which is the best high speed internet service for Vegas? (Las Vegas: house, movies)

von949 · 08-08-2012, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danknee

I would dump my Cox internet so fast if Google Fiber rolled out in Las Vegas.

For the same price I pay now for cable+internet (20Mbps down, 8 up) I could have cable+internet (1000Mbps down, 1000 Mbps up) PLUS 1 terabyte of online storage, PLUS a 2 terabyte DVR, PLUS a Nexus 7 Tablet ($200 value). F'ing incredible. Plus if you opt not to subscribe, you could just pay $300 for the installation (waived if you commit to 2 years of service) and then you get 5 Mbps down and up for free for at least 7 years...that breaks down to like $3 per month for 7 years of internet.

It is embarrassing to Comcast, Cox, Centurylink, etc. when companies that have never operated in your user space come in and make them look like infants.

If the price is right, I think EVERYONE will dump whatever they have for Google Fiber. Especially if they waive the $300 "construction fee" and keep the price competitive with the competition. I think after the Kansas City test phase, they will determine if they can still offer all of that which you listed above for that price and still be profitable. I doubt it.

newopty · 08-08-2012, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by von949

If the price is right, I think EVERYONE will dump whatever they have for Google Fiber. Especially if they waive the $300 "construction fee" and keep the price competitive with the competition. I think after the Kansas City test phase, they will determine if they can still offer all of that which you listed above for that price and still be profitable. I doubt it.

Unfortunately, I doubt Las Vegas would be a priority for Google. There are many other cities with better demographics for Google Fiber. I hope I am wrong because would love to have it.

Danknee · 08-08-2012, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by von949

If the price is right, I think EVERYONE will dump whatever they have for Google Fiber. Especially if they waive the $300 "construction fee" and keep the price competitive with the competition. I think after the Kansas City test phase, they will determine if they can still offer all of that which you listed above for that price and still be profitable. I doubt it.

When I lived in Utah I was one mile the wrong direction to get Utopia fiber, which is locally owned fiber leased to carriers. $45 a month for 100/100. What a disappointment!

The fiber infrastructure is the biggest obstacle for Google or anyone else. Kansas had overhead power lines to utilize. With everything buried in Vegas (read expensive) I'm sure we won't see decent fiber networks for a long time.

hjmontijo · 08-09-2012, 05:40 PM

CenturyLink is the best

Danknee · 08-09-2012, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hjmontijo

CenturyLink is the best

Why? Your post made me feel like I should check the deals since I haven't for at least a year.

Century Link is a worse value in my situation any way I tried to cut it:

From CenturyLink's site they quote me $116.53 which includes one measly receiver, then they want another $8.99 per month for each additional receiver!? For me that would mean 4 additional receivers or a total $152.49 per month for their lowest basic Prism TV and claimed 10Mbps internet.

Note: My cell is my primary phone line and I will never own a landline (ever), so this doesn't factor in.

Compare this to what I have now with Cox:

I pay $103.75 after all taxes and fees, no discounts to speak of. I have Expanded essential cable ($53.99), which gets me approximately the same channels as the Century Link deal plus I get quite a few HD channels. I don't have to use any receiver box, which I greatly appreciate as all my TVs have HDTV tuners built in and don't need the clutter or wasted energy the unnecessary box adds. Also this means I could hook a TV up to each of the 15 split connections in my house and pay the exact same amount.

I get 20-25Mbps down and about 5Mbps up with my Premier internet service ($46.99). My Cox internet has only gone down once for about 15 minutes in the two years I've used Cox. I know this because my alarm system texts my cell phone any time my internet service is down.

In Summary, Century Link's service would cost me $116.53-$152.49 for similar cable to what I have now (ignoring the inconvenience of the receiver boxes) and for internet that might hit 10Mbps, which is 250% less bandwidth than I receive from Cox. Cox costs $103.75 with all the advantages over CL listed above.

I choose Cox. Like I said early in this thread though, get Google Fiber in Las Vegas and Cox will never see me again.

