On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 11:46:10AM -0800, Leo Bicknell wrote:
In a message written on Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 02:31:09PM -0500, Joe Provo wrote:
Everywhere that had enough paying-humans-per fiber-mile, so primarily the Northeast corridor (Metro DC through Metro Boston). Parts of the SF Bay, Chicago, Cleveland, Denver, Detroit... google "cable overbuilder" (RCN, WOW and several others). Nontrivial capital is required for the build-and-maintain of physical plant, so most all have shrunk since the bubble popping.
Interesting, I figured a few major cities would have a second provider, being able to high a large high rise or apartment complex might make the economics make sense.
Different problems; the property management adds another administrative layer to the sequence (locality/district/ward; city/town; state; federal) which has varying powers for exclusivity. Which of course vary by (locality/etc; city; state). [snip]
Which brings us back to the argument at hand, the problem is a combination of factors, regulatority (franchise issues), physical [snip]
An assertion which was false; you can discuss the 'practicality' or whatever the experience has taught us as a nation, but to say "there are no" are "this datum generalizes for all" in most all of this and sister threads is a major error. There is no national scope, and the jury is still out if statewide scope [fpr video] is a good or bad thing. Sorry to muddy with facts, please resume pontificating. -- RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE