Google Fiber

[southsider1015]

To what extent has anyone in Jacksonville given a serious thought about Google Fiber?

I've read up on Google's website regarding the current city linup, requirements, and future plans. And no where does it include our city.  Nor any city in Florida, for that matter.  With JEAs capability, organization, and cooperation, I think Jacksonville can and should be given a shot.

I've reviewed the requirements, and their checklist appears to be a slam dunk.  For those of us in the industry, this could be easily pulled together with the City's and JEAs support.  In fact, we could probably assemble a team to pull together this, pro bono.

If anyone has anything helpful or informative to add to this discussion, please provide!  Thoughts and opinions are welcome too!

[southsider1015]

https://fiber.google.com/newcities/
https://fiber.google.com/about/files/googlefibercitychecklist2-24-14.pdf

[spuwho]

First off the City and JEA have absolutely no interest in having any involvement in any fiber scheme across the city.  JEA has an extensive fiber network across the city that is used for metering and control and they would like to keep it that way.

Several other carriers have fiber assets in the city limits, however, the coverage varies extensively.

Clearly by far the largest coverage is the former BellSouth assets which are now part of AT&T. However, there are a couple of issues in utilizing it. First, BellSouth did not build a lot of local fiber assets as part of an IP backbone. For example: I have a ATT fiber hut in front of my house with a line card that converts it to 2 four pair copper coming into my house. ATT hasn't been real motivated to update the older assets unless a hurricane or tropical storm comes through, then the Feds will pay for it.
Second, there is a regulatory benefit by ATT maintaining copper to the home. As long as this benefit remains, they are not inclining to invest in FTTH. ATT likes FTTN (fiber the the node) where content runs across fiber to a node and then delivered using copper pair. (also called U-Verse)

Verizon has a significant fiber presence in the city, but it is used to trunk cell and commercial IP traffic. When asked if they had any plans to offer a FTTH service (FiOS), they said it was technically possible, but not in their business plans. FiOS is strictly a south and western Florida deal at the moment.

There are other players in the Jacksonville market, for example Comcast has assets here as well as TW Telecom (formerly TimeWarner Telecom).  TW Telecom is a biz offering. Comcast coax to the home delivery is adequate to meet the market as it stands right now. While they might aggregate their payloads using fiber in the city, they have no business case to take fiber all the way.

Windstream also holds fiber assets here through their aggregation of Paetec, USLEC, Embarq, NuVox, Valor and parts of Alltel that Verizon couldn't keep.

Back to your question on why not Google?

Google doesn't offer fiber out of the goodness of their pocketbook. They want advertising data and metrics. They want extensive build out terms with very few impediments. They have already run into several squabbles over pole access and ROW complaints. They want access to excellent demographics which runs into problems with many municipality equal access franchise clauses. They want a place with very high "take" rates.

However, if Jacksonville were to relax their franchise rules for offering television services to accommodate Google, then a few things will happen. Google would cherry pick the best demographics. Comcast & ATT would either raise rates or withdraw from non-profitable areas because they no longer have enough subs to support servicing the area.

If Jacksonville had a higher density over a larger area, or a larger ideal demographic, then yes, I could see them having some interest. But COJ would have to weaken franchise rules or offer them free land for a datacenter before they would consider it.

I would love to have FTTH and would pay for it. But this area just doesn't drive that sort of investment for a consumer service.

[mtraininjax]

Comcast holds the city license for cable company in Jacksonville, and that carries with it serious clout. They are the top of the mountain and offer a very competitive offering compared to TWT, ATT and Windstream.

The railroads were laying fiber along their right of ways during the heydays of early 2000s. Then when the music stopped and the party went into recession, all that fiber remained dark till a few years ago when it was actually being used. TWT has been growing and expanding its loops around the city, but for businesses. We signed a deal for a 10 MB Fiber Pipe for about 1300 a month in old business, but we needed constant bandwidth for our business. Now you can get 105 MB of bandwidth from Comcast per month for about 100 bucks. So Comcast has found a way to make bandwidth pretty cheap for consumer and business models.

I don't see another expansion of fiber in Jax until we see more new homes built further and further out, even then the last mile of most installations is just POTS, the cheapest way ATT can deliver service.

[southsider1015]

Thanks for the indepth analysis. That was a lot of information!  Couple of questions:

Does JEA provide FTTN for consumers?  What is their system used for? 

