Originally Posted by Nocturin
ditto for AT&T whiners.Source
I don't understand your bitterness.red herring.
hey look at that over there!
Who's bitter? And yes, I know AT&T had tons of money. But the interesting thing is, I'm the one on this thread is saying that BOTH companies should pony up their own money to provide a service and not rely on the charity of a city who cut a one sided deal without first consulting the real owners of the items ... tax payers. But hey, I'd be happy if the city just cut the SAME DEAL to everyone. That is what TRUE competition is.
Which is all that I've been saying all along. Google has been handed an unfair advantage by people who don't didn't pay for the resources (ie the city of KC, where they are just the managers) and people here act as if Google is doing something awesome. If I had $38 billion in the bank and didn't have to pay rent, utilities, had technicians handed to me and paid for by someone else, and a marketing department handed to me, oh, and let's not forget, free access to the cities fiber network that is ALREADY in place, and only had to pay HALF as much to access poles ... I bet I could "succeed" too.
Without that sweetheart of a deal, I seriously doubt Google would have went for it. Not to mention, people are looking at this as some future expansion in other cities. Well, unless those other cities cut the same sweet deal, I doubt it will "succeed" there either.