DavidAELevy · 03-12-2013, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danknee

When I lived in Utah I was one mile the wrong direction to get Utopia fiber, which is locally owned fiber leased to carriers. $45 a month for 100/100. What a disappointment!

The fiber infrastructure is the biggest obstacle for Google or anyone else. Kansas had overhead power lines to utilize. With everything buried in Vegas (read expensive) I'm sure we won't see decent fiber networks for a long time.

That not necessarily true. Speak with any cox contractor that specializes in trunk additions/junctions/addons (NOT the contractors that come out for home installations). There's tons of line conduits underground in Las Vegas. Feeding new lines through... well cox does this via their out of state contractors all the time. The contractor companies pay for the workers room and board here indefinitely because of the amount of work they get from cox. Depending on the politics and exclusiveness involved.. It may not be that much more expensive than running lines via existing power polls.

I also say don't under-estimate Google's ability to find profits and keep a good profit margin while providing incredible service quality/products.

At any rate, competition and open markets are good for everyone involved as markets tend to find their equilibrium, when you cut off a market from new competitors it hurts the supply and quantity demanded. What I'm trying to say is Cox has had an iron grip on Las Vegas for ISP service for way too long now and it's time to make it attractive by state or city/county incentives for competitors like Verizon FIOS, U-verse, Google Fiber, etc to come into Las Vegas and provide us the cutting edge service that the entertainment capitol of the world deserves!

Have you inquired about Cox fiber? It's outrageously priced....
I'm not sure the entire market conditions of why... but regardless something should come about to lower the costs to everyone. And that can be done with less trade restriction (assuming that's the reason internet is so expensive per bandwidth in Las Vegas) and market accessibility to new service competitors.

topaz420 · 03-12-2013, 02:08 PM

OMFG I just got Cox's upgraded "Ultimate" tier
150mbps down / 50mbps up

Actual average speeds
130mbps down / 35mbps

Absolutely incredible and probably the second fastest internet in the country after Google Fiber

Talk to customer retention, be nice to them and they'll give you a deal!

I got 30% off for one year. That's $76/month instead of $109!

dynimagelv · 03-12-2013, 03:31 PM

palepeople · 03-13-2013, 11:55 AM

I hate Cox - but they are the only game in town when it come to real high-speed internet.

lvoc · 03-13-2013, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidAELevy

That not necessarily true. Speak with any cox contractor that specializes in trunk additions/junctions/addons (NOT the contractors that come out for home installations). There's tons of line conduits underground in Las Vegas. Feeding new lines through... well cox does this via their out of state contractors all the time. The contractor companies pay for the workers room and board here indefinitely because of the amount of work they get from cox. Depending on the politics and exclusiveness involved.. It may not be that much more expensive than running lines via existing power polls.

I also say don't under-estimate Google's ability to find profits and keep a good profit margin while providing incredible service quality/products.

One interesting thing is that those Cul-de-sacs (There are dozens of them) all have Century Link Phone service but cannot get internet service..

At any rate, competition and open markets are good for everyone involved as markets tend to find their equilibrium, when you cut off a market from new competitors it hurts the supply and quantity demanded. What I'm trying to say is Cox has had an iron grip on Las Vegas for ISP service for way too long now and it's time to make it attractive by state or city/county incentives for competitors like Verizon FIOS, U-verse, Google Fiber, etc to come into Las Vegas and provide us the cutting edge service that the entertainment capitol of the world deserves!

Have you inquired about Cox fiber? It's outrageously priced....
I'm not sure the entire market conditions of why... but regardless something should come about to lower the costs to everyone. And that can be done with less trade restriction (assuming that's the reason internet is so expensive per bandwidth in Las Vegas) and market accessibility to new service competitors.

Interesting. But who owns the conduit? If, as I suspect, it is Cox than no one else has a shot without a big expense. I had a long discussion with Cox, who was most helpful, about getting Cable/Internet into a cul-de-sac that was not initially wired. The cost of running about a half mile from the nearest source was about $30,000. Cox was willing to eat two thirds but the bill was still too high.

Another interesting thing about those places is that they have Century Link phone service but can't get DSL.