demanded more and more from internet service, and incumbent .... Mediacom, the incumbent cable operator, has a network c
COMMUNITY BROADBAND ENGAGEMENT AND EDUCATION PROJECT REPORT Charles City, IA
Curtis Dean
[email protected]
Contents Executive Summary....................................................................................................................................... 2 Background ................................................................................................................................................... 2 Current Provider Landscape ......................................................................................................................... 4 Project Goals and Methodology ................................................................................................................... 6 Engagement and Education .......................................................................................................................... 7 Website and Social Media Engagement.................................................................................................... 7 Community Stakeholder Meetings ........................................................................................................... 7 Fiber Town Hall Meeting ........................................................................................................................... 8 Measurement: Community Broadband Survey ............................................................................................ 9 Sample Size and Margin of Error............................................................................................................... 9 Summary of Survey Findings ..................................................................................................................... 9 Broadband Costs ................................................................................................................................... 9 Internet................................................................................................................................................ 11 Pay TV .................................................................................................................................................. 11 Landline Telephone ............................................................................................................................. 12 Demographics...................................................................................................................................... 12 Broadband Future ............................................................................................................................... 12 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................. 13 Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................... 15 Exhibits ........................................................................................................................................................ 15
Page |1
Executive Summary SmartSource Consulting and its project team was hired by the City of Charles City, Iowa to answer an important question. Is there sufficient interest in a community fiber broadband network in Charles City to justify investing in a full feasibility study and business case? The Community Broadband Engagement and Education Project was designed to answer that question. We engaged Charles City residents in a dialogue about the current state of broadband services in the community; educated the community about the lasting benefits of fast, affordable, reliable, and ubiquitous broadband; and measured community interest in a municipal broadband project. We found that citizens are dissatisfied with the broadband services they receive today, and understand the importance of advanced broadband services for the future growth and success of the community. There is strong support for the concept of a community fiber broadband network.
Background The 1990’s were a decade of significant change in the telecommunications industry. The goal of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was to deregulate certain aspects of the telecom industry and bring competition to the marketplace. Many experts agree that it had the opposite effect as a wave of mergers swept the industry, consolidating market power in the hands of fewer and fewer companies. Rather than expanding, competition languished, especially in smaller communities where the economics were not favorable enough to invite new entrants into the business. Consolidation among companies that produce video programming pressured cable costs higher and higher, impacting consumers significantly. The 1990’s also brought a new service - internet access - that has truly transformed our lives. Access to the internet has become an essential element in how we live, work, and play. In its infancy, internet access (mostly via dial-up connections of 56 Kbps or less) was considered a toy by most consumers. But over time consumers demanded more and more from internet service, and incumbent providers scrambled to upgrade their copper networks to stay ahead of the demand curve. In some communities, incumbent operators were not moving fast enough to satisfy the needs of citizens. As a result, the decade of the 1990’s saw a rapid growth in community-owned broadband networks. These networks, usually operated as a municipal utility, were built to allow communities to control their own technological destinies rather than waiting for large incumbent operators to make those needed investments. The state of Iowa was one of the leaders in municipal telecommunications during the decade. Figure 1: Spencer, Iowa broke ground on their broadband utility in 1999
Between 1994 and 2005, 70 Iowa communities approved referenda to establish a municipal telecommunications utility.1 One of those communities was Charles City, whose voters approved the 1
See Exhibit A: Iowa Municipal Telecommunications Referenda
Page |2
referendum in 2005 by a margin of 62% to 38%. Of these legally authorized communities, approximately two dozen communities built networks or began offering wireless services.2 Why didn’t Charles City and these other 40+ communities in Iowa implement a telecommunications utility immediately following the vote? A primary reason was the response of incumbent operators. Fearing a municipal competitor, incumbents promised to improve their services and better meet the needs of consumers. Initially these operators did respond, launching high-speed internet service (DSL and cable modems) as well as creating new digital TV services and launching more TV channels. Limited network upgrades were made to allow these improvements. There were also reasons for inaction particular to each community, including lack of strong grassroots support (beyond the vote), concerns about the ability to fund these networks, and local political factors. In some communities that passed a referendum, the motivation was simply to preserve future options in the face of legislative threats to restrict municipal entry and not due to a groundswell of local demand for a public option. Twenty plus years later, it has become apparent to many communities that the technology used by incumbent providers is not adequate to meet the future (and, in many cases, current) needs of the community. The bottom line is that existing copper networks do not have the technological capability of 21st century fiber optic networks. This reality has led many of Iowa’s municipal broadband utilities to implement plans to rebuild their infrastructure to fiber-to-the-home (FTTH). Lenox and Bellevue completed their transition from copper to fiber networks in the 2000’s. Cedar Falls rebuilt their system within the last five years. Today, almost every Iowa municipal broadband utility has either started a FTTH conversion or is planning one in the next few years. They realize that increasing demand for advanced services and gigabit-plus internet speeds require fiber networks. As municipal Figure 2: Cedar Falls rebuilt their network to all utilities are only obligated to serve the best interests of fiber, attracting recognition and a visit from their citizen-owners and not to create a stream of profits President Obama in 2015. for outside investors, they are willing and able to make those investments. The economics of the telecommunications industry make it difficult for incumbent providers to justify the significant investment needed to upgrade their networks to all fiber, especially in small communities like Charles City. Instead, they have chosen incremental improvements to their copper networks that are intended to stay just ahead of the demand curve created by consumers’ needs, bud sadly often fail to do so. Although there have been steady advances in copper network technology, these networks cannot compete long-term with the capabilities of fiber. Providers who continue to rely on copperbased networks will always be scrambling to stay just ahead (and sometimes will fall far behind) of their customers’ needs.
2
See Exhibit B: Iowa Community Broadband Map
Page |3
2010 Telecommunications Study Concerns over the community’s broadband services led Charles City to commission a Telecommunications Study in 2010. The study consisted of a survey mailed to residential and business customers that asked questions about telecommunications services and perceptions among citizens about a possible public broadband option. This survey showed that “Almost 59% would be very supportive if the City telecommunications customers were provided cable, Internet or land-based telephone generally satisfied with their pay TV, services in order to have local control over the internet, and landline telephone service quality and pricing; an additional 32% would be at the time. Despite acceptable levels of somewhat supportive” – 2010 Telecommunications satisfaction, the survey revealed strong Study Executive Summary overall support for the concept of the City providing telecommunications services. Despite the positive response from the 2010 Telecommunications Study, city leaders did not take any additional actions to advance the concept. The 2010 Telecommunications Study provides a snapshot in time of perceptions among Charles City broadband consumers six years ago. However in the world of today’s rapidly evolving technology, six years is a long time, and much has changed. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) began issuing an annual “Measuring Broadband America” report in 2011. The first report, based on 2010 data, found that the median internet download speed in the United States was 10 Mbps. 2015 data shows that has increased nearly four-fold, to 39 Mbps.3 Much of this speed increase has been driven by entertainment, specifically the explosion of streaming video. Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, Hulu, and dozens of others have become as much a part of America’s living rooms as their cable box. At the same time, the use of the internet for economic activity - including work-at-home - has also grown rapidly. Consumers in 2016 are much more sensitive to not just speed, but reliability. An internet outage in 2010 might have been viewed as a minor inconvenience; today it can be a crisis. For those reasons and others, it was appropriate for Charles City community leaders to reach back out to the public to not only measure broadband service perceptions, but to engage in education about the value of broadband for the community’s future.
Current Provider Landscape Like most rural communities, Charles City has one incumbent telephone company (CenturyLink) and one incumbent cable TV company (Mediacom). CenturyLink provides traditional landline telephone service and DSL internet service over its copper-based network while Mediacom utilizes a hybrid fiber-coaxial (HFC) network to provide pay TV, internet, and landline telephone service.
3
http://data.fcc.gov/download/measuring-broadband-america/2016/2016-Fixed-Measuring-Broadband-AmericaReport.pdf
Page |4
In addition to these facilities-based providers, Charles City residents also have access to two satellitebased pay TV providers (DIRECTV and Dish Network), as well as several wireless internet options (fixed wireless and mobile/cellular data). For video content, consumers also have a growing number of choices for over-the-top (OTT) video that is delivered via their internet connection. In addition to the original streaming video services such as Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime, several new OTT video services have been launched in the past two years and many more are expected to appear moving forward. These services - such as Sling TV, Sony PlayStation Vue, and DIRECTV Now – have one thing in common: they require an excellent internet connection to deliver content reliably and with acceptable picture quality. Excellent broadband should meet several criteria. It should offer fast internet service; it should have high reliability and rapid service restoration when interruptions do occur; it should be affordable so that most citizens can have access to at least adequate service; and it should be available everywhere in the community. Using these metrics as a guidepost, the incumbent cable TV and telephone companies each have their advantages and disadvantages.
Mediacom Mediacom, the incumbent cable operator, has a network capable of offering internet speeds that are considered sufficient for most consumers today. Their hybrid fiber-coax (HFC) network uses cable modems for internet access, offers digital pay TV service, and provides landline telephone utilizing Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP). Mediacom has announced an upgrade to new DOCSIS 3.1 technology across its entire network. These upgrades, primarily in their central office/headend and at the customer premise, will enable Mediacom to begin offering gigabit internet services.4 It is unknown exactly when this upgrade may make enhanced services available in Charles City. It is also unknown what price points these new and enhanced services will occupy (will they be affordable?) and whether system reliability – a key determinant of customer satisfaction – will improve.
CenturyLink CenturyLink’s copper telephone network does not have the same capabilities when it comes to internet services, and the company has not announced any significant technology upgrades that will enable it to do so. The highest internet download speeds available on CenturyLink’s Charles City network is 20 Mbps. That is below the FCC’s definition of broadband internet (25 Mbps or higher downloads) and inadequate for many modern consumers. A common disadvantage that both Mediacom and CenturyLink have is “Constant service interruptions, which is a problem reliability. Because their networks are for me since I work remotely from home” – Comment older and utilize copper facilities for the on Community Broadband Survey connection to the end user, outages are more frequent than many consumers will tolerate in our hyper-connected world. Also, because both Mediacom and CenturyLink have limited local technical personnel, restoring service can take longer than most customers can accept.
4
http://www.telecompetitor.com/mediacom-docsis-3-1-gigabit-migration-to-be-completed-by-year-end/
Page |5
BroadNet Connect Another provider, at least in limited areas to certain companies and institutions, is BroadNet Connect, the IT division of the UnityPoint Health Network. BroadNet Connect (also known as HncBnc) was granted funds from the Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP) as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (better known as the Stimulus Package) in the early 2010’s. The funds were used by BroadNet to extend their existing fiber optic network around Iowa, and a portion of those funds were used to build a fiber ring in Charles City. While the primary purpose of the build was to enhance services to health facilities, BroadNet is also able to make excess capacity on the network available to anchor institutions and other users. The City of Charles City has connected to the BroadNet network at several locations to vastly improve internet connectivity to city facilities. To date only one non-city user, a local bank, has connected to the BroadNet network. If the City decides to move forward with a community fiber broadband network, one option to reduce costs could be to contract with BroadNet Connect to utilize their existing fiber where possible. However due to their network’s limited reach across the community, BroadNet Connect will provide at best a partial solution to enhancing the community’s broadband services. One of the challenges of examining the current provider landscape is the same challenge that is frustrating to consumers: determining the real price of services. Most providers offer so many combinations of pay TV, internet, and landline telephone services with various discounts and surcharges that it becomes difficult to compare apples to apples. On top of this, providers “No discount for being a loyal customer, but will give often create special offers to attract new discounts to new customers. It doesn’t pay to say customers that are not made available to with one company.” – Comment on Community existing customers. Some offers are not Broadband Survey necessarily published and widely distributed and require a customer to be proactive to obtain a better deal. This lack of transparency makes shopping for the best deal within or among providers a difficult task. For a more detailed review of the published rates among incumbent providers in Charles City and a competitive analysis of those services, please refer to Exhibit C. To provide a different context to the services currently offered, we also compared some of the common combinations of services with similar combinations in two eastern Iowa municipal fiber broadband networks; Waverly Utilities and Cedar Falls Utilities. Those comparisons are shown in Exhibit D. In general, that analysis shows that service offerings in Cedar Falls and Waverly are generally less expensive for comparable services versus incumbents in Charles City, especially when it comes to internet services.
Project Goals and Methodology As stated in the project proposal that was accepted by the City of Charles City, The overall goal of the Community Broadband Engagement and Education Project is to determine whether there is sufficient community interest in municipal broadband project to justify investing in a detailed feasibility study. We intend to engage Charles City in a dialogue Page |6
about the current state of broadband services in the community; educate the community about the lasting benefits of fast, affordable, reliable, and ubiquitous broadband; measure community interest in a municipal broadband project; and provide leaders with information needed to determine next steps. With this goal in mind, we conducted the project in two essential phases. During the engagement and education phase, we held group meetings and engaged in one-on-one conversations with Charles City residents. During the measurement phase, we conducted a Community Broadband Survey to gauge citizens’ attitudes about existing providers and gauge interest in a community project.
Engagement and Education Several methods and approaches were taken to engage with residents and provide information about what a community fiber broadband network would mean for Charles City.
Website and Social Media Engagement In July 2016, a website was launched to serve as an information hub for the Community Broadband Engagement and Education Project in Charles City, along with similar projects in Charles City and New Hampton. The site, www.ourbroadbandfuture.com, has general information about community broadband and links to other online resources. A page specific to Charles City, http://www.ourbroadbandfuture.com/charles-city.html, was created to provide background on the history of Charles City’s exploration of community broadband (beginning with the referendum in 2005); a video recording of the town hall meeting; and frequently asked questions from residents. Another method used to reach residents with messaging was a Facebook page, www.facebook.com/charlescitybroadband. Since a large percentage of Americans maintain an active presence on Facebook, this was a logical (and free) way to “spread the word”. Posts to the Facebook page included general information about community broadband, meeting notices, and links to the Community Broadband and Survey. As of January 16, 2017, the Facebook page had gathered 225 total page likes (meaning people had asked to receive notifications when new information was posted). There was a limited level of engagement on the Facebook page throughout the term of the project. The few comments that were made were favorable.
