Category: WBS

WBS: “After Five Years Of Fighting, Lafayette Gets Their Fiber”

What’s Being Said Dept.

Karl Bode over Broadband Reports is another that has been tracking Lafayette’s trials for years and his take on the long-anticipated launch is similar to others who have been watching. It was a fight; one that the citizens won:

We’ve been tracking the deployment of municipally-owned fiber in Lafayette, Louisiana for years, the project being particularly notable for some of the sleazy efforts made by Cox and AT&T (then SBC) to kill it. Those efforts, back in 2005, included everything from hinting at exporting local support jobs if the deal was approved, to hiring push pollsters to try and convince locals that the government-controlled project would result in politicians rationing consumer TV viewing. Needless to say, Cox and Bellsouth lost.

Bode also notes that we’re getting something for our efforts:

A few weeks ago, Lafayette Utilities System (LUS) unveiled their pricing for the service, offering triple play bundles ranging from $84.85 to $200, with downstream broadband services ranging from 10Mbps to 50Mbps (all symmetrical). LUS offers standalone symmetrical 10Mbps for $28.95, 30Mbps for $44.95, and 50Mbps for $57.95. There’s no caps, no contracts, and no installation fee.

Those prices handily beat not only local competitors Cox and AT&T (it’s now pretty clear why they fought so hard), but carriers in other markets too. Comcast offers a 50Mbps tier in select markets for $139.95 (when bundled), but its upstream speed is 5Mbps. Verizon’s 50Mbps/20Mbps service costs $144.95/month standalone, or $139.95 when bundled. The fastest speed AT&T currently offers customers is 18Mbps/1.5Mbps, which is $65 a month if you bundle TV service.

But the real treat for locals is the unalloyed envy exhibited by the usually raucous and dismissive crowd of commentators at the site. The first commentator says: “I would literally murder someone to get symmetrical 50Mbps…” and the ensuing debate continues with a review of which body part other discussants would give to have that access.

As a special treat Joey Durel logs in and plugs the 100 meg peer-to-peer network:

Thank you all for your comments. We are excited by the possibilities this brings to our community. We put together a very conservative business plan and should easily be able to sustain our pricing. Of course as programming costs go up, our prices will go up, and so will the competition. One thing not mentioned is the fact that we are also giving 100MBS peer to peer, for FREE. And, if this initiative doesn’t live up to the expectations, my neck is on the chopping block. I think it is worth the minimal risk. And, by the way, this is not backed by the government, so taxpayers are not at risk. These are revenue bonds backed by our utilities system, and while there is some risk it is actually very low. Thanks again,

Joey Durel
Lafayette City-Parish President

And, hey, on top of all that it is sunny and warm in the hub city.

WBS: “Lafayette, La., finally gets its fiber network”

What’s Being Said Dept.

Marguerite Reardon over at CNet has been following the Lafayette Fiber saga since the beginning (and posted on-target pieces both on the fight and on the victory) so it’s not surprising to see that she’s capped that with a good piece on “Lafayette, La., finally gets its fiber network.”

After nearly five years of planning and fighting with local cable and phone companies, the Lafayette Utilities System opened its fiber-optic broadband network for business.

Whew! I thought it was more than “discussions”….. and, on CNet’s account the fight was actually about something:

It’s easy to see why Cox Communications, the local cable operator, and AT&T, which bought local phone company BellSouth, are threatened by LUS. Pricing for the new triple play services are very competitive. Consumers can get a triple play bundle from about $85 to $200 a month. And the broadband services offer download and upload speeds between 10Mbps to 50Mbps. The standalone broadband service costs about $29 for symmetrical 10Mbps downloads and uploads; $45 for 30Mbps, and $58 for 50Mbps service. The service doesn’t require a contract and there’s no installation fee.