Why does the City NOT have an interest in helping its citizens get FTTN?  There seems to be a big push from JTA to provide low cost transportation infrastructure with BRT, Skyway, etc.  The need for low cost internet connectivity should be just as, if not, as important.  It should not be considered a luxury, but a necessity.

I can understand ATTs lack of motivation to provide FTTN, to some degree.  What's the regulatory benefit of providing copper to the home?  This doesn't seem consistent with improving speeds.  Also, just to understand, FTTN is better than copper, but it doesn't really do the job that FTTH does, right?

Regarding Verizon, why wouldn't consumer fiber be in their business plans?  Can't compete with ATT?

Comcast is worthless, especially in the fiber market, and almost not worth mentioning.  The only discussion worth having about them is regarding the merger, and how fast can we get away from them.

Back to Google.  I understand their business model and need for metrics.  But they are already getting this information every time someone Google's something, uses Google Maps, uses Google Mail, or has an Android phone.  Paranoia regarding big brother and Google is misdirected if its aimed towards Google Fiber.  Its already happening.  Consumers including me don't seem to mind.

The franchising rules need to be discussed.  I'm not well versed on the history, the current rules, nor what should be done to promote competition to benefit end users.  With the right Council, these rules can and probably should be written for these purposes in this day and age.

Free land?  Didn't COJ attempt to inventory all real estate assets, and the amount of available land was staggering?  This should not be a problem, in my opinion.

I would certainly pay for FTTH, as would most consumers, given the option or choice over copper.  The competition needs to be here and everywhere to keep these providers working for us.

And frankly, I'm tired of hearing about how this City doesn't inspire investment.  Google Fiber would certainty help this cause, right?

[southsider1015]

Comcast holds the city license for cable company in Jacksonville, and that carries with it serious clout. They are the top of the mountain and offer a very competitive offering compared to TWT, ATT and Windstream.

The railroads were laying fiber along their right of ways during the heydays of early 2000s. Then when the music stopped and the party went into recession, all that fiber remained dark till a few years ago when it was actually being used. TWT has been growing and expanding its loops around the city, but for businesses. We signed a deal for a 10 MB Fiber Pipe for about 1300 a month in old business, but we needed constant bandwidth for our business. Now you can get 105 MB of bandwidth from Comcast per month for about 100 bucks. So Comcast has found a way to make bandwidth pretty cheap for consumer and business models.

I don't see another expansion of fiber in Jax until we see more new homes built further and further out, even then the last mile of most installations is just POTS, the cheapest way ATT can deliver service.

Comcast holds the cable reins, sure.  But what about the fiber?  Or is this one and the same?  Also, how is the bandwidth for copper and even comparable with fiber?  Comcast's offerings are JUNK.  Speed tests are easily controlled and skewed.  I don't trust Comcast, especially with this merger coming.  We need to be looking for away from copper and more towards fiber.  See South Korea.

Aren't we seeing record home sales in Nocatee?  What about Tamaya?  St. Johns and all their future development?  We are building homes, people are moving here, and when this economy and City starts really turning around, will this City be ready? 

[spuwho]

Thanks for the indepth analysis. That was a lot of information!  Couple of questions:

Does JEA provide FTTN for consumers?  What is their system used for? 

No. JEA uses their fiber network for internal purposes. I noted measure and controls. Electric and water metering, controls on certain remote equipment or controls for recycling certain sub-station equipment.

Why does the City NOT have an interest in helping its citizens get FTTN?

There was a discussion done just before I got here about the possibility of using JEA fiber to do a municipal offering. Most of the motivation was due to the fact that the local cable provider was completely inept. I actually heard about that all the way up in Chicago when I lived there. ATT-BI took over the carrier and then divested it to Comcast.  While the issues were addressed for the most part, the city and JEA didn't show any interest in managing a muni offering. They don't get along on certain infrastructure already today, but thats another story.

There seems to be a big push from JTA to provide low cost transportation infrastructure with BRT, Skyway, etc.  The need for low cost internet connectivity should be just as, if not, as important.  It should not be considered a luxury, but a necessity.

JTA is a highway focused entity that just happens to be involved in public transit. If you surf through the MJ archives in depth, you will see a range of disillusionment on the level of transit services they seek. They have improved the leadership as of late.

