isn't going to come cheap to KC but in saying, "where we could build efficiently, make an impact on the community and develop relationships with local government" I suspect what Google really meant was, We've found a city ready to part with a whole lot of cash.

And there you have the one thing that KC has that 1100 other cities including Greensboro either doesn't have or aren't prepared to spend.

Like I said, "Ditch diggers and linesmen expect to get paid well for their services." and at upwards of $75.oo per hour including taxes and benefits the bill is going to be astronomical considering that almost every home and business will have to get fiber.

And that doesn't take into account the cost of materials.

In other words, imagine new wires being run to every home and business in the entire city.

Thomas

This is purely speculation on my part, but it seems to me that Google is smart enough to know that if they stick the first city with a huge bill, they won't get a second chance anywhere else.

Triadwatch

Thomas that is a good point

Ed Cone

Yeah, that's been my thought, too, Thomas.

A bait and switch would be a huge PR mistake. The company has $35 billion in cash on hand, and it has an interest in promoting high speed networks that makes this a reasonable investment.

I'd guess there will be some costs to the city, but not the major ones. And I do wonder what Kauffman's role might be.

Interesting -- none of the articles about KCK's big win even mention Greensboro as the big loser. It's almost as if this was a huge national contest involving more than 1,000 contestants, not a referendum on our city.

Thomas

You know why we didn't get it? The Coliseum.

The comments to this entry are closed.