[TriLUG] TW and Embarq work to keep Wilson style internet from spreading

[metro305]

On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Michael Kimsal <mgkimsal at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm not sure I see that as a problem.  Can TW honestly say that there's
> absolutely no spill over from any other part of the TW infrastructure that
> helps them roll out service in new areas?  There's certainly no income
> *from
> cable service* from town X coming in to TW when they decide to roll out
> service to town X.  They're using funds from other parts of their business
> to finance expansion, right?  I'm really not sure how this is much
> different, at all.  If anything, I don't really mind *my* property tax
> helping to fund high speed internet in *my* neighborhood.  It's much
> preferable (to me) to funding expansion of TW in to other cities which is
> paid for with *my* service fees to TW.
>
> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 3:46 PM, metro305 <metro305 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >  The possible problem with Wilson's Greenlight broadband is that it will
> > not
> > pay for itself rather will rely on other avenues of revenue (higher
> > property
> > tax or electricity rates) to pay the the operating cost and repay the
> bond.
>  > --
> > TriLUG mailing list        :
> http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
> > TriLUG FAQ  : http://www.trilug.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Michael Kimsal
> http://jsmag.com - for javascript developers
> http://groovymag.com - for groovy developers
> 919.827.4724
> --
> TriLUG mailing list        : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
> TriLUG FAQ  : http://www.trilug.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions
>


It is the taxpayer's money at risk if it Greenlight fails.  Normally when a
private business fails it the investors/shareholders that assume the risk*.
I hope to see Greenlight succeed and the law fail.

*Some restrictions do apply  ;-)