I can understand ATTs lack of motivation to provide FTTN, to some degree.  What's the regulatory benefit of providing copper to the home?  This doesn't seem consistent with improving speeds.  Also, just to understand, FTTN is better than copper, but it doesn't really do the job that FTTH does, right?

While much of the telecom regulations have been stripped away from the old Bell/AT&T monopoly days, copper in many forms has retained a certain level of regulatory protection.  Much of the residential rules for "universal service" are based on telephony services over copper pairs coming to your home. Much of the regs around this are legacy from when AT&T owned the whole market. When deregulation started there was a fear that investment in the local infrastructure would decline because deregulation was letting all comers into the local access market over that legacy copper.

So certain rules were left in place to make sure that local access infrastructure would be maintained so that people still had choices. Since AT&T lobbied such a long delay in the eventual breakup (universal service was declared in 1963) they had a vested interest in maintaining that infrastructure. Post breakup they are gradually losing interest. The advent of wireless has accelerated this shift as the carriers offload legacy (and less profitable) infrastructure to smaller carriers using financial tools like a Morris Reverse Trust.

Because that copper still carries some protections, in return AT&T prefers to keep it in place and not invest in any fiber replacements. In their mind, without a guarantee of profit (like they had pre-regulation) they don't see any benefit to use anything else.

Regarding Verizon, why wouldn't consumer fiber be in their business plans?  Can't compete with ATT?

All the carriers have shown an unwillingness to compete with each other where the acquisition of subs is too expensive or difficult. Because the cost of entry for wired services is very high (say compared to wireless) many of the providers want exclusive franchise agreements so that they can recover their cost of capital faster.

COJ is already served by two providers, Comcast & ATT U-Verse. Both of those carriers are able to provide service because originally they had an exclusive franchise agreements in their earlier forms. (cable TV and telephony)  That those two service types have become available using their exisiting infrastructure.

Now if Verizon decided to enter the market, they would have to finance large amounts of capital to get the fiber laid down your street. If 50 people live on your street and only 5 subscribed to it, the time to recover the capital would be extremely long. Wall Street was already lighting up Verizon FiOS because these sub rates were not meeting the targets in all the places they laid the fiber.

A side issue in areas served by Verizon copper. If you signed up for FiOS fiber, Verizon would rip out that regulated copper, so if you went fiber with them, there was no going back. You couldn't request the copper to come back. This essentially "locked you in" to Verizon fiber. People with Tivo;s, fire alarm circuits, etc. that needed a copper phone lines got exceptions, but if you didn't like FiOS service, you had to find someone else to service you and bring their infrastructure to you.

Since Jacksonville has "dual service" by land, Verizon doesn't see any reason to invest millions into a Jacksonville buildout. They don't own the copper here, so they would compete with both. That means low prices to win subs, but that is terrible for those 30 years bonds they have to pay off.

Comcast is worthless, especially in the fiber market, and almost not worth mentioning.  The only discussion worth having about them is regarding the merger, and how fast can we get away from them.

Comcast has been allowed to get large because regulators know that the larger the sub base they can develop, the more services they can create and expand on.  This is another reason ATT and Verizon have been running away from copper in some states. They can't compete with the return Comcast has on coax, so they move on. (wireless in this case). Comcast does use fiber for trunking, but as I noted, they have no business driver to swap out the coax with FTTH.

Back to Google.  I understand their business model and need for metrics.  But they are already getting this information every time someone Google's something, uses Google Maps, uses Google Mail, or has an Android phone.  Paranoia regarding big brother and Google is misdirected if its aimed towards Google Fiber.  Its already happening.  Consumers including me don't seem to mind.

People don't mind the NSA collecting data on them either. It's really a personal decision. The collecting and selling of personal data has become a mega-business by different companies. It's become so bad, the government had to set up a "Do Not Call" database at the public's request. What the public didn't seem to know was that their number was given out by them in order to get a discount somewhere. So now the collection energy is moving to your cell phone and internet use.

The franchising rules need to be discussed.  I'm not well versed on the history, the current rules, nor what should be done to promote competition to benefit end users.  With the right Council, these rules can and probably should be written for these purposes in this day and age.

