<div dir="ltr">On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Jay Lozier <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jslozier@gmail.com" target="_blank">jslozier@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">To me, the better solution is not allow the there to be local<br>
monopolies. In many communities, the monopoly exists because local<br>
governments granted an exclusive franshise to a cable provider. A<br>
single, local provider in theory means better local control but CobbEMC<br>
management had been defrauding the members for years. As someone who<br>
lives in their service area I would love the chance to use someone else.<br></blockquote></div><br><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">With services like this, you need to have local monopolies on some level, otherwise you'd have a different set of wires running everywhere for each service provider, and the streets would be constantly under construction as other providers were installing new lines, etc..., which has other negative impacts. This is the reason that exclusive franchises are granted in the first place (often with large tax breaks).<br><br><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div>❧ Brian Mathis<br></div>@orev<br></div></div></div>
<br><br></div></div>