The maximum download speed offered by AT&T is 6Mbps for $43 a month. And it’s cheapest is a 768Kbps service for $20 a month. Cox only offers Internet download speeds up to 15Mbps. Depending on what specific services are selected, bundled pricing from AT&T and Cox is comparable. The big exception is that AT&T and Cox offer these prices as part of a promotion, whereas LUS prices are the actual standard prices and will not expire.

Lafayette is just one of many cities that has tried to build it own broadband network. Other cities and regions such as Provo, Utahhave attempted to do the same thing. In nearly every instance, cable and phone companies have tried to prevent these network build outs.

Now just why is it that to get coverage that notices the real history, the actual fight, a succienct comparison of the offerings, and the real reasons why the incumbents (rightly) feared a community network we have to a national tech news source?

WBS: “Louisiana city offers 50Mbps fiber for $58”

What’s Being Said Dept.

An Electronisa.com article reviews the pricing structure for LUS Fiber and, usefully, both briefly reviews the history of the fight and compares the offering to national standards.

Lafayette’s fiber comes despite significant opposition to the deal and others like it in the US from cable and DSL providers Cox and AT&T, both of whom have publicly objected and are believed to have quietly funded private lawsuits attempting to thwart the plan for city-wide fiber.

Much of the resistance is believed to come from fears of competition, as the Lafayette Utility System is estimated to cost about 20 percent less per month than the strictly private alternatives but is also as fast as otherwise very expensive services such as Comcast’s DOCSIS 3 and Verizon’s FIOS, both of which cost at least $140 per month for 50Mbps Internet service alone.

A hint of memory about how hard we had to fight to get this network and the national advantage we’ve already gained is notably missing from the accounts in local media. One would expect that a review article about the history of the network and the advantages it offers would be forthcoming. Such gracious coverage would surely be seen if the new network were being brought in by an outside corporation who was investing $110 million dollars in a superior infrastructure that promised dramatic savings to the community. Why doing it for ourselves should be less noteworthy is difficult to understand. It’s hard not to believe that the incumbents’ advertising budgets don’t have something to do with the stilted delicacy of local coverage.

WBS: The Path to Leadership

What’s Being Said Dept.

They’re talking about Lafayette’s network in New Zealand. Or at least David Isenberg is. David visited recently and I am embarrassed to admit I haven’t written about it. (Yet. I will.) I’ve written about Isenberg & the Internet and his F2C conference here before. For now let it suffice to say that he has the sort of stature in the field that people happily fly him across the globe in order to get his advice on what should come next in telecommunications policy. (For a well-written overview of the man, and a review of his speech hit the NZHerald.)

He went to New Zealand intending, apparently, to walk the Kiwis through a path toward internet leadership that included fare like “structural separation,” and “unbundling local loops.” But he ditched that complex policy message and decided that the real message should be:

“…let’s face it, fiber, the all-optical network, is the end game.”

His recommendation to New Zealand: Just go for it. And he thinks its pretty reasonable financially. He uses Vermont’s rural and Lafayette’s urban networks to run up an estimate for the cost of fibering up the whole nation. Here’s what he said about Lafayette:

“In town, it costs a lot less. I visited Lafayette LA two weeks ago. Lafayette is a city of 110,000, or about 40,000 households. They’re building a municipal fiber network to every house in the city, rich and poor, black and white, for about 300 million, or about $2000 a house at a 50% take-rate. If you factor in OPEX and everything else, their cost will be about $50 a month. They plan to charge $70, for TV, telephone and 100 Mbit/s Internet.”

I think several of those numbers are off but the basic point remains true: It’s not too costly for a determined community. And Isenberg’s advice to the nation of New Zealand is to follow Lafayette’s lead in building fiber to every home.

That’s what I call good press. And sensible advice.

WBS: “Why Lafayette Can Be That Shining City on the Hill”

What’s Being Said Department

Geoff Daily over at AppRising has posted a remarkable article, “Lafayette Can Be That Shining City on the Hill.” It’s remarkable for the sympathy and insight that he shows. Enough so that you really ought to go read the whole piece. Go on, I meant it…

But I do want to preserve here the opening and closing bits of the post and briefly comment.

