Without access to capital, even the best laid plans for Internet access infrastructure can fall apart. In rural areas, large corporate Internet access companies don’t consider deployment an investment with a sufficient return, so local communities are finding ways to improve connectivity on their own. In order to locate funding, they seek grants and loans to supplement local investment. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency recently released Expanding Internet Access: Bank Financing for Rural Broadband Initiatives to provide insight into the role banks play in financing local rural projects. The report also offers several case studies examining projects that benefitted from bank financing.

Download the report.

In this policy brief, we highlight the gulf between FCC broadband data for Rochester and what’s actually available to residents by examining local competition.

Rochester Competition: Not All it Appears to Be

The city, home to the world-famous Mayo Clinic, had previously considered building a municipal network, but the idea was dropped, in part because of the incorrect perception that enough competition already exists between Internet service providers. Our analysis and the corresponding maps reveal that broadband competition in the region is more limited than many realize.

The policy brief concludes:

“Overall, Charter and CenturyLink compete for the urban center of Rochester, while the rural areas rely almost exclusively on fixed wireless for broadband service. Even where residents have a choice in broadband, anyone looking for speeds in excess of 40 Mbps will almost certainly have to subscribe to Charter Spectrum. This is why more cities, especially those with municipal electric services, are considering how smart local investments can ensure more consumer choices and a working market for these essential services.”

Read more details about the situation in Rochester; download the policy brief Broadband Competition in the Rochester Region: Reality vs Federal Statistics here.

For years, national cable and telecom companies have complained that they operate in and industry plagued by too much competition. How valid is that claim? We decided to look at the data and map out what the large carriers offer and where they offer it. In order to share our findings with policy makers, local elected officials, and the general public, we’ve created a report that includes series of maps to illustrate our findings and our analysis.

Download Profiles of Monopoly: Big Cable and Telecom to read this report filled with maps that provide revealing visualizations about the status of broadband competition in the U.S.

The FCC collects data from Internet Service Providers that reflects census blocks where they offer service to at least one premise. Currently, the Commission does not collect information about rates subscribers pay. A new report from the Berkman Klein Center dives into prices subscribers pay and also looks at trends from national companies as well as local publicly owned networks. The report, Community-Owned Fiber Networks: Value Leaders in America, supports what we’ve always found — that publicly owned networks offer the best all around value for the communities that make the investment. Download the report.