ie8 fix

Tangled up in fiber

By Jim Hu
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
May 2, 2005 4:00 AM PDT

Ashland City Council member Russ Silbiger has a word of advice for communities thinking about installing their own fiber-optic network: Do your homework.

Ashland, an Oregon town of 20,000 perhaps best-known for its annual Shakespeare festival, is one of the first rural municipalities in the United States to have built out its own fiber-optic network.

Launched in 2000, the Ashland Fiber Network now offers its subscribers TV programming that some consider on par with local cable provider Charter Communications. Its broadband Internet speeds were recently clocked at 6mbps, Silbiger said. Most cable broadband services offer speeds of up to 4mbps.

AFN is also loaded with debt--$180,000 at last count, and climbing fast.

"My belief is they didn't calculate the numbers right," Silbiger said, referring to the council that approved the broadband project five years ago.

Community broadband is becoming a hot-button issue, pitting cities against state legislators who are heavily supported by local cable and phone giants. From large metropolises such as Philadelphia and Chicago, to smaller cities dotted throughout predominantly rural states such as Oregon and Utah, a growing number of municipalities are mulling ways to build their own broadband networks.

Some cities complain that their telephone or cable supplier has moved too slowly in bringing broadband to their residents. Others consider municipal fiber or wireless networks a draw for businesses and a way to pad local revenues.

Broadband albatross?
Not all muni-backed broadband efforts have been a flop. Backers point to a number of smaller efforts that have fared well since taking the leap, including Kutztown, Pa., and the city of Spanish Fork, Utah, which is comparable in size to Ashland. Silbiger himself regards the Spanish Fork effort as a system that managed its financing and operations well, leaving it in sound financial health.

As there are no conclusive economic studies to prove the point one way or the other, anecdotes play a powerful rhetorical role on both sides in the debate.

The example of failure cited most commonly is Marietta, Ga. Just like Ashland, Marietta decided in the late 1990s to build fiber lines into people's homes and pipe in broadband access, TV channels and voice calling. But the cost of construction and maintenance, coupled with lower-than-expected subscriber additions, became too expensive for the city to handle.

In July 2004, the city sold Marietta FiberNet for $11 million to American Fiber Systems, a fiber-based Internet service provider. In total, Marietta spent about $35 million to build and maintain the system, AFS said.

A representative for the city of Marietta did not return repeated requests for comment.

"From their perspective, I think it became more cost-intensive than they were willing to pursue in terms of continual maintenance and the cost of upkeep," said Debbie Coffman, marketing manager at AFS.

Like many rural cities, Ashland was unhappy with the pace of broadband development from the local cable and phone companies. So in the late 1990s, Ashland residents decided to build their own. The city raised funds through bonds to build an advanced fiber-optic network, with plans to cover costs by selling broadband Internet access and cable TV into peoples' homes.

The first part of the plan was a success. "If we did not have that service, we would never have gotten broadband here," said Ann Seltzer, a spokeswoman for the city.

But Ashland's rosy projections soon fell apart amid construction cost overruns and higher-than-expected maintenance expenses.

To pay off its $180,000 debt this year, AFN has started borrowing funds from other city departments. The load is expected to balloon to more than $450,000 next year. City council members are seriously considering a politically risky solution, according to Silbiger: raising taxes.

Ashland's debt problem has become a perfect lever for the Baby Bells and cable operators seeking to put a stop to municipal broadband projects across the country. Their message has been consistent: Muni broadband projects are bad for competition, bad for broadband build-out and, most important, bad for residents who will see their taxes rise should the network's business plan fail.

"Quite honestly, it's bad public policy for the government to be in competition with private enterprises," said Joe Chandler, a spokesman for phone giant BellSouth. End box

4 comments

Join the conversation!
Add your comment (Log in or register)
Marietta was not a FTTH build
Jim:

One major point from your article....

"The example of failure cited most commonly is Marietta, Ga. Just like Ashland, Marietta decided in the late 1990s to build fiber lines into people's homes and pipe in broadband access, TV channels and voice calling. But the cost of construction and maintenance, coupled with lower-than-expected subscriber additions, became too expensive for the city to handle.

