Steve Mensing, Editor/RFP Staff
♦ Yesterday at Spencer’s Board of Aldermen meeting, the Aldermen passed a motion to permit Spencer’s Town Manager Larry Smith to start discussions about the possibility of bringing Fibrant to Spencer. Those discussions would greatly hinge on 5 very specific terms that Aldermen Jeff Morris spoke about prior to the Board’s motion to start discussions with Salisbury.
The 5 terms Salisbury must meet to expand their broadband network into Spencer were mentioned in their motion for the discussions with Salisbury.
1-Delay any installation request until an agreement is reached.
2-Fibrant must be made available to “all households” in Spencer by a preset date.
3-There would be no cost to Spencer for installations or repairs that might be required for the system.
4-All costs, fees, and billing practices must be applied equally to Spencer households as they are to Salisbury households.
5-Pole connections, rentals, and so forth would be calculated so as to fairly compensate Spencer without seeking any net profit for the town.
During public commentary Mike Tanck, the Director of Government Relations for Time Warner Cable in Charlotte, and Kent Winrich, Fibrant’s Director, spoke. No representative from AT&T U-verse, the town’s other internet provider was present.
Tanck spoke first, describing Time Warner Cable’s TWC Maxx high-speed residential upgrades that will be made throughout the Charlotte region, including all of Rowan County in the coming months. Time Warner Cable upgrades will be provided at no additional cost to its customers. The highest speed available to residential customers is 300 Mbps. (The Charlotte region will be rolling out 10 gig by 10 gig fiber optic for business.) TWC Maxx upgrades are listed below:
Winrich spoke briefly about Fibrant 1 gig symmetrical internet and offered that Spencer and Salisbury has a great economic opportunity if they partnered.
A software-developer John Blake, with government ties, lives near Spencer’s border with Salisbury. He stated he required fast upload and download speeds for his work. Typically every municipal broadband clamoring to open up a new city or expand their existing turf will find someone with extraordinary internet needs to put forward their “case”. The city of Salisbury trotted out some area ITs prior to pitching Salisbury’s city council for the dire need for super high-speed internet in allegedly “underserved” Salisbury. Well Fibrant’s rollout proved a monumental fiasco. Up until July of 2014 Fibrant only sold two 100 Mbps subscriptions and not much in the way of business showed up.
There’s some positives for Spencer if they go forward with Salisbury’s request to expand. The 5 terms the aldermen agreed upon show the town as putting no skin in the game–its a treat all borne on the shoulders of Salisbury tax and utility payers. Not such a hot idea if Spencer is as chilly to subscribing to Fibrant’s broadband services as most Salisburians are.
The terms offered by the Spencer’s aldermen were overly generous. I would’ve sought a handsome net profit at Salisbury’s expense. And I would’ve “requested” that any monies removed over the years from Spencer’s water and sewer utilities be returned and that any hike in Spencer’s future water and sewer bills be met with an equivalent hike in Spencer’s profits from pole connections, rentals, and the like. Lastly if Salisbury becomes insolvent, Spencer gets to keep Salisbury’s fiber optic network remaining within its borders. Everybody has their idea of fairness–mine looks like a giant leg of venison being wolfed down in Sherwood forest.
There are a number of challenges Fibrant faces in trying to find customers in Spencer. Just about the same kind they faced in incumbent-crowded Salisbury.
• The fact that most people don’t jump ship from an incumbent to the new kid on the block.
• Fibrant has major consumer barriers: a 300 dollar 1 year contract, unpleasant fees, a new website lacking important information which forces people to call Fibrant sales. Fibrant’s internet has stretches of unreliability.
• The overwhelming majority of folks have no need for excessive high-speed internet.
• Public information requests revealed that Fibrant spied on customer’s emails.
• Fibrant has a record for poor service and for not answering their phones or returning their calls.
• Fibrant attempts to sell noncompetitively priced VOIP phones and TV (with no TV everywhere and ancient set-top boxes).
Mike Tanck, Director of Governmental Relations for TWC in Charlotte (below):
Kent Winrich, Fibrant Director (below):