Community Stakeholder Meetings During August, 2016, we held several community stakeholder meetings in Charles City. The goal of these meetings was to discover what broadband needs exist and if those needs are being adequately met by existing providers, and to measure the general level of interest and support in the concept of a community fiber broadband network. We also hoped to identify whether there were any significant barriers to a potential community fiber network. A one-on-one meeting was held with the IT director for Charles City Community Schools. The school district has been proactive on telecommunications, having constructed 12 strands of fiber to connect between several of the districts buildings. However, a couple of facilities still rely on a point-to-point wireless system for connectivity. The district purchases internet bandwidth from the Iowa
Page |7
Communications Network and, through network management practices, this bandwidth is seen as adequate. However at this point there is no redundant provider. Like many districts, Charles City has a program to provide students with Chromebooks to use in and outside of the school buildings. A governmental stakeholders meeting was held with representatives of several city departments and Floyd County in attendance. City departments have one advantage over the rest of the community; they have fiber connectivity through HncBnc for several city buildings. In most cases those departments are using HncBnc for their primary connection and utilizing Mediacom for a redundant connection. One exception is the public library, which is not on the HncBnc fiber ring and relies on a 50 MB cable modem service from Mediacom. Although happy with the service they are receiving today, city departments discussed the advantages that having a ubiquitous fiber network would bring to providing public services. For example, the city’s water pollution control department has connectivity at the wastewater treatment plant but not to the lift stations. Others discussed the Smart City capabilities that a fiber network could provide to benefit public safety and other areas of city operations. Representatives of Floyd County expressed interest in rural residents being included in a future project as connectivity is even more limited for people that live outside of the city limits of Charles City. Two meetings were held that focused on broadband and business. Economic development stakeholders were invited to the first meeting on August 15, 2017 and it was well attended. It was pointed out that the city’s economic development focus has been on enhancing opportunities for existing businesses and industries rather than trying to attract new ones. As a result, the need for making Charles City businesses more “tech savvy” was emphasized. Two points of concern about the community’s current broadband access were identified. One, overall reliability is not optimal and that affects the ability of businesses to conduct everyday transactions such as electronic funds transfers. Also, a lack of capacity in the community’s southwest section was identified as a problem. As with the governmental stakeholders meeting, we also saw strong interest in broadband improvements from outside the city limits, particularly the Northeast Iowa Regional Airport east of Charles City. Airport representatives told the group that their only current option for connectivity is slow and unreliable fixed wireless service, and that has hampered efforts to develop airport property for business development. Attendance was light at the Chamber Lunch and Learn on August 30, 2016. There was general agreement among the group that reliable broadband service has become vital to the operation of any business, small or large. Redundancy-the ability to have two providers so that internet access is virtually guaranteed-was also stressed since even a brief outage can shut down a business entirely in today’s connected world. The group seemed generally favorable to the concept of a community fiber broadband network.
Fiber Town Hall Meeting About 20 residents and city officials attended a Fiber Town Hall meeting held on August 30, 2016. Attendees seemed very interested in the topic, engaged in good questions with the panel of presenters, and expressed overall support for the concept of a community fiber broadband network. The meeting
Page |8
was videotaped by the Charles City Public Access Network and made available afterwards on YouTube. As of January 17, 2017, the video had been 65 times.
Measurement: Community Broadband Survey Although anecdotal information was gathered from one-on-one and group conversations, the most tangible method of measuring the community’s mindset was through the Community Broadband Survey. A total of 557 people answered all or part of the survey. A survey response was counted as partial if one or more questioned were skipped. In addition to asking a series of questions, the survey also provided several opportunities for respondents to provide comments. A complete summary of the survey is listed in Exbibit E. Exhibit F provides a summary of written comments by general topic.
Sample Size and Margin of Error Survey responses were limited to one per IP address to reduce the possibility of motivated persons responding multiple times. If we assume that each survey response represented a single household, the total response rate was 14.8% of households (557 responses ÷ 3,761 households, 2010 Census). Response rates exceeding ten to twelve percent are generally considered very good. The margin of error of the survey responses is +3.83%.5
Summary of Survey Findings Broadband Costs Survey respondents were asked to report their total cost for all terrestrial-based telecommunications services (excluding cellular phone). A total of 422 usable responses were available; the average of these responses was $138.73. If that figure were applied to each of Charles City’s estimated 3,761 households, that would mean that approximately $6.3 million annually is being spent on pay TV, internet, and landline telephone today. The most common combination of services was the traditional “triple play”, some combination of pay TV, internet, and landline telephone service. This was reported by 33.7% of respondents. Table 1: Triple Pay Reported Bills 179 respondents, 131 provided total cost data All Triple Play Customers TV Mediacom DIRECTV Dish Network Mediacom 5
Internet Mediacom CenturyLink CenturyLink CenturyLink
Count Ave. Bill 131 $ 164.47 By Combination Phone Count Ave. Bill Mediacom 85 $159.34 CenturyLink 20 $175.65 CenturyLink 11 $180.82 CenturyLink 5 $154.60
MOE calculated using the American Research Group, Inc. online calculator. http://americanresearchgroup.com/moe.html
Page |9
Low $41.00 $85.00 $87.00 $121.00
High $270.00 $212.00 $300.00 $180.00
Other combinations
10
$172.71
$83.00
$300.00
The next most common combination of services reported was some combination of pay TV services and internet at 31.3% Table 2: Internet & Pay TV Reported Bills 166 respondents, 147 provided cost data
All TV + Internet Customers
Count 147
Ave. Bill $160.81
TV Internet Mediacom Mediacom DIRECTV CenturyLink Dish Network CenturyLink DIRECTV Mediacom Mediacom CenturyLink Dish Network Mediacom DIRECTV Unggoy Dish Network Unggoy Other combinations
Count 82 19 12 10 5 3 3 3 10
Ave. Bill $145.26 $191.11 $177.92 $158.30 $173.00 $158.67 $143.33 $177.33 $207.50
Low $250.00 $90.00 $130.00 $100.00 $110.00 $130.00 $120.00 $130.00 $130.00
High $56.00 $450.00 $250.00 $210.00 $235.00 $200.00 $160.00 $202.00 $300.00
Internet-only respondents totaled 18.1% of the surveys. This would represent what many have called the “cord-cutters” or “cord-nevers”. This small but growing share of consumers utilize cell phones for voice communications and obtain their entertainment via free and paid internet-based methods such as Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime Video, and others. Because off-air TV reception is possible in Charles City with a decent antenna, these consumers can also view broadcast TV stations. Table 3: Internet Only Reported Bills 96 respondents, 71 provided cost data Internet-Only
Count 71
Ave. Bill $71.59
Internet Mediacom CenturyLink Unggoy Wireless Others
Count 47 24 3 5
Ave. Bill $47.74 $65.58 $118.33 $94.99
Low $30.00 $30.00 $30.00 $39.95
High $180.00 $150.00 $270.00 $220.00
The other combinations of services (from largest to smallest were):
Internet + Phone: 8.3%. These may be cord-cutters who have decided to keep a phone line for convenience or because their provider has incentivized them to do so. Pay TV + Phone: 3.6% Pay TV Only: 2.6%
P a g e | 10
No Services: 1.5% Landline Telephone Only: 0.9%
Internet 91.4% of survey respondents reported subscribing to internet service.
Mediacom was the most popular choice as internet provider at 60.4% while CenturyLink’s share was 30%. Overall, 28.8% were somewhat or very satisfied with their internet service provider. The trait that had the highest levels of dissatisfaction were price (65.4% very or somewhat dissatisfied) followed by reliability (45.6% very or somewhat dissatisfied) and responsiveness (33.0% very or somewhat dissatisfied). The majority of respondents said they have 5 or more devices in their home connected to the internet. Email (96.3%) and web surfing (95.6%) were reported as the most common uses of the internet, with video streaming in third place with 67.5%. 16.5% reported that they are streaming 4K video, which takes much more bandwidth than traditional SD or HD video. An explosion of 4K steaming content is expected to place big demands on providers’ networks in the years to come, especially as more consumers upgrade to 4K capable TV’s.
Pay TV 71.2% of survey respondents reported subscribing to pay TV service.
Mediacom is the majority pay TV provider at 62.6%, followed by DIRECTV at 22.9% and Dish Network at 13.1%. 32.5% were somewhat or very satisfied with their pay TV provider. As with internet service, price was cited as a negative (75.1% somewhat or very dissatisfied), followed by reliability (33.7%) and customer service experience (27.4%). The pay TV provider with the highest level of overall customer satisfaction was DIRECTV. 44.7% of survey participants with DIRECTV said they were very or somewhat satisfied with the service. That compares to 40.9% for Dish Network and 26.1% for Mediacom. In keeping with nationwide trends, many respondents expressed that that are paying for a lot of content they don’t watch and would like to be able to get a “skinny bundle” of channels for a lower price. Meeting this consumer demand is the primary challenge of every pay TV provider as programmers continue to require bundling of lesser desired channels with their contracts. The largest source of written comments about pay TV service were in regards to the lack of KWWL-TV on the lineup. Since Charles City is assigned to the “I would like ‘local’ network channels from Iowa. Rochester, MN Designated Waterloo, Cedar Rapids news does me more good Market Area (DMA) and KWWL than Rochester and Austin, MN.” – Comment on is in the Waterloo-Cedar Rapids Community Broadband Survey DMA, satellite TV providers are not allowed to carry it. Mediacom did carry KWWL until the fall of 2015 when it was dropped.
P a g e | 11
TV features such as whole-home DVR, video-on-demand, and TV Everywhere were, as expected, important to many pay TV subscribers. Nearly 60% of respondents said that local programming such as high school sports, school concerts, and other community events were also important to them.
Landline Telephone 46.5% of survey respondents reported subscribing to landline telephone service.
Landline telephone penetration is consistent with nationwide trends showing most consumers moving away from landline telephone service in favor of cellular. Mediacom was reported as the landline provider by 49.1% of respondents with CenturyLink at 45.5%. Several comments were made about telephone service being unavailable when the internet is down, a symptom of the Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) technology that Mediacom employs.
Demographics We asked respondents to provide several demographic characteristics, namely age, gender, and household income. For the most part, the demographic responses were consistent with U.S. Census data for 2010 except where noted below. As a result, statistical weighting was not used during our analysis. Age and Gender. When controlling for adult (20+) population age, the responses on the survey were consistent with US Census data for gender of respondents but respondents did tend to skew a bit older than Census data. Household Income. Household income information was not available from the 2010 Census, so figures from the 2010-2014 American Community Survey (ACS) were used instead. Respondents to the survey generally reported higher household income than the ACS data, however responses to key questions did not differ significantly among income groups. Education. We asked respondents to report their highest level of education received. Results show that survey respondents were much better educated than what was reported by the ACS. While the ACS revealed that 17.6% of Charles City residents have at least a Bachelors year degree, 37% of the community broadband surveys reported such degrees. Again, our analysis of the survey results didn’t find any significant impact of this education level bias on overall responses.
Broadband Future The survey asked several questions designed to measure perceptions on the importance of fast, affordable, reliable, and universally-available broadband in Charles City. Large majorities of respondents (68% or better) agreed that broadband is very important for quality of life, education, economic development and jobs, and health care. Respondents said the most important characteristic of a broadband provider is excellent customer service, with 91.0% ranking that aspect as very important. 88.9% said that utilizing the best available technology is very important, followed by involvement in the community (55.3%) and local ownership and control (45.7%). The most important question in the community broadband survey was this:
P a g e | 12
“If a community fiber broadband network were built in Charles City that offered superior service for a reasonable price, how likely would you be to switch from your current provider(s)?” The answers represent the bottom line of this project, providing the City of Charles City with a measurement of support for future steps and providing guidance for whether a community fiber broadband network in Charles City is likely to be successful if built. The results are very encouraging.
Overall, 82.9% of survey respondents said they are somewhat or very likely to switch to a community broadband provider if one is built. The result was the highest among the three communities that our team worked with in 2016 (Maquoketa and New Hampton being the other two). This likelihood to switch did not vary significantly between the various demographic groups, although older and less educated respondents did show Figure 3: Likelihood to Switch to Community Provider slightly lower support. If Charles City decides to take additional steps, including a feasibility and business plan, a vital element will be projections on what take rates are likely. The answer to this survey question shows that take rates in excess of minimums are likely to occur.
Conclusions The Community Broadband Engagement and Education Project provided support for the following conclusions. 1. There is a strong consensus among Charles City residents that having fast, affordable, reliable, and universally available broadband is important for the future of the community. They understand that excellent broadband is a key to employment opportunities, education, health care, and general quality of life. 2. Charles City residents are not satisfied with the choices they have now for broadband services, especially the lack of competition among internet providers. 3. A community fiber broadband network, operated as a city utility, would address the shortfalls identified during the project. a. Fiber optics would guarantee that Charles City has the access to and control of technology needed for world-class internet speeds as well as pay TV and telephone service. b. Reliability would be higher since fiber networks have fewer points of failure than copper networks and cables are not subject to disruption from other radio frequencies and water.
P a g e | 13
4.
5.
6.