There is already a fair amount of competition locally. Besides the land based providers (Comcast and ATT) you have the sat providers like DISH and DirectTV.  Currently Netflix is working on a range of original content which opens up a new world of a la carte content. So now the internet is becoming the next source for people to consume.  Just one issue.....who do you get your raw bandwidth from?  On the land its Comcast or ATT. On your phone the crowd is a bit bigger, but its not as satisfying (yet). Some people have seen this shift coming and have been trying to jump on the wagon. The issue is 2 major carriers are currently squatting on the largest swath of unused wireless bandwidth in the nation. Who are those 2? Why AT&T and Verizon, of course!  SiriusXM would like to get into mobile video by bonding some of their digital channels and they have done field tests, but they haven't taken the leap.

Free land?  Didn't COJ attempt to inventory all real estate assets, and the amount of available land was staggering?  This should not be a problem, in my opinion.

I was being somewhat sarcastic. The city does own some vacant land in and around the city's "NAP district" which is in and around the AT&T central office downtown. I was just trying to point out that if COJ was serious about making a Google pitch, they would have to throw some vacant land with access to some peering capacity to make it worth their while.

I would certainly pay for FTTH, as would most consumers, given the option or choice over copper.  The competition needs to be here and everywhere to keep these providers working for us.

And frankly, I'm tired of hearing about how this City doesn't inspire investment.  Google Fiber would certainty help this cause, right?

The city does need investment. I just don't think the city fathers believe it needs to be in bulk bandwidth. I would tend to agree. The city is well serviced for business bandwidth needs generally speaking. COJ has more pressing matters for investment like downtown, libraries, better urban planning, attracting new businesses.

One last note. While COJ is dual-serviced by land line for content, AT&T U-Verse is not available in all locations.
My house has an AT&T fiber hut right in front of it. But the fiber is TDMA based. It essentially simulates large copper bundles. Unfortunately, BellSouth was not big on providing anything beyond telephony and DSL so many of their fiber buildouts didn't support IP based networking. This is a requirement for U-Verse.

U-Verse is essentially Video over DSL where ATT bonds several pairs of copper together to provide a higher data rate and then service video through it.  Because the data rate to the home is limited, AT&T only can provide 4 channels at a time. This is OK for single TV homes, but if you have a multi-TV home, the more channels being watched reduces the amount of internet bandwidth. Also when you change channels, your U_Verse controller is essentially telling a controller at the AT&T central office to route a different video stream to you. All of this happens in fractions of a second. Comcast today sends everything to you all at once.

Technology marches on as a firm just announced 1Gbps DSL over copper recently. Before you think awesome!, it only works over bonded copper pairs and has a range of only 100-150m. This is great for the U-Verse people and the FTTN. Not so great for the house that resides at the end of the copper line from the central office 2 miles away and is too far from a cable provider.

[southsider1015]

Thanks for the info.  Based on what you said, it unfortunately sounds like COJ is a ways from getting FTTH.  I figured this to be the case. The most we could ask of the City is to update the franchise laws, but as you said, its not seen as a priority. 

I just hope that the City can do it a part when the time is right.

[KenFSU]

Really great info in here.

Thanks.

[carpnter]

Thanks for the info.  Based on what you said, it unfortunately sounds like COJ is a ways from getting FTTH.  I figured this to be the case. The most we could ask of the City is to update the franchise laws, but as you said, its not seen as a priority. 

I just hope that the City can do it a part when the time is right.

I believe franchise laws are at the state level now.

[spuwho]

Here is a report on a current Google Fiber proposal being vetted in Portland, OR. Its not all roses. If they did come to Jacksonville, you would see the same behavior.

Per the Seattle PI

Portland's being a pushover to snag Google Fiber

As Seattle tries to figure out how to improve its broadband situation, it ought to keep an eye on its sister to the south.

Portland is getting hot and heavy with Google, which may bring its fast fiber broadband service to the Rose City as early as 2015.

Last week, Portland reached a preliminary franchise agreement with the online giant and will begin public deliberations on the deal in May, according to The Oregonian.

Google announced in February that it plans to bring its fast-fiber broadband and cable-TV service to Portland and five surrounding cities.

But first Portland and the neighboring cities must sort through the same neighborhood issues that Seattle now faces with CenturyLink and other broadband providers demanding special treatment and more access to public property.

Google may be an exciting newcomer to the telecom business but in its dealings with cities, it acts like a crusty old player in the industry.

