Hello! My name is Becky and I’m a first-time blogger on Blandin on Broadband. Today I was doing a quick scan of my daily email from the folks at Baller Herbst when I saw an article from vnunet.com titled Fibre-to-the-home reaches one million Europeans. The story includes reference to the fact that “the 150 municipal networks serving these customers tend not to be owned by conventional telecoms operators, but by utilities or local authorities.”
This is true in Grand Rapids as well. Last summer I watched eagerly as Paul Bunyan Telephone Cooperative brought the capacity for bandwidth beyond my wildest dreams through a trench in my yard and up to my house. Paul Bunyan Telephone has served Northern Minnesota for over 50 years. Today, the cooperative offers local & long distance phone service, internet service including high speed service and all-digital television. Their “Connect Grand Rapids” fiber project is on schedule for completion by May 2007 although word from the Paul Bunyan office is that they’ll be fully operational before then.
I can’t help but wonder if Paul Bunyan’s access to public funds made the difference in their ability to bring fiber to Grand Rapids and Cohasset, our neighbor to the west. And I wonder if this could be further evidence that infrastructure projects of this kind need to be supported by the kind of innovative financing that public-private partnerships provide.
I received the link to the blog in an email today and decided I should sit down and give it a read…and then, regrettably, decided to relay my $.02
I would have to respectfully disagree with access to public funding for PBT. I manage a competitive operation in the area. It troubles me that some of my hard earned money will wind up in the trenches of a direct competitor. It troubles me more that there are already companies servicing these areas. If this was Togo, MN, or any other truly “unserved” area than hats off to PBT.
There are 2 problems I see with the Grand Rapids deployment. First of all, there is a problem understanding supply & demand for data services in the area. Sure, everyone wants 1Gbps connectivity to their house, but there are few of us here that would actually be able to fully utilize such a service. Can you? I certainly can’t. When we receive inquiries for such robust connections (generally industrial applications or inter-connects) we meet their needs. If we cannot meet their needs we can find an company in the immediate area who can meet those needs. We handle those inquires on a case by case basis. It boils down to supply and demand.
I would love to get access to cheap funding to overbuild my competitors, but that’s not something I’m willing to pursue unless I can deliver services that FAR exceed those of my competitors. If you were to take a step back and look at who PBT competes with in the region you might notices that they haven’t blown anyone away. If you look even further you might uncover a data rate that might be inferior to direct competitors in GR. Call it laying the seeds if you want to, but I’m not a Field of Dreams fan. Build it and they will come is a pretty risky venture if you ask me.
*ducks*
I would expect that you work for one of the few that work against PB. You view on this is skewed by your lack of understanding. AS a CCNA I can tell you know one thing and that is not a single network in Bemidji or Grand Rapids holds a candle to PB’s network and it is not over built. Sounds like your just envy that network. Having used all the networks in this area I have found all but one sadly unreliable and nearly unusable for anything more than standard web surfing. Networks so over extending they can not even handle simple streaming is just sad. And yes Streaming Media is becoming a big part of the net, whether or not you like it ZACH! further there was a time when PB was the small guy and it proved itself by taking the path the you and the rest of providers in the community refused to take and they took 75% of their market, at your expense and they did this BEFORE they had access to public funds…… And FYI When Paul Bunyan Says 5 MBPS you get even more then that. And yes I have the speed test results to prove it. Unlike your shard bandwidth solutions that mearly give people peaks PB’s Network gives me 5MBPS fully and dedicated.
Zach 1 – First I have to apologize for not responding earlier – somehow your post in March completely snuck by me! I’m so sorry.
To both Zachs – I want to thank both of you for commenting on the post. It’s great to get differing views on a local level because I think it helps illuminate the differing views on the state and national level.
It sounds as if both of you have better first hand experience regarding Paul Bunyan and other providers in Grand Rapids – so I won’t try to comment on the specifics you each mention – but rather look to the bigger issues:
1. What would someone do with 1Gbps connectivity?
I think a lot of providers and legislators are asking themselves the same question. But I think Zach 2 mentioned the most prevalent use of broadband – video. I think that use of video is growing. Many networks TV channels now allow folks to download whole TV programs, the state legislature streams and then archives many sessions and committee hearings, and Bernadine Joselyn from Blandin was just at the Killer App conference where they talked a lot about advanced in videoconferencing. I think that will grow increasingly in the near future.
Right now we’re caught in a chicken and egg scenario – people don’t learn know applications because of bandwidth (and experience) and because they aren’t able to use applications, they don’t know when they need bandwidth. I think many applications are getting easier, especially with video – and that will open the door to more people wanted to use it and more people requesting/using more bandwidth.
2. Should commercial providers receive public funding?
Again, because you are both better versed at the specifics here I’d prefer to think of the larger issue and invite you to bring it back to the local if you’d like. I think this is a good question. As a business owner I would also not be thrilled to see my competitor get a boost from public funds. As a consumer, I’m OK with public funds going to support businesses if they need it to bring me a utility that I feel is essential.
Trying to wear both hats, I’d like to make sure that any public funds that went to a commercial firm were doled out fairly. By that I mean – did all providers have a fair opportunity to compete for the money or contract? (I don’t know if this was the case here.)
3. What about an Open Network?
OK, I’m bringing up this concept. It’s one that Blandin supports. I suspect you both know about open networks but for any other readers – an open network constructs a model that I think of as wholesale and retail where one provider supports and maintains a backbone-type infrastructure in a community while other providers focus on the last mile, providing services to home and businesses. (Services meaning the connectivity and tech support.)
So the backbone provider acts like a wholesaler and the other providers are akin to retail buying services from the backbone and reselling to the end customer. The backbone provider might qualify for public funds for build out and bandwidth and could offset charges to the downstream providers.
There is my two cents. Thanks again for your comments.