7.
c. Because of fiber’s technological superiority over copper networks, internet speeds of a Gigabit or higher would be available to every home and business from the very beginning. And there is a clear upgrade path for higher speeds as the community needs them. d. Capacity on the network will be sufficient to meet community needs for decades to come without replacing the infrastructure itself. e. Because CenturyLink’s network is not capable of broadband-level (25 Mbps+) internet services, there is effectively no competition in the market for this vital service. A community fiber network would provide that competition. f. And because a community network is not driven by a need to generate profits (and by providing true competition to existing providers), prices for these vital services should be lower than they would otherwise be. A community fiber broadband network would provide long-term benefits to the City of Charles City, enabling the kinds of “Smart City” applications that will be needed and desired in the future. A feasibility study will likely demonstrate significant local economic benefits to construction a community fiber broadband network. a. Communities with fiber-to-the-home networks see an increase in home values of 3.1%.6 b. A community fiber network provides competition, which lowers costs to consumers. Money saved stays in the community to be used for other economic activity. c. Fiber networks raise a communities Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by an estimated 1.1%, which means higher profits for small businesses. 7 d. Over a period of ten years, the total economic benefit to Charles City, including the community’s equity in the fiber network, will likely range between $12.9 and $24.9 million. 8 There is a strong probability that a detailed feasibility study will demonstrate that a community fiber broadband network can provide excellent broadband services (internet, pay TV, and telephone) at a competitive price. a. Take rates among residents are likely to be sufficiently high to create sufficient cash flow cover operational costs and debt obligations. b. The potential for shared service infrastructure with other providers, including other municipal providers, can reduce the cost of the network significantly and bring access to advanced services that might otherwise be cost prohibitive. Based on the competitive landscape and likely cost to construct a network, it is highly likely that a feasibility study will provide meaningful metrics that will support construction of a community fiber broadband network.
6
FTTH Council. http://www.ftthcouncil.org/blog/study-shows-home-values-up-3.1-with-access-to-fiber FTTH Council. http://www.ftthcouncil.org/p/bl/et/blogid=3&blogaid=305 8 See Exhibit G: Ten-Year Economic Benefits 7
P a g e | 14
Recommendations The overall goal of the Community Broadband Engagement and Education Project was to determine whether there is sufficient community interest in municipal broadband project to justify investing in a detailed feasibility study. It is our opinion that interest in a community fiber project is strong enough to justify this additional investment. Therefore, we recommend that City of Charles City issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) to qualified firms to conduct a detailed feasibility study that includes a preliminary design, cost estimate, and business plan. Charles City may require assistance creating and issuing this RFP. To avoid the potential for a conflict of interest, this assistance should come from a firm or individual who would not be a prospective bidder on the RFP. Curtis Dean with SmartSource Consulting will provide this assistance to the City of Charles City at no additional charge if is interested in engaging for these services. One factor that the City will need to consider if it moves forward is the fact that it does not have existing administrative infrastructure in place for an electric utility that can be an advantage to start-up municipal broadband utilities. Having an existing electric utility provides a new telecommunications utility with experienced utility customer service staff, overhead/underground repair equipment, and the ability to use the telecom network to lower electric system operating costs. It also places some limitations on financing as many Iowa communities have leveraged their electric utility for revenue bonds to achieve lower rates. Some mixture of telecommunications revenue bonds and general obligation bonds is the likely financing course for Charles City, each of which have some advantages and disadvantages over electric revenue bonds. Those financial impacts should be fully explored in the feasibility study.
Exhibits Exhibit A-Iowa Municipal Telecommunications Referenda Exhibit B-Iowa Municipal Broadband Map Exhibit C-Incumbent Provider Published Rates and Competitive Analysis Exhibit D-Charles City Incumbents vs. Iowa Municipal Fiber Providers Exhibit E-Complete Survey Results Exhibit F-Summary of Survey Comments by Topic Exhibit G- Ten-Year Economic Benefits Exhibit H: Project Team
P a g e | 15
Exhibit A: Iowa Municipal Telecommunications Referenda City Vedic City Laurens Hull Hawarden Pocahontas Muscatine Milford Grundy Center Decorah Sanborn Spencer Akron Sibley Primghar Danbury Lenox Alta Vinton Coon Rapids Hartley Manning Paullina Tipton Waverly Osage Bancroft Orange City Hamburg Lake View New Hampton Webster City Rock Rapids Carroll Traer Reinbeck Woodbine Wahpeton Ackley Arnolds Park New London Sac City Algona Onawa Mapleton Harlan Cedar Falls Hampton Parkersburg Mason City Storm Lake Lansing Orleans Hudson Okoboji
Population (2010 Census) 200 1,476 1,960 2,478 1,970 22,697 462 2,596 8,127 1,353 11,317 1,489 2,796 891 384 1,401 1,865 5,257 1,305 1,733 1,490 1,124 3,155 8,968 3,451 808 5,582 1,240 1,278 3,692 8,176 2,573 12,288 1,594 1,751 1,564 462 1,756 1,162 1,937 2,368 5,741 3,091 1,416 5,282 36,145 4,218 1,877 28,177 10,076 1,012 581 2,117 820
Year 2002 1997 1994 1994 1999 1997 1999 1996 2015 1997 1997 1994 1994 1997 1997 2005 1997 2015 1996 1997 1996 1998 1997 2000 1999 1994 1997 2005 1997 1999 1998 1994 1998 1998 2000 1998 2003 2005 2003 1996 1997 1997 2002 1998 1995 1994 2005 2005 2005 1998 2005 2003 2005 2003
Yes % 100 99 97 96 95 94 94 93 93 92 91 91 91 90 90 89 88 88 87 86 86 86 86 86 85 85 84 84 84 84 84 83 83 81 81 80 79 77 77 77 77 74 74 72 71 70 70 70 69 67 66 66 65 65
Exhibit A: Iowa Municipal Telecommunications Referenda Westfield Dubuque Mount Pleasant Emmetsburg Anamosa Charles City Asbury Spirit Lake Iowa Falls Maquoketa Indianola Independence West Union Waukon Denison Waterloo Lake Park Sidney Vinton Dunlap Windsor Heights Greenfield Carlisle Cresco Manchester Altoona Norwalk Nevada Marion Glenwood Hiawatha
189 57,504 8,770 3,958 5,494 7,812 2,450 4,493 5,193 6,112 14,156 6,014 2,549 4,131 7,339 68,747 1,023 1,300 5,102 1,139 4,636 2,129 3,497 3,905 5,257 10,345 6,884 6,658 26,294 5,358 6,480
1997 2005 1997 1998 2005 2005 2005 2003 2005 2005 1997 1997 2005 2005 1997 2005 2003 2005 2005 2005 2005 1997 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005
65 64 64 63 62 62 61 61 60 60 58 57 57 56 54 53 47 47 47 44 44 42 36 36 33 28 28 25 23 16 11
Communities in BOLD have built community broadband networks
Referendum in 2015 was approved
Hawarden
Mapleton
Harlan
Alta
Primghar
TCA
Hartley
Paullina
Sanborn
Manning
Lenox
Pocahontas
Laurens
Spencer
Fostoria
Coon Rapids
Algona
Indianola (partial)
Webster City
Grundy Center
Osage
Traer
Reinbeck
Cedar Falls
Rowley
Independence
Waverly (under construction)
Fruitland
Muscatine
Bellevue
Exhibit B: Iowa Municipal Broadband Map
Internet, Pay TV, & Telephone
Services Key
Internet & Pay TV
Pay TV Only
Internet Only
Plant Technology Key
Hybrid Fiber-Coax (HFC)
Fiber-To-The-Premise
Fiber backbone only
Wireless
Shared services
Exhibit C: Incumbent Provider Published Rates and Competitive Analysis
Incumbent Providers Charles City is served by two terrestrial telecommunications providers, CenturyLink and Mediacom, as well as by several wireless and satellite service providers. In this section, we will address the services provided by the companies that have the highest market shares.
CenturyLink CenturyLink is the incumbent local exchange carrier (ILEC). It operates a hybrid fiber-twisted pair copper network. It uses this network to provide telephone service and internet access via DSL. While CenturyLink does not offer a video service of its own, it allows customers to bundle DirecTV with its phone and internet services. Determining what service packages are available from CenturyLink is a challenge. Due to the nature of the DSL technology it uses, different addresses have different maximum speeds available. Essentially, the closer a premise is to the CenturyLink central office, the faster DSL speeds are available. CenturyLink customer service representatives could not or would not provide a general statement of what the highest speeds available were in Charles City. So we used the CenturyLink online chat function and asked a customer service representative to provide us with speeds and pricing at several different addresses in Charles City at different distances from the central office. The results were not encouraging for Charles City consumers. The highest available DSL speeds, available only within a few blocks of the CenturyLink central office on Ferguson Street, was 20 Mbps download and 1.7 Mbps upload. That does not meet the FCC’s minimum definition of broadband service. We checked availability at 2 other addresses spread geographically around Charles City. Each address had a different service availability; 1 for each of the speed tiers listed in Table 1.
Table 1: CenturyLink Residential DSL Packages and Prices Download Speed
Upload Speed
Price
Contract Term
Equipment Charges
20 Mbps
2 Mbps
$39.95
12-month contract
DSL Modem with Wireless
$69.00
No contract
$29.95
6-month contract
$59.00
No contract
$29.95
6-month contract
$49.00
No contract
$49.99
No contract
12 Mbps
7 Mbps
1.7 Mbps
896 Kbps
Purchase: $99.99 Lease: $9.99 per mo.
The internet speeds offered by CenturyLink in Charles City are inadequate for 21st century needs. Even the 20 Mbps service level is substandard and it is presently available in a limited geographical area of 1
Exhibit C: Incumbent Provider Published Rates and Competitive Analysis Charles City. Since we know that CenturyLink has been offering DSL speeds of 40 Mbps in some communities for several years, we can assume that no significant upgrades have been made in Charles City for some time. And gigabit speeds that CenturyLink has rolled out in portions of some metro areas are not likely to be deployed in Charles City any time soon. Voice services are consistent across the entire community, and charges below were obtained from the CenturyLink tariff1. Table 2: CenturyLink Residential Telephone Services Package
Price
Other Details
Basic Phone
$21.22 No features, no long distance
Home Phone Plus
$35.00 Includes up to ten calling features; long distance billed at $0.05 per minute
Home Phone Unlimited
$49.00 Includes up to ten calling features; unlimited long distance
Mediacom Mediacom is the incumbent pay TV company in Charles City. It operates a hybrid fiber-coaxial (HFC) network to provide a multi-channel digital television service, internet access, and telephone service. Internet access and telephone service is delivered via cable modems. At the end of 2016, Mediacom announced that it had upgraded its entire network in 22 states to the new DOCSIS 3.1 standard, giving it the capability of providing gigabit speeds. Pricing and exact availability of these gigabit speeds has not been announced. It is important to keep in mind that, although enabling gigabit speeds, the Mediacom network still relies on a copper coaxial cable to make the final connection to the end user. By its nature it is still susceptible to maintenance issues such as RF interference and electronics failures that all-fiber networks are not. Mediacom’s internet packages range in price from $29.95 monthly to $99.99 monthly. These speeds and package prices are comparable to those offered by other large cable companies in America. Table 3: Mediacom Residential Internet Packages and Prices Package
1
Download Speed
Upload Speed
Monthly Data Allowance
Price
Launch
3 Mbps
512 Kbps
150 GB
$29.95
Prime
15 Mbps
1 Mbps
250 GB
$49.95
Prime Plus
50 Mbps
5 Mbps
350 GB
$59.95
http://www.centurylink.com/tariffs/ia_qc_loc_terms.pdf
2
Equipment/Other Charges
Cable Modem lease: $7.50/month Wireless Home Networking: $3.95/month
Exhibit C: Incumbent Provider Published Rates and Competitive Analysis Ultra
100 Mbps
10 Mbps
999 GB
$79.95
Ultra Plus
150 Mbps
20 Mbps
2000 GB
$99.99
WiFi Extender: $2.95/month Internet Surcharge (for customers only subscribing to internet): $15.00/month
Because their terrestrial-based competitor CenturyLink does not offer internet speeds of greater than 20 Mbps, Mediacom has an effective monopoly of broadband internet (using the FCC’s minimum of 25 Mbps as a guidepost). This lack of competition is anti-consumer because it not only limits choices but means that Mediacom doesn’t have any market forces to encourage it to improve services. So when it
Figure 1: Mediacom Pay TV Pricing
3
Exhibit C: Incumbent Provider Published Rates and Competitive Analysis comes to new internet services, including the gigabit speeds it is touting nationwide, it seems likely that other communities that do have competitive choices are likely to receive these upgrades before Charles City. Mediacom’s cable television services (Figure 1) are also comparable to offerings by other large pay TV providers in the U.S. Like many other companies, Mediacom moved away from analog video several years ago, digitizing its entire lineup to free up additional bandwidth on their HFC network for increased internet speeds. In addition to linear channels, Mediacom also offers services such as whole-home DVR, pay-per-view, and video-on-demand that have become standard offerings for providers. Local TV stations are always a primary attraction for pay TV customers, and Mediacom carries channels from the Cedar Rapids/Waterloo Designated Market Area (DMA). Mediacom also offers land-line telephone service over its network. It does not offer a pay-as-you go plan with local service and long distance. It’s voice plans all include unlimited calling in the U.S. states and territories as well as Canada, along with numerous calling features. The published unbundled rate is $49.95 per month. Like other providers, Mediacom offers deep pricing discounts for customers that bundle their services. In many cases, customers must sign a service agreement or contract to obtain these discounted rates. Frequent “new customer only” promotions can further lower these rates for some period of time.
DIRECTV DIRECTV is a national provider of pay TV services. DIRECTV was purchased by AT&T in a deal that made AT&T the largest pay TV provider in the United States and the world.2 Since the purchase was finalized, AT&T has begun integrating DIRECTV into its product lineup by bundling it with cellular service. It has also launched a new streaming service, DIRECTV Now, that will allow customers with broadband to receive many of DIRECTV’s services without the need for a satellite dish. Although final packages and pricing details have not been released, industry reports say a lineup in excess of 100 channels for around $35.00 per month is expected.3 There have also been industry rumors that AT&T may move completely away from a satellite delivery platform in the future to make its service entirely over-the-top (OTT). There have been no confirmation of this possible new strategy by AT&T officials. DIRECTV offers a sizeable package of channels in its pay TV lineup, along with an exhaustive list of premium services such as DVR, pay-per-view, and video-on-demand. The prices shown above are for a new customer’s first year of service. However a 24-month contract is
Figure 2: DIRECTV Packages and Pricing
required for new customers, and prices increase significantly for the second year of the agreement.