Opening ‘graph:

During my week in Lafayette a message I attempted to leave behind is that building a full fiber network isn’t enough; it’s as, if not more, important to focus on getting the community engaged with the use of broadband.

Closing:

Lafayette is a unique and special community that I can’t wait to continue exploring, but for now I’ll end this coverage with the following charge to the people of Lafayette:

Your community is poised to take a bold step into the 21st century.

But your investment in a new network means nothing if no one uses it.

Your community can become that shining city on the hill for fiber and the use of broadband.

But only if you leverage the strength of your history, culture, and people to make the most of what’s possible.

If done right, Lafayette can guarantee its economic prosperity for the next 100 years.

But it’s going to take hard work to do so, not just building the network but getting the community ready to use it.

Cajuns know that through hard work great things can be achieved.

So set the goal to be great, make the commitment to do what it takes, and anything is possible.

Geoff is exactly right on these points and we’d do well to heed his call.

My small quibble is that by characterizing our place as Cajun he misses the parallel histories of the French, Creoles and Americains in this small area and the role of that admixture in building the unique place for which he clearly holds affection. A trip to some Zydeco haunts and more thorough introduction to the flavors and implications of gumbo can await a return visit.

“The Latest From Lafayette, LA”

What’s being said dept.

It’s nice to be noticed. Especially for the things you’re actually proud of. Lafayette got a bit of notice online today from Geoff Daily over at Apps Rising. Geoff has visited here in Lafayette a couple of times and has had an outsiders eye on the city and its unique fiber project for awhile. So its gratifying that in reporting on an interview with Terry Huval of LUS he focused on the really important stuff. Sure, he mentions that he found out about technical issues and things that are interesting to industry pundits. But he spends all his time talking about what Lafayette’s network means.

But there were two other nuggets of news that really caught my eye as they proved LUS’s desire to be progressive in deploying one of the most advanced communications networks in the world

100 meg intranet—He’s right to headline this; it’s the biggie:

First off, Terry shared with me their plans to offer high speed intranet or LAN services for free to enable consumers and small businesses to transfer data in-network at speeds much faster than the Internet connections they’re paying for.

So say you’ve signed up for LUS’s baseline broadband, which will likely be around 10Mbps. Because of these free LAN capabilities, you’ll be able to establish point-to-point connections to other users on LUS’s network that go beyond the speed of your broadband connection to support burstable speeds of up 100Mbps for in-network data transfer.

What might this enable? Imagine sharing an HD home movie with a neighbor in minutes instead of hours, or a small business being able to send large datasets across town exponentially faster than it would take over the open Internet. No longer will you be limited by your Internet connectivity but instead you’ll be able to take greater advantage of the capacity fiber provides.

It is one thing to see the objective implications of this innovation. Daily understands what it means. He Gets It:

It’s my fervent belief that leveraging the in-network capabilities of full fiber networks holds the potential to revolutionize our relationship with the Internet and how we use connectivity to establish stronger bonds within our community.

That’s as wordy as I might be…to simplify: communications is the foundation of community. Owning the communications network means we can choose to build a more robust community in ways that private corporations would never consider. To wit:

The Digital Divide: building on the power of a 100 meg intranet the issue becomes making sure that power is as evenly and fairly distributed as is practically possible. This concern motivates what we’ve called the digital divide. Daily has clearly heard about Durel’s presentation in Washington.

The second major tidbit I learned relates to one of LUS’s initiatives to bridge the so-called digital divide by offering low-cost Internet service to TV sets.

The idea is that many people may want TV and phone service but aren’t yet convinced they need broadband. So LUS is going to enable them to pay a low fee to rent a special set-top box and for very basic Internet access–slower than their base level broadband–so that they can surf the Web from their TV.