In Portland, Google is twisting arms by offering its fast broadband in return for city handouts, just as CenturyLink is doing in Seattle.

Google doesn't want to abide by current restrictions on the placement of metal utility cabinets on parking strips in front of people's homes, according to Oregonian reports.

That's not all. Google is going further and requesting that Portland give the company swaths of public property to place garage-size "network huts" — with a 12- by 28-foot base — to support its project.

Companies starting up a new venture generally have to find and rent private property. Google could afford to do the same; it's now making more than $1 billion a month in profit. The day after reaching the deal in Portland, it reported a net income of $3.45 billion the previous quarter. It also appears to have a limitless budget for building amenities at its glorious offices.

Yet Google expects cities to basically hand over public property for its fledgling broadband and cable-TV business.

Cities are pushovers when it comes to broadband. The way politicians talk about it, you'd think their constituents were stuck in the dark ages and broadband was as important as the fire department.

Whether it's a crisis is debatable. But a crisis mentality is what's used to justify extraordinary measures, like giving Google, CenturyLink and others what they want.

If there really is a crisis, and broadband has become a critical service on par with water and electricity, cities should consider providing the service directly as a public utility.

Perhaps it's also time for the federal government to classify broadband as an essential public service that must be available to everyone.

After phone lines were deemed an essential service, the government required companies to provide "universal service" so everyone was served.

Broadband was exempted from universal service requirements, support for which has eroded since telecom deregulation took hold in 1996.

With telecom companies in the driver's seat, and elected officials begging them for a ride, universal service seems off the table. It's treated as a dusty, antiquated concept that will impede progress and the arrival of sexy new products like Google Fiber.

Google Fiber is appealing and has plenty of cheerleaders on social media and at City Hall.

Yet Google is a mixed blessing. The majority of residents in any city would probably rather get broadband service from a public utility that's accountable to them, instead of from a fairly opaque company that makes its money delivering hypertargeted advertising.

Privacy concerns are offset by the prospect of a wealthy company stepping in to help address a complicated infrastructure challenge. Still it's a business, not a gift, and city officials should push to make sure all of their residents benefit from the deals they make.

That's not going to happen in Portland, apparently. As it has in other cities, Google is retaining the right to pick and choose which neighborhoods get wired and which are left behind.

This is couched in clever, Google-y terms — the service is coming first to "fiberhoods" that express interest in the service.

But the effect is to pit neighborhoods against each other and enable the company to cherry-pick lucrative pockets of a city where people are willing to pay $70 a month or more for broadband.

This approach is also tilted in favor of residents and neighborhoods that are already the most tech savvy. They'll get service first — and perhaps exclusively — because they can best use the Internet to call attention to themselves.

Digital divide

What's really sad is that tech-savvy neighborhoods may already have relatively good service and are likely targeted for upgrades by existing providers.

This isn't hypothetical. A digital divide has surfaced in Kansas City, where Google first began offering fiber broadband service in 2012, after taking applications from cities across the country.

Two other cities, Provo, Utah, and Austin, Texas — are getting the service. Portland is among nine now being considered by Google.

In Kansas City, Google offers gigabit speed connections — 1,000 megabits per second — for $70 per month, plus taxes and fees. A bundle with TV service costs $120 per month.

That's a nice deal where it's available. But the company has been slow to expand its coverage area in Kansas City and vague about if and when it will reach some working-class areas, according to a report in The Kansas City Star.

Cities really have one opportunity to ensure that all of their residents will be served by these next generation broadband services.

That's during the initial franchise negotiations, when cities can press for universal coverage in return for the special rules and public property they're offering up.

Once cities provide these handouts, they don't have much leverage. They'll end up bowing and scraping and hoping that Uncle Google throws a bit more fiber their way, someday.

The experience in Kansas City — where suburbs are stuck waiting for Google to extend its fiberhoods — suggests that cities in a region targeted by Google Fiber should work together on setting expectations and deadlines.

Yes, a provider like Google may abandon a city that doesn't play along.

But is that such a loss if the company ends up cherry-picking and making the market less attractive to other providers — including public utilities — that might come and provide fast broadband for everyone?

Even a limited rollout of Google Fiber and vague plans to expand may goad Comcast and the phone companies to up their broadband game in cities like Portland.

It's still surprising, though, that a place known for demanding humanely raised organic produce wouldn't also ask Google for universal service.