2 3
http://about.att.com/story/att_completes_acquisition_of_directv.html http://www.businessinsider.com/directv-now-35-per-month-with-100-channels-2016-10
4
Exhibit C: Incumbent Provider Published Rates and Competitive Analysis
Table 4: DIRECTV Year 1 vs. Year 2 Prices DIRECTV Package
Select
Entertainment
Choice
Extra
Ultimate Premiere
Year 1 price
$50.00
$55.00
$60.00
$70.00
$75.00
$125.00
Year 2 price
$98.00
$98.00
$110.00 $118.00
$128.00
$181.00
Many customers are unaware of the looming “sticker shock” they will experience when signing up for service. Although the “regular prices” are listed on the DIRECTV website, it takes some diligent research to find. Another marketing tool that DIRECTV uses to attract customers is NFL Sunday Ticket, a package of out-of-market National Football League games that is exclusive to DIRECTV. Since football fans have only one option to receive this product, they are attracted to DIRECTV, especially since the first season after signing up is general included. In addition to the sticker shock shown above, these fans are faced with paying the regular full-season price (starting at $269.94 for the 2016 season) the next year, a premium that can create some level of buyer’s remorse among many customers. DIRECTV does not offer internet or landline telephone service over its satellite platform. However, they do have bundling agreements with a number of terrestrial provider, including Mediacom and CenturyLink, that can lower monthly rates by $10.00 monthly for one year.4
Dish Network Dish Network is a national provider of satellite pay TV services. It has fewer customers than DIRECTV but is still the third-largest pay TV provider in the U.S., trailing only Comcast and DIRECTV. Like it’s satellite and terrestrial competitors, Dish Network offers advanced features such as pay-perview, video-on-demand, and whole-home DVR service. They also provide local TV channels but, like DIRECTV, are limited to only providing those TV stations from the home DMA of Davenport/Rock Island/Moline. Dish Network’s primary competitive advantage versus Mediacom or DIRECTV is generally lower prices for comparable levels of service. Another competitive advantage is the fact that Dish Network’s prices are “locked in” for the entire two-years of a standard agreement.
Figure 3: Dish Network Packages and Pricing 4
http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/content/packages/internet
5
Exhibit C: Incumbent Provider Published Rates and Competitive Analysis Dish Network’s recently released “Flex Pack” is the company’s response to consumer demands for a socalled “skinny bundle”. It allows customers to start with a smaller group of popular national channels for $39.99 a month, then add different packs of channels to suit their needs. Individual packs cost $4-10 per month. The Flex Pack includes a single standard receiver, so additional costs apply for customers who want DVR service or multi-room viewing. Dish Network has some competitive disadvantages versus pay TV competitors. They have a general reputation of having inferior customer service compared to DIRECTV, and of course they also share the lack of NFL Sunday Ticket with Mediacom and all other pay TV providers.
Important Note About Broadcast TV Stations One of the challenges that pay TV providers face with Charles City is geography. Broadcast TV station territories are divided into Designated Market Areas (DMA’s) by the Nielsen Company, the same folks that measure television ratings.
Figure 14: Iowa DMA Map
As the map shows, Floyd County has been assigned to the Rochester, MN DMA. For satellite TV providers such as DIRECTV and Dish Network, they are prohibited from carrying any broadcast TV
6
Exhibit C: Incumbent Provider Published Rates and Competitive Analysis stations from outside their DMA. That means those customers cannot receive ANY local TV from the Waterloo/Cedar Rapids market or others in Iowa. Cable TV providers face a slightly different challenge. Although the rules are complex, terrestrial pay TV providers generally are allowed to carry stations from outside their DMA if they meet certain criteria and if they are willing to pay the retransmission consent fees that the TV station demands. For example, Mediacom does carry one Cedar Rapids station (KCRG-TV), but decided to drop another (KWWL-TV) from their lineup in August 2015.5 The community broadband survey generated a lot of comments about this TV station specifically as residents indicated they would like KWWL on their lineup. A community pay TV service offered by Charles City would want to explore whether or not it is feasible to carry KWWL or other Waterloo-Cedar Rapids DMA channels as a way of meeting this consumer demand.
5
http://kchanews.com/2015/08/25/mediacom-to-drop-kwwl-from-channel-lineup/
7
Exhibit D: Charles City Incumbents vs. Iowa Municipal Fiber Broadband Providers
Internet Only Charles City survey = 18.1% Mediacom Download/ Upload Price* Package Launch 3 Mbps/512 kbps $ Prime 15 Mbps/1 Mbps $ Prime Plus 50 Mbps/5 Mbps $ Ulta 100 Mbps/10 Mbps $ Ultra Plus 150 Mbps/20 Mbps $ * Includes package price, $7.50 modem rental, and $15 internet surcharge
Package
CenturyLink Download/ Upload Price* 20 Mbps/2 Mbps $ 12 Mbps/1.7 Mbps $ 7 Mbps/1 Mbps $
Cedar Falls Utilities Download/ Upload Price* Package FiberBasic 3 Mbps/1 Mbps $ FIberHome 100 Mbps/50 Mbps $ FiberHome Plus 250 Mbps/125 Mbps $ FiberHome Quantum Gigabit 1000 Mbps/500 Mbps $ *Includes $12 charge for non-TV customers
Package Standard Expanded Gigabit
Waverly Utilities Download/ Upload Price 50 Mbps/50 Mbps $ 100 Mbps/100 Mbps $ 1000 Mbps/1000 Mbps $
52.45 72.45 82.45 102.45 122.49
Per MB $ $ $ $ $
17.48 4.83 1.65 1.02 0.82
Per MB 69.00 $ 11.50 59.00 $ 9.83 49.00 $ 8.17
41.95 57.50 76.50 147.00
Per MB $ $ $ $
13.98 0.58 0.31 0.15
Per MB 59.95 $ 1.20 77.95 $ 0.78 149.95 $ 0.15
Pay TV Only Package Local Plus Family TV Prime TV
Charles City Survey = 2.6% Mediacom Channels 33 99 112
Price 37.77 83.14 99.15
Per Channel $ 1.14 $ 0.84 $ 0.89
Price 88.00 98.00 111.00 118.00 128.00
Per Channel $ 0.61 $ 0.65 $ 0.63 $ 0.54 $ 0.53
DIRECTV Package Select Entertainment Choice Xtra Ultimate
Channels 145 150 175 220 240
$ $ $ $ $
1
Exhibit D: Charles City Incumbents vs. Iowa Municipal Fiber Broadband Providers
Package Flex Pack America's Top 120+ America's Top 200 America's Top 250
Package Basic Basic Plus Basic Plus,Sports Choice, & Family Choice
Dish Network Channels 50 $ 190 $ 240 $ 290 $
Price 39.99 54.99 64.99 74.99
Cedar Falls Utilities Channels 33 $ 87 $
Price Per Channel 25.00 $ 0.76 68.00 $ 0.78
128
$
Waverly Utilities Channels 29 $ 88 $ 111 $
Package Basic Expanded Basic Expanded Basic, More Sports, & Choice TV
Per Channel $ 0.80 $ 0.29 $ 0.27 $ 0.26
80.00 $
0.63
Price Per Channel 21.95 $ 0.76 77.90 $ 0.89 93.40 $ 0.84
Pay TV + Internet Pay TV Package Local Plus
$
Family TV
$
Prime TV
$
Pay TV Package Basic
$
Charles City Survey = 31.3% Mediacom Price Internet Tier 37.77 Launch (3x512k) Prime (15x1) Prime Plus (50x5) Ultra (100x10) Ultra Plus (150x20) 83.14 Launch (3x512k) Prime (15x1) Prime Plus (50x5) Ultra (100x10) Ultra Plus (150x20) 99.15 Launch (3x512k) Prime (15x1) Prime Plus (50x5) Ultra (100x10) Ultra Plus (150x20) Cedar Falls Utilities Price Internet Tier 25.00 FiberBasic (3x1) FiberHome (100x50)
2
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
Price 37.45 57.45 67.45 87.45 107.49 37.45 57.45 67.45 87.45 107.49 37.45 57.45 67.45 87.45 107.49
$ $
Price Total 29.95 $ 54.95 45.50 $ 70.50
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
Total 75.22 95.22 105.22 125.22 145.26 119.59 139.59 149.59 169.59 189.63 136.60 156.60 166.60 186.60 206.64
Exhibit D: Charles City Incumbents vs. Iowa Municipal Fiber Broadband Providers FiberHome Plus (250x125) $ FiberHome Quantum Gig (1000x500) $
Basic Plus
$
Basic Plus,Sports Choice, & Family Choice
$
Pay TV Package Basic
$
Expanded Basic (Bundled) ($10 off) Expanded Basic, More Sports, & Choice TV ($10 off)
$
68.00 FiberBasic (3x1) FiberHome (100x50) FiberHome Plus (250x125) FiberHome Quantum Gig (1000x500) 80.00 FiberBasic (3x1)
64.50 $ 89.50 135.00 $ 160.00
$ $ $
29.95 $ 97.95 45.50 $ 113.50 64.50 $ 132.50
$ $
135.00 $ 203.00 29.95 $ 109.95
FiberHome (100x50) $ FiberHome Plus (250x125) $ FiberHome Quantum Gig $ (1000x500)
45.50 $ 125.50 64.50 $ 144.50 135.00 $ 215.00
Waverly Utilities Price Internet Tier 21.95 Standard (50x50) Expanded (100x100) Gigabit (1000x1000) Standard (50x50) Expanded (100x100) Gigabit (1000x1000) 93.40 Standard (50x50) Expanded (100x100) Gigabit (1000x1000)
Price Total $ 59.95 $ 81.90 $ 77.95 $ 99.90 $ 149.95 $ 171.90 $ 59.95 $ 127.82 $ 77.95 $ 145.85 $ 149.95 $ 217.85 $ $ $
59.95 $ 143.35 77.95 $ 161.35 149.95 $ 233.35
Pay TV + Internet + Phone ("Triple Play) Charles City Survey = 33.7% Mediacom Xstream Silver: includes Family TV, TiVo service (single TV), WiFi, Phone service With Prime Plus internet 50 Mbps x 5 Mbps $ 177.48 With Ultra Internet 100 Mbps x 10 Mbps $ 187.48 Ultra Plus Internet 150 Mbps x 20 Mbps $ 197.48 (Prices above includes required cable modem rental)
Xstream Gold: includes Family TV, whole-home TiVo, 1 Digital Pack, Starz/Encore, Showtime, WiFi, and Phone With Prime Plus internet 50 Mbps x 5 Mbps $ 202.48 With Ultra Internet 100 Mbps x 10 Mbps $ 212.48 Ultra Plus Internet 150 Mbps x 20 Mbps $ 222.48 (Prices above include required cable modem rental and 1 extra TiVo converter)
3
Exhibit D: Charles City Incumbents vs. Iowa Municipal Fiber Broadband Providers Xstream Platinum: includes Family TV, whole-home TiVo, 3 Digital Paks, Starz/Encore, Showtime, HBO, Cinemax, WiFi, and Phone With Prime Plus internet 50 Mbps x 5 Mbps $ 222.78 With Ultra Internet 100 Mbps x 10 Mbps $ 232.78 Ultra Plus Internet 150 Mbps x 20 Mbps $ 242.78 (Prices above include required cable modem rental and 1 extra TiVo converter) Cedar Falls Utilities Xstream Silver Comparator: include Basic Plus TV, Digital Access Fee ($4.5), HD DVR ($12.50), Total Talk Phone ($33.95) FIberHome 100 Mbps/50 Mbps $ 158.95 FiberHome Plus 250 Mbps/125 Mbps $ 183.45 FiberHome Quantum Gigabit 1000 Mbps/500 Mbps $ 253.95 Xstream Gold Comparator: include Basic Plus TV, Digital Access Fee ($4.5), HD DVR ($12.50), Multi-Room Fee ($5), 1 HD Receiver ($7.5), 1 Digital Pak ($7), Starz/Encore ($11), WiFi ($8) and Total Talk Phone ($33.95) FIberHome 100 Mbps/50 Mbps $ 197.45 FiberHome Plus 250 Mbps/125 Mbps $ 221.95 FiberHome Quantum Gigabit 1000 Mbps/500 Mbps $ 292.45 Xstream Platinum Comparator: include Basic Plus TV, Digital Access Fee ($4.5), HD DVR ($12.50), Mulit-Room Fee ($5), 1 HD Receiver ($7.5), 3 Digital Paks ($17),Premiere Combo (Starz/Encore, HBO/Cinemax, Showtime/TMC @ $48), WiFi ($8) and Total Talk Phone ($33.95) FIberHome 100 Mbps/50 Mbps 244.45 FiberHome Plus 250 Mbps/125 Mbps 268.95 FiberHome Quantum Gigabit 1000 Mbps/500 Mbps 339.45 Waverly Utilities Xstream Silver Comparator: include Triple Play Bundle (Expanded Basic, Unlimited Voice), Network DVR Standard 50 Mbps/50 Mbps $ 165.70 Expanded 100 Mbps/100 Mbps $ 170.80 Gigabit 1000 Mbps/1000 Mbps $ 242.80 Xstream Gold Comparator: includes Triple Play Bundle, Network DVR ($10.95), 1 add'l HD Receiver ($4.95), 1 Standard 50 Mbps/50 Mbps $ 190.85 Expanded 100 Mbps/100 Mbps $ 208.85 Gigabit 1000 Mbps/1000 Mbps $ 280.85 Xstream Platinum Comparator: includes Triple Play Bundle, Network DVR ($10.95), 1 add'l HD Receiver ($4.95), Standard 50 Mbps/50 Mbps $ 254.20 Expanded 100 Mbps/100 Mbps $ 272.20 Gigabit 1000 Mbps/1000 Mbps $ 344.20
4
Exhibit E-Complete Charles City Survey Results
Response Counts Co mp letio n Rate:
86.2% Co m plete
480
Partial
77 T o tal: 557
1. What broadband services do you currently subscribe to at home? (Answer is required)
1
Value
Percent
Responses
18.1%
96
Televisio n o nly (cable TV o r satellite)
2.6%
14
Landline telepho ne o nly
0.9%
5
31.3%
166
Internet and landline telepho ne
8.3%
44
Televisio n and landline telepho ne
3.6%
19
33.7%
179
1.5%
8
Internet o nly
Internet and televisio n
All three services (internet, televisio n, and landline telepho ne) I do n't have any o f these services at this tim e
T o tal: 531
2. Who is your Internet service provider? Value
Percent
Responses
Mediaco m (cable m o dem )
60.4%
274
CenturyLink (DSL)
30.0%
136
Unggo y (wireless)
2.9%
13
Rise Bro adband (wireless)
1.1%
5
Cellular data plan
1.3%
6
Satellite (Excede, etc.)