The downside is significant limitations:

Now Terry admits that this service will be limited as it likely won’t be able to do things like allow people to watch YouTube videos plus there are the limitations of the set-top box, which won’t have the storage and ability to support an endless array of peripherals as a full-fledged computer would.

But users will be able to visit webpages, use email, and other basic functions of being online. And because it’s LUS’s mission to deliver their services for 20% less than their local competitors, it’ll essentially work out so that you pay the same to get TV and this limited Internet product from LUS as you would to get TV alone from the cable company.

The overall idea behind this is to provide another way for people to get introduced to the advantages of being online so that they might find inspiration to upgrade to the true broadband connectivity LUS’s full fiber network can deliver.

Daily is on target about the limitations:

When I heard Terry describe a service where you couldn’t watch YouTube, where you didn’t have any storage, where you likely were extremely limited in the Internet applications you could use, I found myself cringing at the thought.

But he comes down here:

…in the end I think this is an innovative approach to tackling the digital divide from a different angle, and I couldn’t be more excited to see how it plays out, because if it works then we’ll gain another important arrow in our quiver as we all work together to convince America that broadband’s great and that everyone needs to be online.

Frankly, while I respect both Geoff and Terry’s judgment, I think we can do better than accepting the limits of Alcatel’s favored supplier. I do think that the set-top box solution is the best solution for those not yet on the web. (And I’ve long held this opinion.) But it isn’t at all clear to me that there is any reason that we couldn’t have a much more capable settop box setup than is suggested in Geoff’s post.

It really should be pretty easy.

Let’s think about this a little: a cable settop box these days is increasingly often a Digital Video Recorder (DVR) and is capable of two-way communication with the headend. It is, in reality, already a network connected computer with a fat hard drive for video storage. Often the guts of the software is a Linux OS already because that is what is cost-effective (and free) for the developer. The typical cable provider is desperate to get these boxes into every home because the company knows that once they get a digital box in the home they can 1) sell more services that require two-way communication (say Video on Demand which is a huge cash cow) and 2) upgrades do not require an expensive (hundred + dollars) truck roll and 3) many typical outage issues at a home can be dealt with from the hub without a roll or if a roll is necessary they know what the problem is going out.

These additional revenues and savings MORE than pay for the cost of the box. So cable companies do their best to push them on every customer and if the FCC did not require them sell a non-box, “analog” cheap tier they would not do so.

LUS would share these benefits, so getting sophisticated set top boxes into the hands of as many consumers as is humanly possible should be a high priority for the sake of video revenue alone.

Since the basic setup is already a hard-drive capable networked computer with very nice video circuitry spending the very few spare dollars to add a few things like a bit more RAM and maybe a usb port should be a tiny incremental cost.

Presto chango: a fully capable, if cheap, computer–if you open it to your customer.

It would be a stunningly cheap way to meet their social obligation to close the digital divide in our city. —Something I know they really want to address.

With such a device in hand the smart thing to do would be to offer it to every customer as part of the package. Even, especially, the low-cost tier. The FCC only forces you to allow the low cost tier to be box free. If you want, you can give the customer the box or allow them to refuse it. If that box carried with it a free low-level internet that was fully capable but slower than the city’s 10 meg basic tier I predict few people would turn it down. Instantly almost every LUS subscriber would be on the internet by default. Making that capacity available in every home would instantly turn the household TV into a household internet device—I’d bet families would cruise YouTube together. We already do that with our grandchildren on tiny 13 or 15 inch laptop screens with the kids crowded around and laughing. Imaging how much more fun it would be to do it comfortably on a big screen. Or gaming…..a lot of network things are potentially more fun or valuable on the multiple participant TV screen than on our seperated little ones.

It’d be a healthy switch from a passive social medium to an active social one. And Lafayette could pioneer it.

And LUS could sell more VOD and other product to those people than they would otherwise and save lots of money on maintaining them. (And pay off the network more quickly.)

