Report: Google’s Kansas City Fiber project could cost as much as $94M to build

By Meghan McDonough April 9, 2013

As we previously reported, Google’s heading deep in the heart of Texas for its latest Google Fiber installation project. The company announced today that it’s hoping to have Austin connected to its superfast gigabit Internet service as early as mid-2014, but it didn’t mention anything about how much money it’s investing in its service. Late last year, Google began launching Fiber in Kansas City, Kansas, with plans to also include Kansas City, Missouri. However, TechCrunch is reporting that the Bernstein Research analyst group estimates the cost for building and deploying the Fiber network in Kansas City could reach $84 million just to get to the first 149,000 homes – and that’s before they’re even connected to the service. To actually provide service for 12,000 homes on day one will cost an additional $10 million, bringing Google’s total cost for its Kansas City project to $94 million.

According to Carlos Kirjner and Ram Parameswaran of Bernstein Research, that $84 million doesn’t even cover actually connecting those 149,000 homes. It will cost another $674 or $500 per house, depending on whether the house is based in Kansas City, Kan., or Kansas City, Mo., respectively. Bernstein’s analysts estimate that Google’s total cost to build the infrastructure to cover 300,000 homes could reach $170 million – and, once again, that number is before Fiber is actually installed in any of the homes.

Recommended Videos

Now that Austin will be the next city to receive Google Fiber, it begs the question of what Google’s plans are for its superfast Internet and TV service. Bernstein analysts estimate that it would cost $11 billion for Google to build and rollout the service to 20 million homes nationwide. That 20 million number is important because it equates to roughly 15 percent of the market and would make Google a “medium-to-large domestic access and pay-TV provider,” according to Bernstein.

Google currently sells three tiers of Fiber: the most comprehensive includes gigabit Internet and over 200 HD TV channels for $120 a month; the middle tier includes gigabit Internet for $70 a month; and the lowest tier charges $300 for installation with 5Mbps download speed guaranteed for free for at least seven years. None of these plans include a data cap, either.

We’ll see what happens with Google Fiber. While one analyst group’s opinion isn’t gospel, it does highlight the exorbitant cost of building a high speed network from scratch. Google isn’t hurting for cash, but it does raise the question of what Google projects might be sacrificed in the future to accomodate the cost of an unproven superfast Internet network.

Image via Google

Topics

Google

Meghan McDonough

Former Digital Trends Contributor

Meghan J. McDonough is a Chicago-based purveyor of consumer technology and music. She previously wrote for LAPTOP Magazine…

Computing

We just got our first hint of the RTX 6090, but it’s not what you think

A hand grabbing MSI's RTX 4090 Suprim X.

As we're all counting down the days to a possible announcement of Nvidia's RTX 50-series, GPU brands are already looking ahead to what comes next. A new trademark filing with the Eurasian Economic Commission (EEC) reveals just how far ahead some manufacturers are thinking, because it mentions not just the Nvidia RTX 5090, but also an RTX 5090 Ti; there's even an RTX 6090 Ti. Still, it'll be a long while before we can count the RTX 60-series among the best graphics cards, so what is this all about?

The trademark registration filing, first spotted by harukaze5719 on X (formerly Twitter) and shared by VideoCardz, comes from a company called Sinotex International Industrial Ltd. This company is responsible for the GPU brand Ninja, which doesn't have much of a market presence in the U.S.

Computing

How the Blue Screen of Death became your PC’s grim reaper

The Blue Screen of Death seen on a laptop.

There's nothing more startling than your PC suddenly locking up and crashing to a Blue Screen of Death. Otherwise known as a Blue Screen, BSOD, or within the walls of Microsoft, a bug check screen, the Blue Screen of Death is as iconic as it is infamous. Blue Screen of Death is not a proper noun, but I'm going to treat it like one. It's what you were met with during crashes on Intel's 14th-gen CPUs, and it littered airport terminals during the recent CrowdStrike outage.

Everyone knows that a Blue Screen is bad news -- tack on "of Death" to that, and the point is only clearer. It's a sign that something catastrophic has happened, so much so that the operating system can't recover, and it needs to reboot your PC in order to save it. The Blue Screen of Death we know today, fit with its frowning emoticon, is a relatively new development in the history of Windows.

Computing

The performance downgrade made to the M4 Pro that no one is talking about

Someone using a MacBook Pro M4.

I've spent this whole week testing the new M4 chip, specifically the M4 Pro in both the Mac mini and 16-inch MacBook Pro. They are fantastic, impressive chips, but in my testing, I noticed something pretty surprising about the way they run that I haven't seen others talk much about. I'm talking about the pretty significant change Apple made in this generation to power modes.

First off, Apple has extended the different power modes to the "Pro" level chips for the first time, having kept it as an exclusive for Max in the past. The three power modes, found in System Settings, are the following: Low Power, Automatic, and High Power. The interesting thing, however, is that in my testing, the Low Power drops performance far more this time around.