1.8%
8
Other - Write In
2.6%
12 T o tal: 454
2
Ot her - Writ e In
Count
Dish Netwo rk
2
Earthlink
2
Verizo n
2
DISH
1
Om nitel
1
Us Cellular with Vo ice
1
Verizo n
1
o m nitel
1
o m nitell
1
To tal
12
3. Please rate your overall level of satisfaction with your current Internet service provider (ISP). Value
Percent
Responses
Very dissatisfied
13.0%
58
So m ewhat dissatisfied
25.4%
113
It's OK
32.8%
146
So m ewhat satisfied
19.8%
88
9.0%
40
Very satisfied
T o tal: 445
3
4. Please rate your satisfaction with your ISP on each of the following characteristics. Very dissat isfied
S omewhat dissat isfied
It 's OK
S omewhat sat isfied
Very sat isfied
Speed
60 13.5%
80 18.0%
141 31.7%
112 25.2%
52 11.7%
Size o f data cap
50 11.5%
66 15.1%
161 36.9%
72 16.5%
87 20.0%
Reliability (frequency o f service interruptio ns)
78 17.5%
125 28.1%
111 24.9%
80 18.0%
51 11.5%
Respo nsiveness (repair tim es)
48 11.0%
96 22.0%
170 38.9%
75 17.2%
48 11.0%
Custo m er service experience
51 11.5%
94 21.3%
160 36.2%
83 18.8%
54 12.2%
Price
148 33.3%
145 32.7%
91 20.5%
35 7.9%
25 5.6%
5. How many devices in your home are connected to the Internet? T his would include desktop and laptop computers, tablets, smartphones, e-readers, digital photo frames, smart thermostats, and other smart home devices or appliances.
4
Value
Percent
Responses
1
4.3%
19
2
9.1%
40
3
13.2%
58
4
11.8%
52
5
12.5%
55
6
13.6%
60
7
10.2%
45
8
6.8%
30
9
3.2%
14
15.4%
68
10 o r m o re
T o tal: 441
6. How do you use Internet service in your home? (check all that apply)
5
Value
Percent
Responses
Em ail
96.3%
438
Web surfing
95.6%
435
Stream ing standard video (SD o r HD)
67.5%
307
Stream ing 4K video
16.5%
75
Gam ing
47.7%
217
Educatio n
47.9%
218
Sm art ho m e applicatio ns
20.0%
91
Clo ud sto rage o f files (Dro pbo x, iClo ud, etc.)
38.9%
177
Clo ud applicatio ns (Go o gle Apps, Office Online, etc.)
40.4%
184
5.1%
23
Other - Write In
6
Ot her - Writ e In
Count
Wo rk
2
Vo ice o ver Internet Pro to co l- Vo IP
1
Am azo n Echo
1
Bills
1
Business
1
Business Pro gram s
1
Do wnlo ad bo o ks o n Kindle
1
Ebay
1
Reading news, curio sity abo ut things, ho w to fix/do things, read abo ut whatever yo u want - like a library service
1
Security Cam eras
1
So cial Media
1
Stream ing m usic-wireless speakers
1
Tivo
1
Video co nferencing fo r wo rk
1
do wnlo ad ebo o ks/audio bo o ks
1
live video chat
1
m usic stream ing
1
o nline bill pay
1
so cial m edia
1
we bo th have stay at ho m e jo bs that require high speed internet to functio n
1
yes
1
To tal
22
7. What factors prevent you from subscribing to a higher speed level of service from your 7
ISP? (check all that apply) Value
Percent
Responses
I already have the highest speed available fro m m y ISP
29.7%
134
Higher speeds are to o expensive
60.8%
274
Upgrade pro cess is a hassle
15.3%
69
I do n't want to extend a co ntract o r service agreem ent
26.2%
118
6.7%
30
Other - Write In
Ot her - Writ e In
Count
50 is eno ugh
1
Can't get o ther faster o ptio ns
1
Co m pany is no t able to pro vide it.
1
Do nt Care
1
Higher Speed No t available
1
Higher speed services are unreliable and way to o expensive and charge fo r o verages.
1
I Do nt kno w what to upgrade to
1
I do n't need higher.
1
I do nt need higher speed
1
I find it hard to spend additio nal m o ney when I already spend a significant am o unt o n ho rribly spo tty service.
1
I have highest speed available to m y lo catio n
1
I have the speed that cam e with the packaged deal
1
It's as fast as gets right no w, and I have 1 m o re year o n m y co teact.
1
It's no t available
1
Its all i need
1
Lo catio n and building lim itatio ns
1
To tal
29
8
Ot her - Writ e In
Count
NO OTHER OPTIONS!
1
Need to kno w m o re abo ut what else is available.
1
No t Available
1
No t Interested
1
Ok the way it is no w
1
Satisfied with current service
1
Speed no t available because o f wireless receptio n pro blem s.
1
WE have lim ited service where we live.
1
Wo rried abo ut reliability.
1
co ntract lo ck at this tim e
1
eco no m ic availability
1
no t available near m e
1
o nly cho ice we have
1
To tal
29
8. Do you have any other comments, questions, or concerns about your current Internet service? Count
Response
5
No
1
frustrated abo ut tv service especially. Co st increases after yo ur "deal expires"
1
As a business it is extrem ely frustrating to have service do wn fo r any length o f tim e
1
Bad land line service cuts o ff
1
Been waiting m o nths well no w years fo r unngo y but they keep telling m e they do n't have the equipm ent.
9
Count
Response
1
Better to wers and receivers needed asap
1
Can't get internet in basem ent
1
Charles City Wo uld Benefit by this. Osage had go o d service when we lived there
1
Charles City really needs a better and less expensive o ptio n fo r cable tv. We do no t subscribe due to the price. Our internet is slo w and unreliable and to o m uch m o ney fo r what we get.
1
Co ncern fo r quality and speed with line o f sight service o vertim e as trees gro w
1
Co nnectio n has been very unstable fro m the beginning (> 1 year). We have had several technicians co m e o ut to the ho use and have had vario us pieces o f o ur system replaced. We have even had po rtio ns replaced o utside o n the cable feeds co m ing fro m the po le into the ho use. I do n't have an unlim ited am o unt o f tim e to sit at the ho use so that an unlim ited num ber o f techs can co m e o ut and po ke at the hardware ho ping to m agically fix the issue. It is especially frustrating when the internet co nnectio n never seem s to be stable fo r m o re than a few m inutes at a tim e.
1
Co nstant services interruptio ns, which is a pro blem fo r m e since I wo rk rem o tely fro m ho m e.
1
Co uld be better and less expensive
1
Currently Switched abo ut 3 m o nths ago . still happy at this po int
1
Custo m er service is terrible and the price quo ted is no n-existent, CenturyLink charges m any tim es fo ld than what we were quo ted.
1
DSL gets the bad ads. But when the pho ne is 99.99% reliable so is the internet service. MediaCo m gets a line cut and they are o ut fo r the day. This happens o ften.
1
Data caps are unacceptable.
1
Do no t believe in data caps
1
Every tim e m y co ntract is ending I have to call and ask fo r a pro m o tio al price in o rder to keep it. I have to nego tiate fo r internet, landline and direct tv and if I can't get a pro m o tio nal pric then I wo uld have to dro p them because I can't affo rd it if they do n't
1
Expensive !!!
1
Fo r true high speed internet, Mediaco m is the o nly o ptio n in this area. This allo ws them to basically do and charge what they want with no threat o f co m petitio n and it places custo m ers into an unfair po sitio n where we have no o ptio n to change service.
1
Ho pe that fiber o ptic co m es residential so o n
1
I can't get a faster co nnectio n. And I kno w kno w bill will be go ing up in the next year.
1
I had to dro p m y televisio n service with Mediaco m because the price kept go ing up yet the service went do wn (to o k away channels & never replaced with ano ther) Very Unsatisfied with them .
10
Count
Response
1
I have had m ediacim as well as century link. We switched to century link because m ediacim was VERY unreliable and o ur internet was do wn m o re than up. They also put a cap o n m o nthly usage. With century link ho wever, we are unlim ited and the service is reliable, but if m o re than o ne o r two peo ple are in at o nce (we are a ho useho ld o f 9 with 4 children at the m iddle/high scho o l) it will no t wo rk! This is a hassle as the fo ur o lder kids need internet fo r ho m ewo rk. It wo uld be nice to have ano ther o ptio n with faster speed and no lim it o n usage, but that is reliable.
1
I pay extra fo r high speed and do nt have it
1
I want to co ntinue with what i have
1
I wo uld like m o re co nsistant and faster but id no t want to pay m uch m o re
1
I wo uld like to be invo lved in this pro ject in so m e capacity.
Redacted for personal content 1
I wo uld like to have ano ther co m pany with as go o d as m ediaco m fo r internet service witho ut all the hassle
1
I wo uld lo ve to have m o re reliable internet service. We have interm ittent o utages that m ay last fo r a few seco nds but kick us o ut.
1
IT wo rks great
1
If there was so m ething else m o re reliable and less expensive I wo uld jum p o n that train so fast I wo uld get the TV to o .
1
Im pro ved with new m o dem this m o nth
1
In sectio n 4, the questio n asks ho w i feel abo ut m y current ISP. I answered that i was highly satisfied with the cap o ptio n o nly because i do n't have o ne. I also think that the questio n abo ut speed is slightly m isleading. I currently have a 7m bp co nnectio n. there is a 12m b co nnectio n o ffered fo r a substantial price increase and signing o f a new co ntract, neither i am interested in. The thing is, 12m bp isnt fast. In 2014, a study fo und that the US has an avg internet speed o f 20m ps. So no t o nly is the to wn belo w avg, we are belo w the avg fo r 2 years ago . We also pay m o re per gig than m o st o ther develo ped co untries. My current co ntract is 5 do llars per gig, wich is actually ridiculo us when co m pared to co untries like Iceland, Ro m ania and Ho ng Ko ng, all o f who se co sts are belo w a do llar a gig. I kno w i wro te a lo t, but let m e reiterate m y po int by saying the num ber o f o ptio ns fo r isps in the area and the speeds that they o ffer is abysm al, and we co uld definitely do better
1
Internet very slo w at all tim es and frequently o ff line when needed
1
It isn't the fastest service and it do es go do wn.
1
It quit wo rking
1
It seem s that o n certain parts o f to wn so m e carers wo rk better then o thers o r like with centurylink m y fam ily lives o n the o ppo site side a grand interested speed is do uple where I can o n get half that o n 8th Ave
1
It so m etim es resets rando m ly
11
Count
Response
1
It's just fine fo r the price, wo uldn't want to pay any m o re
1
It's no t reliable. Signal go es in and o ut wo rks o k so m etim es and do esn't wo rk at all o ther tim es.
1
Lack o f co m petitio n has resulted in co nsum ers being taken advantage o f sniffled inno vatio n. Mediaco m fails to deliver o n their pro m ise.
1
Lately Medico m has had pro blem s. So m e days we have internet service and so m e days we do n't ...... VERY FRUSTRATING! Also , we've had pro blem s with Medico m suppo rting o ur TV. Many tim es it will say "no signal fo und" and we lo se that TV statio n fo r ho urs!
1
Lim ited o ptio ns o utside o f city lim its.
1
Media Co m is a jo ke, co nstantly having issues with either no t getting clo se to the speed that I pay fo r, o r the co nnectio n go es o ut all to gether. Co ntact custo m er service and while they are usually friendly it seem s like the tim e it takes to get a tech o ut to lo o k into any issues yo u m ight be having takes 3-7 days.
1
Mediaco m has beco m e to big and expensive, service no t as go o d as it was earlery
1
Mediaco m has o utrageo us prices and data caps are co nsum er unfriendly to o ls that have been pro ven to do no thing to "alleviate co ngestio n" as they lo ve to say
1
Mediaco m is no t go o d! They are so inco nsistent, I have to replace the m o dem every m o nth bc it's jsut sto ps wo rking.
1
Mediaco m is rude, expensive, & unreliable.
1
Mediaco m is way o verpriced
1
My co llege had faster service 20 years ago .
1
My m ain co ncern with the current Internet is cho o sing a cable o ptio n to stay co nnected during bad weather and it still go es o ut. No Internet is no access to em ergency info rm atio n. This issue was extrem ely apparent during the recent flo o ding. The next m ain co ncern is lengthy co ntracts and way to o high o f co sts. I wo uld be very interested in a lo cal, reliable, affo rdable o ptio n.
1
My service with m ediaco m is go o d
1
My two basic issues are speed and price. I live alo ne so speed sho uld no t be an issue as I o nly use o ne, so m etim es two devices at a tim e. I wo uld lo ve to see a system like Cedar Falls utilities o ffers, where all services are available fo r a reaso nable price and are dependable and fast.
1
N/A
1
Need co st to stay the sam e it's up and do wn all o ver the place. Thanks
1
Need higher speed.
1
No disco unt fo r being a lo yal custo m er, but will give disco unts to new custo m ers. It do esn't pay to stay with o ne co m pany.
12
Count
Response
1
No .
1
No pe
1
No t generally able to stream currently.
1
No t pleased that "new" custo m ers get a great deal but o lder lo yal custo m ers do no t. The pricing po licy pro m o tes pro vider jum ping to m aintain affo rdable rates. They've even adm itted this. I do n't want to change pro viders every 2 years fo r a go o d price so I'm stuck paying m o re than the o ther custo m ers. This is no t a fair pricing po licy.