It is a classic win-win.

a small variant:
Suppose LUS doesn’t want to provide a local hard drive because of cost (though drive costs are absurdly cheap). Hey, we’ve got fiber. With a 100 meg intranet connection at every house there is NO reason not to provide online storage to customers. Cheap, easy–and you’re already obligated to do email storage anyway, just to provide that basic service. What’s an additional gig or two for good citizen-customers?

All that is standing in our way is the capacity — or rather incapacity — of the set top boxes currently being considered. The only reason YouTube does not work, I’d venture to guess, is that the creaky old OS version that the Motorola or Cisco has installed can’t handle flash. So get ’em to upgrade it. Make sure to pick a box with a USB port. Let the user hang a disk off that if they want. (The ones they are considering already support wireless keyboards and mouse.) Find a box that does what we want it to do.

We can do this.

If we decide we want to.

That’s what makes owning the network so wonderful. We can do it for ourselves.

WBS: “Milestone Reached in Lafayette Fiber Deployment – LUS FTTH is on track”

Whats Being Said Department

Broadband Reports, which has followed the fiber battle in Lafayette exetensively, continues to track the story. It now covers the announcement of the groundbreaking last Thursday. The site is probably the largest discussion forum devoted to broadband issues in the nation and its always interesting to see what folks have to say in the comments. In this one we are treated to a repise of the debate as to whether or not Lafayette is “in the woods.” Oh well; it’s fun to read anyway. One guy does seem to have a handle on how arduous the planning for a fiber network has to be.

Shreveport considers WiFi…and Looks South

Two articles in The Shreveport Times (1, 2) review the potential for community WiFi in Shreveport. The articles are apparently a response to the formation of a task force on the issue manned in part by “the council’s youngest and perhaps most tech-savvy members.”

The articles author does a good job of reviewing the pluses and minuses, the successes and failures, of municipal WiFi. Cap’n Shreve’s port is just thinking about it though. The story makes it clear that discussion in Shreveport is just begining so I wouldn’t look for anything concrete for a while.

It is, however, interesting to notice that another of Louisiana’s major cities is at least thinking about municipal broadband. And that has lead them to notice that we’re doing it differently down south of I-10:

Yet other cities have taken a different approach.

In Lafayette, city officials put a bond issue before voters in 2006. The result: $120 million to extend fiber optics to each home and business in the city, according to Keith Thibodeaux, chief information officer for the city’s Information Services and Technology Department.

The city estimates residents will be able to get services for about 20 percent less than the approximately $85 a month paid for bundled telephone, cable and Internet service, said Terry Huval, director of Lafayette Utilities System. “This system will completely pay for itself.”

Huval later added, “Our motive is not to make a profit, but to provide a value to the community.”

[Note: the author of the story got one part of that wrong: LUS has consistently said that it would offer a 20% discount off the triple play price current when the plan was announced — about 85 dollars a month; not 20% off 85 dollars.]

The story then goes on to interview Keith Thibodeaux about Lafayette’s WiFi network which is currently limited to police and utility functions.

Shreveport’s committee almost immediately encountered the sad fact that Louisiana law makes any public broadband (including wifi) very difficult. One of the “tech savvy” council members says:

Aside from cost, which is a question mark at this point, Lester said legislators passed a law that essentially prohibits municipalities from being in direct competition with companies that provide high-speed Internet access. But it doesn’t prevent municipalities from partnering with such companies.

Lester isn’t quite right there–though he hedges his bet by saying that the law “essentially” prohibits such networks. That is the clear intent of the law, of course, but Lafayette’s successful fiber fight makes it clear that a city can fight and win if it is determined enough. The council members might well be that he doesn’t think that a referendum battle would work in his part of the state. Maybe–but it really ought to be considered. There are large advantages in owning that property yourself; networks are no different from real estate in that regard. The people of Shreveport ought to be given the chance to discuss that alternative. (They’d be smart to discuss a fiber build as well.)

Should Shreveport’s people decide they want to do something for themselves they’d have supporters in Lafayette.