EBP's profitability is only relevant to a discussion of fiber generally to the extent it is a concrete example of a municipality (or anyone) building fiber profitably. The question is--could Baltimore go out and do this? Or, what's stopping a private company from doing this in Baltimore? And what's relevant to that is the real capital expenditure to build the fiber network--not just extending a fiber network you had lying around.
I'm happy to concede that if you don't have to actually pay for much of your fiber network, you can indeed show a "profit."
> EBP's profitability is only relevant to a discussion of fiber generally to the extent it is a concrete example of a municipality (or anyone) building fiber profitably.
Very well then, but why did you start of this thread with provably false claims? EPB fiber is not subsidized by the electric side (refer to your own research paper if you don't believe me) and Chattanooga is most definitely servicing their debt in full (again check your paper).
> The question is--could Baltimore go out and do this?
Perhaps, I haven't looked into it, so I don't know. But, why Baltimore? Different state, different laws on municipal broadband, much larger metro area and a very different socioeconomic mix.
> Or, what's stopping a private company from doing this in Baltimore?
Nothing much if they have the money and inclination to do so, assuming they can get the appropriate permits and franchises. Apparently Verizon did consider doing it.
> And what's relevant to that is the real capital expenditure to build the fiber network--not just extending a fiber network you had lying around.
So if Verizon decides to build out FiOS in Baltimore, which part of their existing (national and local) fiber network should they according to you include in their network build budget and show an additional return on?
> I'm happy to concede that if you don't have to actually pay for much of your fiber network, you can indeed show a "profit."
Which parts of the EBP fiber network do you feel have not been paid for? And what do you mean by "profit"? Are you claiming that EPB is cooking the books and not really making a profit?
You keep insisting that no matter what evidence is presented, that the fiber infrastructure will not be able to pay for itself, even in other cities. I can't understand your resistance. Can you explain your position? Are you connected via lobbying, pr, or working for an organization that is opposed to municipal fiber?
Muni fiber could certainly be unprofitable or unworkable, there's no magic reason why it has to work in practice.
I'm happy to concede that if you don't have to actually pay for much of your fiber network, you can indeed show a "profit."