[Jimmy]

I don't think there's much to it, but I'm going to stick this here for future reference.  On Monday AT&T added Jacksonville (and St. Augustine) to a dream list of potential fiber cities where they would deploy Google Fiber-style 1 gigabit high-speed internet.

AT&T today announced a major initiative to expand its ultra-fast fiber network to up to 100 candidate cities and municipalities nationwide, including 21 new major metropolitan areas. The fiber network will deliver AT&T U-verse® with GigaPowerSM service, which can deliver broadband speeds up to 1 Gigabit per second and AT&T's most advanced TV services, to consumers and businesses...

http://about.att.com/story/att_eyes_100_u_s_cities_and_municipalities_for_its_ultra_fast_fiber_network.html

[spuwho]

I don't think there's much to it, but I'm going to stick this here for future reference.  On Monday AT&T added Jacksonville (and St. Augustine) to a dream list of potential fiber cities where they would deploy Google Fiber-style 1 gigabit high-speed internet.

AT&T today announced a major initiative to expand its ultra-fast fiber network to up to 100 candidate cities and municipalities nationwide, including 21 new major metropolitan areas. The fiber network will deliver AT&T U-verse® with GigaPowerSM service, which can deliver broadband speeds up to 1 Gigabit per second and AT&T's most advanced TV services, to consumers and businesses...

http://about.att.com/story/att_eyes_100_u_s_cities_and_municipalities_for_its_ultra_fast_fiber_network.html

Thanks for the link Jimmy.

Take a look at this thread on AT&T.

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,21341.msg373289.html#msg373289

[spuwho]

Google announced the next round of cities to get their fiber offering.

Jacksonville is not among them.

Per WSJ.com:

Google to Announce Fiber Expansion In Four Cities

Google Inc. is preparing to offer its high-speed fiber-optic Internet service in four new metro areas, the latest step in a careful expansion of the service.

Google will announce launches of Google Fiber in Atlanta, Charlotte, N.C., Raleigh-Durham, N.C. and Nashville, Tenn. in coming days, according to two people familiar with the situation.

Google recently sent invitations to local news organizations in those four cities to attend events this week, without identifying the subject. The Atlanta and Nashville events are scheduled for Tuesday, Raleigh and Charlotte on Wednesday and Durham Thursday, according to local news reports.

A Google spokeswoman declined to comment. Officials in the four areas didn't return requests for comment.

In February 2014, Google said it was considering building Fiber in nine new metro areas. The other cities are Salt Lake City, San Antonio, Phoenix, Portland, Ore. and San Jose, Calif. Google has told some officials in those cities that it hasn't ruled them out, and has yet to make a final decision.

David Vossbrink, a spokesman for the city of San Jose, said a Google Fiber official told him Monday that Google would be announcing expansion cities beginning Tuesday. "The message was that these announcements should not be considered the end of the road for the other areas," Mr. Vossbrink said.

Google Fiber offers Internet connections at speeds of up to one gigabit per second—roughly 10 times as fast as the average U.S. Internet connection—in Kansas City, Austin, Texas and Provo, Utah.

In Kansas City, where the service first launched in 2012, Google charges $80 a month for the gigabit service and $120 a month for Internet plus a cable-style TV package. A slower version is free after a one-time construction fee.

After announcing plans to enter a city, Google typically takes more than a year to build out its network to reach homes and businesses in the area. The company gauges demand by neighborhood, only building the network in places that express sufficient interest.

On Wall Street, the project is considered by many investors and analysts as an expensive experiment to try to persuade other broadband Internet providers to upgrade their own networks. But Google executives have said that it is a real business and the company has worked hard to build the service efficiently.

In the Portland area, Oregon tax-assessment rules are delaying a decision by Google to expand its Fiber service there, according to a person familiar with the situation. Oregon assesses utilities using a tax formula that values those companies' property based on the value of their intangible assets, such as brand. It isn't clear if this approach would apply to Google, and the state legislature is planning to tackle the issue in coming months. However, it has created uncertainty for the company, the person said.

[marty904]

This is all quite depressing... I just opened a new office downtown, (an internet related business) and the fastest/only internet service that I could even get is 18MB from AT&T.  It blows my mind how Jacksonville keeps getting on all these "high technology" lists (ranked high) when our downtown core - the "business district" cannot even get internet speeds faster than 18MB.