In July 2004, the city sold Marietta FiberNet for $11 million to American Fiber Systems, a fiber-based Internet service provider. In total, Marietta spent about $35 million to build and maintain the system, AFS said. "



However...



<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.tricitybroadband.com/failures.htm" target="_newWindow">http://www.tricitybroadband.com/failures.htm</a>

Marietta, Georgia
The Charge: On August 31st, 2004, after eight years, the city will sell its FiberNet to American Fiber Systems for less than $11.2 million, a loss of about $24 million. Since 1996, the city has invested about $35 million into building and maintaining the system which services about 180 customers along the 210 miles of deployed fiber.

Mayor Bill Dunway, whose successful campaign platform included selling FiberNet said, "That's why we should not be in this business-you have to keep reinvesting. It's negative cash flow once you consider reinvestment of capital." (Associated Press, Marietta selling city-owned Internet company at $24 million loss, July 29, 2004)

Response from Broadband Reports - <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12751032" target="_newWindow">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12751032</a> - The notion that Marietta FibreNet was a failure apparently stems from an article published in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution on July 29, 2004, suggesting that Marietta "lost" $24 million and then sold out to avoid any more red ink. The author arrived at the $24 million figure by simply subtracting the City's selling price, $11.2 million, from its investment in the system, $35 million. This was obviously wrong and misleading on its face, as the author did not take into account the millions in annual revenues that the system generated over the years.

Furthermore, when judging and comparing private-sector communications providers, industry analysts typically use a standard known as "EBITDA" - Earnings, Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization. See, e.g., »www.investorwords.com/5534/Earnings_Be... Marietta FiberNet had not only been running EBITDA-positive every year since 2001, but it was on track to go fully into the black in the first quarter of 2006. Thus, according to the standards that analysts typically apply to the private sector, Marietta FiberNet was a success, not a failure. American Fiber Systems certainly did not consider it a failure. To the contrary, it hired 100% of the system's management and staff to continue to do exactly what we had been doing before the sale.

What really happened in Marietta? The current mayor ran three years ago primarily on the issue of getting the City out of the telecom business. At the time, the system was still in its adolescence, and it had several years of projected losses to go before getting itself into the promising position that it was in at the time it was sold. The mayor, having won on this platform, made good on his promise to sell the system. Reasonable minds can differ as to whether the City could have obtained more for the system if the mayor were not so determined to sell it. But one thing is certain -- the system would surely have been even more successful and valuable if it had not had to operate under a cloud for the last three years.

I agree with the main point of your article -- that municipalities must be very careful about entering the communications field because failure is a real possibility. In fact, municipalities are extremely cautious, particularly because the open process through which they make such decisions ensures that they act conservatively and take every possible downside into account. I do not believe, however, that Marietta can fairly be cited an example of a municipal venture that failed.

In any event, Marietta FiberNet was a not fiber-to-the-home system of that kind that a number of municipalities are considering today. Marietta FiberNet did not offer the "triple play," nor did it even serve the residential market. Rather, it only offered broadband and telecommunications services to businesses in Cobb County, Georgia, just northwest of Atlanta, and in some areas of Atlanta itself. Several private-sector firms were offering similar services in these markets. Thus, it is questionable whether Marietta's experience provides much useful guidance for other municipalities.
Posted by (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Marietta was not a FTTH build
Jim:

One major point from your article....

"The example of failure cited most commonly is Marietta, Ga. Just like Ashland, Marietta decided in the late 1990s to build fiber lines into people's homes and pipe in broadband access, TV channels and voice calling. But the cost of construction and maintenance, coupled with lower-than-expected subscriber additions, became too expensive for the city to handle.

In July 2004, the city sold Marietta FiberNet for $11 million to American Fiber Systems, a fiber-based Internet service provider. In total, Marietta spent about $35 million to build and maintain the system, AFS said. "



However...