1
Peak usage tim es lag speeds. Data caps sho uld be a thing o f the past.
1
Please wo rk o n extending partnerships since i am o utside city lim its and wo uld lo ve the higher speed, thanks
1
Price Keeps go ing up
1
Price just keeps rising
1
Prices just seem to keep go ing up and up. They take advantage o f the tho usands o f custo m ers sim ply because THEY CAN. I am Leary o f any internet / cable pro vider and the DEAL they o ffer
1
Pro viders are m o no po lizing the area.
1
Service is Excellent
1
Service seem s to be disrupted at o dd tim es, co m ing and go ing at will. Speeds seem to vary rando m ly
1
So m etim es it is slo w to respo nd
1
So urces do no t info rm what speed is required fo r their service and ho w m uch viewing is po sible that reguires, sd,hd,4k,8k?
1
Stream ing TV is used m o st at o ur ho use. We have no t data cap. We do n't see buffering happing m uch. Open to new ideas but right no w we are happy.
1
The m o re alternatives the better.
1
The price to o has been pretty expensive and o n to p o f it we lo se service a lo t o r its slo w and laggy and o ur service then do esn't wo rk.....
1
There are tim es o f service interruptio ns fo r no apparent reaso n
1
They are m aking a m int o ff the co nservatism and lo yalty o f lo ngtim e, no t-so -savvy custo m ers who are averse to change
1
They need better Internet o nly packages
1
They seem to be having m o re issues related to high pings and and rando m dro ps.
13
Count
Response
1
They seem to be price go uging and sneaking in charges wherever they can.
1
This wo uld be great fo r Charles City
1
To Expensive and way to m uch advertising
1
Use Netflix to watch Tv.
1
Very expensive service and reliabliity suck!
1
Very unreliable, stuck in the co ntract with terrible internet
1
Way To o Expensive!
1
We cancelled o ur cable a year ago because the channel packages were o utrageo us o nce yo u passed yo ur 'pro m o tio nal' tim efram e and m edia co m do esn't o ffer tho se deals fo r current custo m ers. We no w stream o ur tv thro ugh a Ro ku and have recently purchased an antenna fo r the lo cal channels we're able to get. (KIMT & PBS)
1
We have had interm ittent o utages fo r 6 m o nths, including bo th internet and TV. I think it has finally been fixed, but they were very slo w to reply.
1
We have tried switching to Unggo y but they are unable to get a signal to m y ho use
1
We have very lim ited service and wo uld like to get an unlim ited plan. Very frustrating. We have been waiting fo r Ungo y to get equipm ent to do ano ther o ptio n fo r 3 m o nths.
1
We need fast, and I m ean greater than 20Mb service in this city fo r everyo ne, ho m e and business!
1
We need o ptio ns o f different pro viders to keep prices co m petitive
1
We need so m ething better. No w is the tim e to start.
1
We need so m ething m o re reliable that wo n't dro p fo r days at a tim e.
1
We pay fo r 7 m pbs and the service pro vider tells us with everything turned o ff we are reading 5 m pbs and they say that is go o d. Why are we paying fo r 7 if we are o nly getting 5 at the very best?
1
We use A LOT o f internet (run a sm all business) & need it to be FAST! We switched to m ediaco m years ago & have had pretty decent service, but the price is high! And when they (m ediaco m ) put caps o n the data usage, well, we just co ntinually went o ver the "am o unt" that we co uld affo rd. So after a few m o nths o f o verage, We uped o ur data plan with them & have no t go ne o ver, but no w we get "kicked o ff" a lo t during the ho urs o f 7pm to 10pm ? !? ! This is when we are all ho m e & wo rking and NEED to be o nline And m y so n has tro uble gam ing & do ing ho m ewo rk. We went to the terabyte o f data plan, which is suppo sed to be supre fast speed, but I do n't think it is! And we get disco nnected A LOT no w! It is expensive to o ! We can no t get any "o ffers" fo r pricing, as we are NOT new custo m ers & can no t affo rd to be o ffline fo r 3 m o nths (that is what Mediaco m requires yo u to do to qualify fo r any deals that they o ffer) And we do n't have the m o ney to just purchase UNGGOy upfro nt - And cent
1
We use o urs fo r everything: pho nes, m o vies, co m puters, Netflix..we have a 999 gb high speed package that fits o ur ho useho ld. The price is 85 a m o nth, but we get alo t o f do wnlo ad and stream ing capacity that suits us, as well as o ur 2 teenagers.
14
Count
Response
1
We wo uld use m o re services if it was available at a better price
1
When will this be ready
1
Wish I had ano ther pro vider to cho o se fro m that carries the speed I need
1
Wo uld be great just to have m o re o ptio ns and so m ething better
1
Wo uld lo be to be able to pay less m o ney a m o nth fo r internet witho ut sacrificing speed
1
Wo uld really like o ptio ns fo r m o re speed, specifically fiber fo r bo th m y ho m e and m y business... custo m er service is extrem ely frustrating with Mediaco m , lo cally they can do very little o ut o f the o ffice, everything has to go thro ugh an 800#. When yo ur internet is do wn and o ur lives are so intertwined with co nnectivity, I do n't find it acceptable that they will get to yo u in a week.
1
Yes-They have o ffered higher speeds to m ake sales o nly tho se higher speeds are no t available in charles city
1
co m petitio n wo uld lead to lo wer prices and m o re cho ices
1
everything co st to m uch
1
i wo uld like to kno w what are o ur o ther o ptio ns then paying aro und $140.00 a m o nth fo r 90% o f the channels we do nt even watch. thank u
1
it is to o expensive to allo w m e to also have cable tv
1
no
1
no ne
1
to o m uch m o ney
1
we pay to o m uch fo r what we get.
1
wish we had so m ething better
1
yhey need to wo rk o n custo m er servce It no t o kay to wait 2 weeks fo r a tech
1
yo u spelled Unggo y inco rrectly
9. Who is your current television service provider? 15
Value
Percent
Responses
Mediaco m
62.6%
219
DirecTV
22.9%
80
Dish Netwo rk
13.1%
46
1.4%
5
Other - Write In
T o tal: 350
Ot her - Writ e In
Count
Am azo n prim e tv, Hulu, Netflix
1
DSL antenna
1
ISP
1
Stream Netflix, Sling TV
1
antena o nly
1
To tal
5
10. What is your overall level of satisfaction with your television service provider? Value
Percent
Responses
9.4%
32
So m ewhat dissatisfied
21.7%
74
It's OK
36.4%
124
So m ewhat satisfied
24.9%
85
7.6%
26
Very dissatisfied
Very satisfied
T o tal: 341
16
11. What is your level of satisfaction with your television service provider based on the following characteristics? Very dissat isfied
S omewhat dissat isfied
It 's OK
S omewhat sat isfied
Very sat isfied
Reliability (frequency o f service interruptio ns o r signal pro blem s)
29 8.5%
86 25.2%
113 33.1%
76 22.3%
37 10.9%
Respo nsiveness (ho w quickly service pro blem s are fixed)
22 6.5%
65 19.2%
132 39.1%
78 23.1%
41 12.1%
Custo m er service experience
30 8.8%
63 18.6%
135 39.8%
61 18.0%
50 14.7%
Price
133 39.3%
121 35.8%
44 13.0%
23 6.8%
17 5.0%
12. Which of the following statements describe your opinions about your current television service? (check all that apply) Value
Percent
Responses
The lineup has a lo t o f channels I never watch
76.5%
263
I wish I co uld get a "skinny bundle" with a lim ited selectio n o f go o d channels at a lo wer price
66.3%
228
So m e channels I want are o nly available o n a m o re expensive tier
64.0%
220
I am happy with the channel selectio n I have to day
8.7%
30
Other - Write In
6.4%
22
17
Ot her - Writ e In
Count
Charge us o ver $200 a m o nth despite being custo m ers fo r o ver 20 years.
1
Co m pany m akes it so und like yo u're getting m o re channels, but lo ts o f the channels are do ubled. One regular and o ne in HD.
1
Dish do es no t have so m e o f the channels I like. Exam ple the CW
1
Do esn't have channels I want
1
Do n't like when spo rting events are "blacked o ut" in o ur area
1
Go o d o ther than few statio ns I can't get
1
I Want Cedar Rapids and Waterlo o Channels
1
I do n't watch spo rts ever
1
I want a.m enu perso nalized to m y preferences.
1
I wo uld like to get channel 7 KWWL
1
Lo cal Do es No t include Waterlo o
1
Miss Channel 7
1
NO KWWL
1
Need KWWL
1
There are channels I want that are no t available
1
There is no cw
1
Want lo cal Io wa Channels 7 and 9!!
1
We do no t get KWWL with o ur subscriptio n, and we wo uld really like that statio n back.
1
i want to cho o se m y channels
1
m ediaco m charges way to m uch fo r internet and cable is o ver $ 100
1
n/a
1
tv go es o ut whenever this is bad weather
1
To tal
22
18
13. In addition to traditional television service, what other features are important to you? (check all that apply) Value
Percent
Responses
Who le-ho m e DVR
56.3%
174
Video -On-Dem and
46.0%
142
TV Everywhere
40.8%
126
Prem ium channels (HBO, Sho wtim e, etc.)
35.0%
108
Lo cal pro gram m ing (high scho o l spo rts, scho o l co ncerts, o ther co m m unity events)
59.9%
185
7.8%
24
Other - Write In
19
Ot her - Writ e In
Count
wo uld like to get channels 7 & 9
1
Cable TV is to expensive it's cheaper to have Hulu, Netflix, and Am azo n Prim e Tv
1
Co llege Fo o tball, Basketball, Vo lleyball, ISU
1
Green Bay Packers CH. 7!
1
I wo uld like to receive KWWL.
1
I wo uld lo ve to have DVR but do n't because o f the extra co st
1
KWWL
1
KWWL TV
1
Kwwl o ut o f Waterlo o , be able to select channels yo u want - like Ala cart
1
Lo cal News, wo uld like to have waterlo o statio n to o
1
Lo cal Weather
1
Lo cal news, Weather
1
NFL Netwo rk
1
PBS, TCM , Hallm ark
1
Spo rts
1
Spo rts - Big 10
1
Spo rts channels
1
Traditio nal TV OK
1
Waterlo o statio ns, Io wa statio ns. I do n't live o r visit Minneso ta, do n't watch their tv statio ns
1
lo cal statio ns within a 100 m ile radius
1
no ne had to cancle co uldn't affo rd it
1
single ro o m -dvr
1
wi-fi
1
To tal
23
20
14. Do you have any other comments, questions, or concerns about your television service? Count
Response
4
No
1
Abo ut ready to go to ro o fto p antenna! Tired o f bait and switch deals!
1
Again, I have to call when m y co ntract is ending and nego tiate a pro m o tio nal price in o rder to affo rd keeping it
1
Again, m y m ain co ncern is wanting to have access to em ergency info rm atio n during weather situatio ns and having the Internet go o ut. When the Internet is o ut, there is no access to cable televisio n. We are also stuck in a large package to bundle with Internet when all we want are lo cal news and internet at an affo rdable price.
1
Again, zero true co m petitio n so they charge anything they want and it's unfair to custo m ers.
1
Better packages with lo wer prices. Let peo ple m ake their o wn packages (channels o nly they want) with decent pricing
1
Bring back Waterlo o Channel
1
Buffering o n certain channels
1
Cant get co llege o r pro fessio nal fo o tball gam es all the tim e
1
Changed to Mediaco m fro m Direct tv fo r pricing
1
Channel 4 wo uld be nice!
1
Co ncern after 6 m o nths ho w m uch it will co st. Never kno w until the tim e co m es.
1
Direct TV it's all paid pro gram m aby like 10 channels we watch and if I go to a lo wer package I do n't get the 10 channels I like.
1
Dislike ho w they are taking lo cal statio ns o ff the line up
1
Dissapo inted when kwwl was dro pped
1
Do no t like i have to watch MN news. o nly have KIMT fo r IA and m o st o f it is MN no t IA
1
Duplicate and triplicate channels, way to o m uch m o ney fo r what is o ffered
1
Freezes up and so m etim es channels have lo st signal
1
I Do nt watch spo rts so hat the extra charge fo r the spo rts channels
1
I do no t wish to stray fro m Dish
1
I hate having to do lo ng co ntracts.
21
Count
Response
1
I hate the channel num bers-i.e. 80.5 etc
1
I have been prgeluded fro m having kwwl witho ut representatio n
1
I o nly keep m y service because o f lo cal pro gram m ing, o therwise I'd investigate stream ing.
1
I rem em ber when cable tv was "new" and the sales pitch was "no advertising", no w it's seem s as if 1/4 o f an ho ur sho w is advertising. Cable tv is expensive. We sho uld no t have to be subjected to so m any ads.
1
I want channel 7 KWWL back
1
I wo uld like "lo cal" netwo rk channels fro m Io wa. Waterlo o , Cedar Rapids news do es m e m o re go o d than Ro chester and Austin Minneso ta..
1
I wo uld like to be able to custo m ize m y o wn channel selectio ns.
1
I wo uld like to be able to get kwwl fro m waterlo o
1
I wo uld like to see the ability to cho se what channels yo u pay fo r. Only receive the channels yo u want.
1
I wo uld lo ve to see Charles City be o ur pro vider fo r bo th Internet and Cable TV pro vided yo u can do it at a reaso nable co st and go o d line up o f channels.
1
If it weren't fo r Sunday Ticket, I wo uld no t have Directv. The o nly reaso n I have it is because I can watch m y fo o tball team no w. When m y free service ends this seaso n, I wo uld rather change.
1
If the City had the service, I wo uld sign up fo r the pho ne, internet and televisio n.
1
It is frustrating to get the channels that yo u want fo r the co st. We also have pro blem s with pixals a lo t as well. Audio and video at tim es are no t to gether either
1
It wo rks great!!
1
It's a m o no po ly in this to wn.
1
It's wo rks great all thro ugh m y ho use
1
Its to Expensive!
