Best of the ISP-Lists

Is Cable Open Access Just a Dream?

Members of the ISP-Cable list share frustrations as they search for a cable company that is really, sincerely willing to work with local ISPs.

[October 9, 2002]

On the ISP-Cable list in September, NO queried,

"Is open access still just a dream? Are any ISPs out there actually working with cable companies to provide cable modem access?"

A number of respondents complained that it's being blocked at every level:

[TC contended] "The cable companies have manipulated the situation so that it is totally unworkable. Even for the resale agreement that was imposed as a temporary stop-gap method to allow ISPs to have a wholesale arrangement with cable, they added requirements that simply made reselling an impossibility. In my opinion, they are flagrantly ignoring both the letter and the spirit of the CRTC laws and rulings."

[JK recalled] "We had an NDA with a cable company for two years. Per the conditions of the SEC, this company was supposed to open access to their infrastructure. However, after two years, tons of paperwork, attorneys' fees, you name it, they called us and said they found an ISP they'd signed a deal with, which met the terms of the merger. The funny thing is, the ISP was AOL. Anyway, the terms of the agreement were terrible. Had we even been granted open access, it would not have been open access at all. We were not going to be allowed to buy a pipe into their network and carry the transit out our pipes: they would maintain everything, including billing. We would get a lousy 25 percent, minus the $25 per month we would have to pay per subscriber. In brief, we would have taken a $5 loss per subscriber per month under the terms of their contract. And if we sold any other services like e-mail, web hosting, etc. to any of our cable customers, we would have to give 75 percent of the revenue to the cable company."

Others blamed it on government control:

[LM suggested] "My guess is that we will need to wait for a more friendly administration, one that's focused on the economy. We need a much more effective FCC, and we're not getting it from Bush."

[JK agreed] "Our government now says cable operators supply 'information services,' which nullifies the very merger agreement entirely, since 'information services' suppliers are not required to open up their networks."

[EA added] "Canada has open access for cable, but I am told the barriers for entry for the small ISP are almost insurmountable there as well. Those barriers mean that open access just isn't an option."

JK contended that, if managed correctly, open access good be a good thing for everyone involved:

"We are still willing to sell cable, assuming we really are granted open access. We are not looking for something for nothing: we just want to be able to do what we do with the telco, which is to buy access into their infrastructure, and carry that transit out on our connections to the Internet. The cable companies would sell a lot more cable access if the local providers that local people are familiar with were able to sell it as well. As it stands now, cable operators have a monopoly. The only way you get a choice in cable providers is if you move to a new area that has a different operator. With true open access, everyone would make money. The cable operators are just missing the boat."

JA offered one possible solution to the problem:

"Is anyone interested in working together to start a cable company? I can supply the computer equipment."

— End