[gbhn]

Another comparison: Yahoo Finance says Time Warner Cable's income in 2011 is ~$20B. I'm not sure I understand why $2B/year for five years is a big obstacle. Reaching 15% of the US cable market (60M households in Q42011 per Nielsen) is 9M subscribers, which at $120/month (current Google Fiber cable replacement rate) is $12B/year.

Anyone else understand why this is poor ROI? Obviously network construction is only part of the operational cost of a big network. But if it's a tiny part, then it seems even stranger that it's being presented as an obstacle. Internet-only rates would be ~$6B/yr, but that has substantially less overhead cost of content associated.

[warfangle]

Current cable+tv price: ~$100/mo Cost to build out goog fiber competitor: $166,666,667/mo Potential price point of fiber+tv to stay competitive with goog fiber: $120/mo

Why would a cable company spend $166m/month in order to get little additional revenue? No, they'd rather add Cable Box Remote Control Rental Fees - it doesn't cost them extra, and it increases their revenue.

Only if they're at risk of losing current subscribers through losing their monopoly status will this behavior change.