1
Its very reliable
1
Let's get it do ne
1
Likely switching fro m dish to Ro ku when co ntract is up later this year. Better pricing fo r the channels we actually watch
1
Mo no po lizing the area.
1
Need EWTN, Channel 7, Lo cal
1
No
22
Count
Response
1
No t Happy with m edico m channels wo uld like ano ther pro vider
1
Our current service pro vider do esn't have channels 7 & 9 fo r news available, we o nly get Minneso ta statio ns and channel 3. That is a disadvantage to the service. In additio n, we pay a lo t per m o nth fo r the Direct tv service.
1
Satisfied with m ediaco m
1
The TV service is po o r as well. The screens pixelate quite o ften, the guide lo cks up every tim e yo u access it and there is an audible hitch in the so und that happens m o re so in the HD channels.
1
The m o re 'ala carte' o ptio ns the better - lo ve the idea o f a m o re tailo red skinny bundle - with a REASONABLE price tag
1
The o nly reaso n I am with Mediaco m is because with a package, m y internet is m uch less expensive
1
The service go es o ut befo re bad weather even gets here
1
They lo cked us into a 2 yr co ntract with hidden charges!
1
To Expensive
1
To m any interruptio ns during heavy rain o r sno w
1
Vert expensive fo r o ur basic and expanded cable package
1
Way To o Expensive!
1
We Do nt receive KWWl and wo uld like to
1
We have dish which when it sto rm s the TV go es o ut..... The co st o f cable and internet is so expensive.... If yo u co uld pick the channels yo u actuality watch and no t pay fo r channels yo u never watch...
1
We need a better o ptio n Mediaco m are co n artists! They charge as m uch as they want.
1
We pay to m uch
1
Why can't their be a cable co m pany where yo u pay fo r basic channels and then are able to buy certain channels yo u actually do like to watch fo r so m uch extra per Channel
1
Why to m uch m o ney fo r what we get
1
Wish we had the o ptio n o n cho o sing which statio ns we want m aking the service custo m izable.
1
Wo uld like o ther lo cal channels witho ut having to use antem m a
1
no
1
pretty satisfied with dish o ther than the price there is channels o n dish that yo u wo uld have to pay extra fo r o n direct
23
Count
Response
1
sick o f payo ng fo r stuff i do nt watch
1
we have to reset o ur ro uter co nstantly. m ediaco m service stinks in that way.
1
when we first go t cable they said there wo uld be no co m ercials we co unted 26 in o ne break
1
why pay fo r 50 channels and o nly watch 6 and no channel 7 fo r news
15. Who is your landline telephone service provider? Value
Percent
Responses
CenturyLink
45.5%
101
Mediaco m
49.1%
109
5.4%
12
Other - Write In
T o tal: 222
Ot her - Writ e In
Count
US Cellular
3
Dish Netwo rk
2
CenturyLink
1
Dish
1
Dish netwo rk
1
Om nitel
1
Talk Am erica
1
US Cellular
1
Verizo n
1
To tal
12
24
16. What is your overall level of satisfaction with your landline telephone service provider? Value
Percent
Responses
6.9%
15
So m ewhat dissatisfied
16.1%
35
It's OK
37.3%
81
So m ewhat satisfied
18.4%
40
Very satisfied
21.2%
46
Very dissatisfied
T o tal: 217
17. What is your level of satisfaction with your landline telephone service provider based on the following characteristics? Very dissat isfied
S omewhat dissat isfied
It 's OK
S omewhat sat isfied
Very sat isfied
Vo ice quality
9 4.3%
19 9.0%
95 45.0%
29 13.7%
59 28.0%
Reliability (frequency o f service interruptio ns)
18 8.5%
26 12.3%
69 32.5%
42 19.8%
57 26.9%
Call co m pletio n (dro pped calls, inco m pleted calls, etc.)
11 5.3%
19 9.1%
77 36.8%
34 16.3%
68 32.5%
Respo nsiveness (ho w quickly service pro blem s are fixed)
10 4.8%
36 17.1%
81 38.6%
38 18.1%
45 21.4%
Custo m er service experience
15 7.4%
40 19.7%
76 37.4%
33 16.3%
39 19.2%
25
18. Do you have any other comments, questions, or concerns about your landline telephone service? Count
Response
1 1
Again, I have to nego tiate a pro m o tio nal price at the end o f every co ntract to keep the lo wer price. I do n't like that I can't affo rd to get caller ID.
1
Blairs a lo ud screech no ise that the perso n o n the o ther end hears
1
Century Link is beginning to o ver bill each m o nth
1
Do no t like the fact that m y "landline" is no w a VOIP pho ne, vo ice quality and co nnectio ns are no t as reliable as a regular wired landline. Service is o ut when cable and internet is disrupted o r when the po wer is o ff unlike a regular landline.
1
Do esn't wo rk even with m ultiple visits.
1
Do n't really want o ur landline but it m ake o ur bundle package cheaper. We do n't use it.
1
Do n't use it; go t it o nly because bundle co st less than Internet and cable witho ut pho ne. Get a lo t o f fund raising calls that we igno re.
1
Even at a do llar a day its to m uch m o ney to pay
1
Go es do wn during sto rm s...no t sure why.
1
Had to purchase to get bundle price
1
Have hearing pro blem need m o re vo lum e.
1
Have service but do nt use landline
1
I do n't have a landline.
1
I get lo ts o f calls that there is no respo nse to when I answer
1
I have never used m y landline with Mediaco m . I wo uld no t have it, but needed to bundle it to get lo wer internet prices.
1
I have no t had this service lo ng eno ugh to kno w ho w reliable it is. Had tro uble already in the first two weeks!
1
I like what i have
1
I will likely be dro pping the landline since I rarely use it.
1
I wish we co uld add caller ID, but no t the o ther o ptio ns
1
If I dro p m y landline, there is no t m uch difference in price because they raise the internet price.
26
Count
Response
1
If service to TV and Internet go do wn, I have no em ergency pho ne service
1
If yo ur o n the pho ne yo u never learn o f a inco m ing call
1
Incredible am o unt o f hacking no t related to the electio n.
1
It was included Free with m y internet and tv service. So wo uld no t want to pay fo r a landline ever
1
Just switched fro m m ediaco m to Centurylink and there are m o re scratchy no ises with CenturyLink.
1
Land lines are being extinct.
1
Lo ng distance is extra
1
No it wo rks fine
1
No t using just fo r bundled price
1
Only have lo cal calls...no lo ng distace o n m y landline
1
Paying $50 a m o nth is to high
1
Telepho ne Service Price Is OK.
1
Terrible custo m er service! Never get the sam e perso n twice when dealing wtih custo m er service call centers!
1
The o nly reaso n I pay fo r it is because it is $28 cheaper to add the pho ne and no t ho o k it up as to o nly have Internet and cable.
1
There seem s to be a system ic issue with o ur bundle. Alm o st every pho ne call dro ps during the call. We canno t hear who ever is o n the o ther end o f the line, but m any tim es thay can hear us talking. This happens so regularly that when it do es, o ur fam ily just expects us to state "We can't hear yo u - if yo u can hear us, we'll hang up and call yo u right back". I shudder to think what wo uld happen if this o ccurred during an em ergency like a fire o r a m edical issue...
1
They gave us a num ber dro m so m eo ne who has a lo t o f debt and legal tro ubles so weree co nstantly getting calls fo r them . Asked to change o ur num ber and they m ake us jum p theo ugh m any ho o ps
1
We did NOT want this service when we recently upgraded the internet speed, but they wo uld no t take o ff o r give credit o n the package....bunch o f crap. So we have it and it do es no thing but anno y us with rando m sales calls at all ho urs o f the day and night. Crap.
1
crackling o ld pho ne lines and slo w repairs
1
i had to get it with the 89.99 bundle o r i wo uld have to pay do uble. we do nt even have a ho use pho ne
1
no
1
no ne
27
Count
Response
1
price!
1
taxes,fees, surcharges - Federal Universal Ser Fund 17.4% Why Me? ? ? ?
19. What is the total monthly cost (rounded to the nearest dollar) of the broadband services (internet, television, and landline telephone) that you receive at home? If you have more than one provider, please add those monthly bills together.
No tic e: Enable a chart o r sum m ary table to see yo ur data.
20. In your opinion, how important is fast, affordable, reliable, and universally-available broadband to Charles City in relation to the following community attributes? Not import ant
S omewhat import ant
Very import ant
Quality o f life
21 4.5%
109 23.3%
337 72.2%
Educatio n
22 4.7%
67 14.3%
379 81.0%
Eco no m ic develo pm ent and jo bs
20 4.3%
79 17.0%
366 78.7%
Health care
29 6.3%
119 25.6%
316 68.1%
21. When considering a company for broadband services (internet, television, and telephone), how important are the following characteristics of that company? 28
Not import ant
S omewhat import ant
Very import ant
Lo cal o wnership and co ntro l
48 10.3%
204 44.0%
212 45.7%
Excellent custo m er service
5 1.1%
37 8.0%
423 91.0%
Invo lvem ent in the co m m unity
35 7.5%
173 37.2%
257 55.3%
Uses the best available techno lo gy
6 1.3%
45 9.8%
409 88.9%
22. If a community fiber broadband network were built in Charles City that offered superior service for a reasonable price, how likely would you be to switch from your current provider(s)? Value
Percent
Responses
Very unlikely
4.4%
20
So m ewhat unlikely
2.6%
12
No t sure
10.0%
46
So m ewhat likely
15.7%
72
Very likely
67.2%
308 T o tal: 458
23. Additional comments, questions, or concerns Count
Response
2
N/A
29
Count
Response
2
No
1
"fiber" do esn't m ean better. I had fiber befo re I m o ved and the video pixelated when I had m o re than 3 tv's o n and the hsd speed was slo wer. The o nly upside was the uplo ad speed.
1
As o f no w i can't affo rd the internet with m ediaco m . I have to use Public Library access
1
Been Waiting fo r so m ething different with a better price
1
Can't wait fo r the o ppo rtunity to suppo rt a lo cal pro vider.
1
Depends o n quality and price
1
Do no t want a co ntract to get a better price. I leave fo r 4-6 Mo nths in winter. Do no t want to be bo und to pay when no t in CC
1
Do nt like having a 2 year co ntract to get lo w prices then switches to higher price. Then have to call and redo co ntract to get lo wer prices and bundle package
1
Do nt want m o re City Go vernm ent Run Services
1
End big co m pany m o no po lizing the area please.
1
Get it so o n
1
Getting the highest speed and reducing m y m o nthly bill is m y highest co ncern
1
Happy with what I have, wo uldn't change just because there was a new pro vider
1
Have been wanting to ditch m ediaco m fo r years.
1
Having so m eo ne fo r repairs no t speaking in a fo reign accent
1
Ho pe this happens
1
Ho pefully it co vers the co untry
1
Hurry up and do this!
1
I already have to nego tiate with pro viders to keep pro m o tio nal prices and to be able to affo rd to even have internet and cable. I plan to retire in a year o r so and m y inco m e will dro p. It wo uld have to be cheaper than what I am no w paying o r I wo uldn't change.
1
I am definitely in the m arket fo r a better pro vider!!
1
I am under ano ther year co ntract with Mediaco m which increases to o ver $100 m o nthly fee next year. I wo uld be interested to see if a bro adband service fro m CC wo uld do sam e thing to Cust. Thro w them in a co ntract if so no t interested
30
Count
Response
1
I do n't think that Mediaco m is staffed by a bunch o f bad peo ple. I have m et so m e that are trying to help, but I think that the em plo yees are o perating within the co nfines o f what Medico m allo ws. I just do n't think that Mediaco m , as a co m pany, really cares. They are happy to take yo ur m o ney and pro vide po o r service. Overall, po o r service is no co incidence since Mediaco m usually falls at the bo tto m o f the business rankings acco rding to Co nsum er Repo rts - http://www.co nsum errepo rts.o rg/teleco m services/cable-tv-subscribers-still-unhappy-co nsum er-repo rts-new-survey-sho ws/ And I quo te fro m Co nsum er Repo rts: "And yet, so m e co m panies sto o d o ut fo r being especially disappo inting. The list includes Mediaco m ..."
1
I had bo th cable and Internet with Mediaco m . The bill ran clo se to $100 a m o nth. Even tho ugh I am em plo yed by the largest co m pany in Flo yd co unty, I co uld no lo nger affo rd this. Because the service was bundled, Internet still co st a lo t. I currently use m y data plan o n m y cell pho ne to use the internet.
1
I suppo rt this effo rt. Ho w so o n?
1
I think co m m unities need o ptio ns instead o f o ne o r two cho ices.
1
I think it's a great idea. I kno w a lo t o f ppl wo uld switch to it
1
I want the City services but yo u will go against the co m petitio n and they will attack yo u. Be prepared. We tried to do the sam e in Spirit lake, IA.
1
I wish to have co ntro l o f what services I purchase. I will no t purchase packages that include services already free such as televisio n. I also prefer to pick and cho o se services I believe to be the best cho ices fo r m y needs.
1
I wo rked in Waterlo o fo r 25 years and can't get the lo cal TV statio n channel 7. We called the co m pany but to no avail the Mediaco m e wo uld no t listen to us.
1
I wo uld have to co m pare what I have with what is o ffered to see if there wo uld be any value in switching.
1
I wo uld highly suggest do ing this.
1
I wo uld like to add that with Direct TV we receive o nly o ne Io wa based news channel (KIMT). I wo uld ho pe that if we do get a co m m unity o wned/based bro adband netwo rk, that we are able to have access to KWWL, KCRG, and o ther Io wa based channels.
1
I wo uld like to be invo lved in this pro ject in so m e capacity. I po ssess the skills to co nsult o n this pro ject. I've wo rked in enterprise level IT fo r 10 years
Redacted for personal content 1
I wo uld switch if able to get the sam e sevices I have no w.
1
I'd switch the first m o nth if the price was reaso nable and there were no data caps im po sed.