<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.tricitybroadband.com/failures.htm" target="_newWindow">http://www.tricitybroadband.com/failures.htm</a>

Marietta, Georgia
The Charge: On August 31st, 2004, after eight years, the city will sell its FiberNet to American Fiber Systems for less than $11.2 million, a loss of about $24 million. Since 1996, the city has invested about $35 million into building and maintaining the system which services about 180 customers along the 210 miles of deployed fiber.

Mayor Bill Dunway, whose successful campaign platform included selling FiberNet said, "That's why we should not be in this business-you have to keep reinvesting. It's negative cash flow once you consider reinvestment of capital." (Associated Press, Marietta selling city-owned Internet company at $24 million loss, July 29, 2004)

Response from Broadband Reports - <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12751032" target="_newWindow">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12751032</a> - The notion that Marietta FibreNet was a failure apparently stems from an article published in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution on July 29, 2004, suggesting that Marietta "lost" $24 million and then sold out to avoid any more red ink. The author arrived at the $24 million figure by simply subtracting the City's selling price, $11.2 million, from its investment in the system, $35 million. This was obviously wrong and misleading on its face, as the author did not take into account the millions in annual revenues that the system generated over the years.

Furthermore, when judging and comparing private-sector communications providers, industry analysts typically use a standard known as "EBITDA" - Earnings, Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization. See, e.g., »www.investorwords.com/5534/Earnings_Be... Marietta FiberNet had not only been running EBITDA-positive every year since 2001, but it was on track to go fully into the black in the first quarter of 2006. Thus, according to the standards that analysts typically apply to the private sector, Marietta FiberNet was a success, not a failure. American Fiber Systems certainly did not consider it a failure. To the contrary, it hired 100% of the system's management and staff to continue to do exactly what we had been doing before the sale.

What really happened in Marietta? The current mayor ran three years ago primarily on the issue of getting the City out of the telecom business. At the time, the system was still in its adolescence, and it had several years of projected losses to go before getting itself into the promising position that it was in at the time it was sold. The mayor, having won on this platform, made good on his promise to sell the system. Reasonable minds can differ as to whether the City could have obtained more for the system if the mayor were not so determined to sell it. But one thing is certain -- the system would surely have been even more successful and valuable if it had not had to operate under a cloud for the last three years.

I agree with the main point of your article -- that municipalities must be very careful about entering the communications field because failure is a real possibility. In fact, municipalities are extremely cautious, particularly because the open process through which they make such decisions ensures that they act conservatively and take every possible downside into account. I do not believe, however, that Marietta can fairly be cited an example of a municipal venture that failed.

In any event, Marietta FiberNet was a not fiber-to-the-home system of that kind that a number of municipalities are considering today. Marietta FiberNet did not offer the "triple play," nor did it even serve the residential market. Rather, it only offered broadband and telecommunications services to businesses in Cobb County, Georgia, just northwest of Atlanta, and in some areas of Atlanta itself. Several private-sector firms were offering similar services in these markets. Thus, it is questionable whether Marietta's experience provides much useful guidance for other municipalities.
Posted by (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
186,000 is not much debt
Anyone who has graduated from high school knows that $186,000 is not a lot in this country.

- At the federal level the debt is over
$6,000,000,000,000
- States commonly have multibillion dollar projects, like the
$?,000,000,000 bay bridge retrofit in San Francisco
- $186,000 is just a little more than the salary and benefits for the average firefighter in Oakland

If civic internet access is such a bad thing, why are the only opponents existing ISPs and the odd libertarian (who doesn't believe we should have an FDA either)
Posted by confucious_says (7 comments )
Reply Link Flag
186,000 is not much debt
Anyone who has graduated from high school knows that $186,000 is not a lot in this country.

- At the federal level the debt is over
$6,000,000,000,000
- States commonly have multibillion dollar projects, like the
$?,000,000,000 bay bridge retrofit in San Francisco
- $186,000 is just a little more than the salary and benefits for the average firefighter in Oakland

If civic internet access is such a bad thing, why are the only opponents existing ISPs and the odd libertarian (who doesn't believe we should have an FDA either)
Posted by confucious_says (7 comments )
Reply Link Flag
 

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

  • Recently Viewed Products
  • My Lists
  • My Software Updates
  • Promo
  • Log In | Join CNET