1
If charles city had their o wn bro adband service I wo uld subscribe as lo ng as it was co m petitive with m ediaco m . And as lo ng as m y price wasn't adjusted up to be able to o ffer it to lo wer inco m e fam ilies fo r a lo wer price fo r sam e service.
31
Count
Response
1
If the prices were co m parable & the speed o f the internet were the sam e... then yep, we wo uld switch! But i want to have CHOICES! I do no t want a co m pany to co m e in & take o ver the to wn! I want to be able o t CHOOSE which internet pro vider we use, based o n price & quality! Also , we pay 99 a m o nth fo r STRICTLY internet! If there was so m ething with fast speed that was cheaper o r o ffered deals to current custo m ers - we wo uld switch! We use Dish Netwo rk fo r tv service & DO NOT have a landline pho ne.
1
If yo u build it peo ple will switch
1
If yo u can be co m petitive o n PRICE and still have better quality ~GET ER DONE ! ! !
1
It is so m ething we need in Charles City
1
It wo uld have to be a lo t cheaper befo re I wo uld I switch
1
Just do it please.
1
KWWL was the NBS statio n I received fo r years an it was rem o ved witho ut m y ability even to purchass and witho ut any input o r representatio n. Waterlo o is 45 m inutes fro m CC and in m y trade area
1
Let's Do It!
1
Let's get this ro lling. My o nly co ncern is I do n't want to be m o nito red o r anything fo r what I do wnlo ad o r stream
1
Lo cal o wnership & co m m unity invo lvem ent wo uld be the m o st im po rtant if and o nly if it were the best service & available techno lo gy.
1
Maintain reaso nable price and no co ntracts/service agreem ents
1
My biggest co ncerns wo uld be the co st, no t o nly ho w m uch the m o nthly bill wo uld be, but also will we have to buy the equipm ent like we do fo r unggo y (spelling? ) And seco ndly the reliability o f the co nnectio n.
Redacted for personal information
1
NA o n Bro adband /- MIsc 1. no t go o d the co ntinued Special treatm ent he receives is disgusting! All o r m o st o f the labo r fo rce / Mo ney spent is no t lo cal-m any co ntinued surprises to co m e. 2. Yo u cater to o ut o f to wners and sis o n lo cals like m e. 3. Sim ply Essentials o ut o f to wn labo r 4. all design develo pm ent o ut o f to wn service? ? ? ? ?
1
Need so m ething better
1
No ne
1
Obvio usly if the speed and price where in the right spo t, i wo uld switch in a seco nd. I co nsider m yself very tech kno wledgeable abo ut these things and reco gnize that the current infrastructure is no t a sustainable m o del fo r co ntinued updating and o ffering faster speeds. i believe that a new isp that was available is go o d fo r the m arket if the pro duct is a better quality fo r a better price. Co m petitio n in internet sales is always go o d fo r the co nsum er.
1
One cable co m pany installed fiber o ptic cable m any years ago . What go o d was it and at what co st?
1
Only if Go o d service and go o d price
32
Count
Response
1
Only if its cheaper depends o n price
1
Our daughter had it when she lived in Cedar Falls. It was excellent. One bill fo r everything and very satisfied with service. No reaso n the city sho uldn't capitalize o n this and sho uld be able to o ffer it m uch cheaper.
1
PLEASE include us who live o utside city lim its and are part o f the scho o l district! Scho o l children and parents o f scho o l children have to have internet fo r scho o l purpo ses fro m everything fro m registratio n, lunch pro gram , ho m ewo rk to co rrespo ndence. We are unable to get any internet but by satellite which wo n't wo rk half the tim e. Quest/McLeo d is no t servicing the land lines as to o co stly so we lo st ho m e pho ne and dial up internet as yo u need a stro ng dial to ne which pro vider wo n't fix.
1
PRICE! Ho w are yo u go ing to co ntro l the co st? So m e peo ple will use it m o re than o thers. Can it be priced acco rding to the am o unt o f usage?
1
Please do .
1
Price is a big co ncern o nly pay fo r what yo u want and use!
1
Price is o bvio usly a big issue.
1
Price wo uld be an issue fo r switching . See questio n 18
1
Privacy and Data Security wo uld be im po rtant co nsideratio ns
1
Pro bably wo uld keep century link fo r land line but internet and tv wo uld be co nsidered if reso nably priced and dependable. Also i do no t appreciate 3-4 increases in bill in o ne year it wo uld be go o d if bill stayed the sam e fo r m o re than a few m o nths
1
Pro viding custo m ers true cho ices when it co m es to pro viders is very im po rtant, plus actually having co m petitio n helps to keep pro viders fair.
1
Sign us up!
1
Speed is a m ust. Mediaco m o ffers very fast speeds fo r their highest tier, but the data caps and the insane pricing need to go
1
They wo uld have to o ffer the sam e speed and GB fo r a co m petitive price.
1
This wo uld be an extrem ely po sitive additio n to o ur co m m unity, alo ng with wo rking to ward public WiFi fo r tho se in the do wnto wn district and visito rs to o ur city. The first co nversio n rate will be sm all because fo lks will have to wait until the end o f their co ntract to switch witho ut having to pay o utrages buyo ut fees. Yo u will see m o re and m o re peo ple take advantage o f this o ppo rtunity o nce it is pro ven to be reliable and affo rdable.
1
We belo nged to a lo cal telepho ne co -o p that o ffered pho ne service and cable TV in ano ther to wn. We were pleased with the service and did no t m ind the sm all initial investm ent. We still ho ld o ur "shares" in that co -o p these m any years later.
1
We did a survey like this a few years ago that was appro ved fo r city o wnership but no thing happened
1
We dro pped o ur lo ng distance service and o nly have lo cal calling - still to o expensive.
33
Count
Response
1
We live 10 m iles o ut in the co untry and have very lim ited o ptio ns fo r o ur internet services which is frustrating fo r o ur entire ho useho ld. Please m ake sure to m ake it available to yo ur rural citizen's to o .
1
We need ano ther cho ice here in Charles City, and reaso nable priced
1
We need to regain so m e co ntro l o f o ur internet o ptio ns and no t have o nly o ne sem i dependable cho ice
1
When calling custo m er service it wo uld be ice to talk to a real perso n instead o f a reco rding that tells yo u ho w to tro uble sho o t yo ur pro blem .
1
When has go vernm ent do ne so m ething better than private enterprise? Mail delivery? Health care? Retirem ent? Ho w abo ut sho wing us that yo u can synchro nize the stupid sto plights o n Main St. befo re yo u decide to take o n so m ething that is 100 tim es m o re technical?
1
When is this go ing to be co m plete?
1
When? No t so o n eno ugh!
1
Where are we go ing to get better service fo r co m petitive co st? That is real value! When CC fist go t cable there were and still are lo cal co m m unity services that are no t being dellieverd. Nam ely no t go vernm ent use o f co m m unity televisio n. Many co m m unities have lo cal co m m unity o rganizatio n o f peo ple. Why no t do so m e fo cus gro ups and then do wnto wn dem o viewing?
1
Will take any o ppo rtunity to leave m ediaco m .
1
With 181 Go o gle reviews, Mediaco m has a 1.4 o ut o f 6 star rating That, alo ne, speaks vo lum es to what their custo m ers think o f their services and suppo rt.
1
Wo ld be great just to have m o re o ptio ns and so m ething better
1
Wo uld TV be o ffered? Free lo cal channels are im po rtant.
1
Wo uld like ano ther o ptio n to cho o se fro m besides Mediaco m (o ther ISPs do NOT m atch Mediaco m 's speeds)
1
Wo uld the service extend o utside o f the city lim its like Om nitel o r CFU?
1
actually just waiting fo r this to happen. Currently with Mediaco m , but have no t signed a co ntract fo r this purpo se.
1
i do nt kno w. i wo uld like to try it fo r a m o nth with the understanding if we do nt like it u will pay to get m y m ediaco m back
1
need m o re info rm atio n
1
no
1
to tally suppo rting change
34
24. Gender Value
Percent
Responses
Male
49.2%
226
Fem ale
50.8%
233 T o tal: 459
25. Age Value
Percent
Responses
17 o r yo unger
0.4%
2
18-20
0.4%
2
21-29
8.8%
41
30-39
17.8%
83
40-49
18.2%
85
50-59
21.4%
100
60-64
10.1%
47
65 o r o lder
22.9%
107 T o tal: 467
26. What is your annual household income? 35
Value
Percent
Responses
Less than $20,000
7.3%
34
$20,000-$34,999
17.6%
82
$35,000-$49,999
14.6%
68
$50,000-$74,999
15.9%
74
$75,000-$99,999
15.1%
70
$100,000-$149,999
16.1%
75
$150,000-$199,999
1.7%
8
$200,000
1.7%
8
I prefer no t to answer
9.9%
46 T o tal: 465
27. What is the highest level of education you have completed? Value
Percent
Responses
1.5%
7
High scho o l
17.3%
81
So m e co llege
25.4%
119
2 year degree
18.8%
88
Bachelo rs degree
25.9%
121
Graduate degree
11.1%
52
Did no t graduate fro m high scho o l
T o tal: 468
36
Exhibit F: Summary of Complaints by Topic Internet Service Comment Topic Reliability complaint Price complaint Speed complaint Availability (faster speeds, no service) Would like more options Data caps Customer service complaint Unable to receive wireless service from Unggoy Satisfied with current service Complaints about contracts Complaints about special promotional pricing
# of Responses 32 30 15 15 9 8 7 5 5 4 3
Pay TV Service Comment Topic Want Waterloo/Cedar Rapids channels (KWWL, etc.) Price complaint Channel complaints Reliability complaint Would like skinny bundle or ala carte Satisfied with current service Complaints about special promotional pricing Complaints about contracts Would like more options Too many ads
# of Responses 35 16 14 12 7 5 3 2 2 2
Phone Service Comment Topic Rarely use/Only get it due to bundle or 911 Reliability complaint Price complaint Voice quality complaint Satisfied with current service Calling features comment Customer service complaint
# of Responses 12 8 6 5 3 2 2
Community Broadband Comment Topic Statements of support for community broadband Depends on price Concerns about replacing one monopoly with another Depends on whether contracts are required Please include rural areas Depends on quality General opposition to community broadband Would need more details
# of Responses 36 17 5 4 4 3 2 2
Exhibit G: Ten-Year Economic Benefits Community's Equity in the System
$
3,400,000 $ 4,900,000 6-7x OIBDA if ever sold ($2,400/subscriber). Other industry deals have been much higher.
Increased value to housing units
$
3,000,000 $ 6,300,000 Ranging from $2,000 - $3,000 home connected (industry sources)
Cost savings for all telecom customers (cumulative 10 year)
$
3,800,000 $ 7,500,000 $10 to $20 per month
Small Business growth and impact
$
2,700,000 $ 6,200,000 1 - 1.5% higher GDP (FTTH Council) $49,500 per capita GDP in 2015 in Iowa Profits 8-10% of GDP (US Bureau of Econ Stats) + Savings on telecom bills
Total 10-Year Economic Benefits Benefit as % of Build (no TV head-end)
$ 12,900,000 $ 24,900,000 233%
316%
Exhibit H-Project Team Curtis Dean, SmartSource Consulting (Team Leader) Curtis Dean has been involved in community broadband for 19 years. At Spencer Municipal Utilities, Curtis was closely involved in the planning and implementation of a new municipal broadband utility, approved by Spencer voters in 1997. As part of the leadership team for that project, Curtis developed the business plans for the cable TV, telephone, and high-speed data services that the new utility would offer. In 2011, Curtis joined the Iowa Association of Municipal Utilities as Broadband Services Coordinator, providing support for Iowa’s telecommunications utilities. In 2015 he established SmartSource Consulting to provide services to small telecommunications services, including project management, marketing, and strategic planning. Since early 2015 he’s also served as project leader for the Iowa Fiber Alliance, a proposed municipally-owned fiber optic transport network in eastern Iowa. Curtis holds a Bachelor of Arts from Buena Vista University and an Executive Masters of Public Administration from the University of South Dakota.
[email protected]
515-650-0251
Todd Kielkopf, Kielkopf Advisory Services Todd Kielkopf is an experienced utility executive with demonstrated results driving change in communities, businesses, and organizations. Roles over his 20+ year career span being a management consultant, General Manager of a municipal utility that included broadband deployment, public-sector chief financial officer and economic development liaison, and active board member within the utility industry. Experiences include forming public/private partnerships to provide broadband services over a fiber network, launching an entrepreneurial development program with Simpson College, and leadership roles within NMPP Energy and the Iowa Energy Center. Todd also advises organizations and startups in the Des Moines metro region on business formation, strategic development, and financial matters.
[email protected]
515-681-1297
Ken Demlow, NewCom Technologies Ken Demlow has worked in the fiber industry for many years, starting with fiber construction. He serves as the National Business Development Manager for NewCom Technologies, an engineering company that focuses on telecom design, engineering and plant documentation and electric infrastructure design and planning. NewCom is based in Des Moines, IA. In this role with NewCom, Ken has been very involved in working through the details of fiber projects, aggregation and economic development. And, he has worked on several smart grid and electric utility projects. Ken has spoken at several industry conferences, has authored several industry articles (including a white paper on how to mitigate one of the key problems in AMI meter installations) and recently served a state level economic development fellowship.
[email protected]
765-366-8370
Exhibit H-Project Team Eric Lampland, Lookout Point Communications Eric Lampland founded Lookout Point Communications, an independent consultancy, in 1997. A network architect for over thirty-five years, Lookout Point focused initially on large scale, mostly global, networks and their unique technical issues. In 2003 Lookout Point redirected its efforts toward aiding municipalities and public utilities. Today Lookout Point has developed the most experienced national team concentrating on the deployment of fiber optic and wireless networks for this segment. Mr. Lampland has served on standards forums, various boards and in multiple companies advising and birthing new technologies. He advises, and learns from, the financial and vendor communities concerning technical and business trends. Currently, his focus has moved to Software Defined Networks using Network Function Virtualization as a means to lay the foundation for the next stage of Internet architectures. He is frequently called upon to share insights at various technical and regional conferences.
[email protected]
651-227-8122
