Some sections of Kansas City slow to register for Google Fiber

In July, Google announced that residents of Kansas City, Kansas and Kansas City, Missouri will soon be able to get 1 Gbps Internet access via the new Google Fiber service. Prices would be $70 a month for the service, or $120 a month for both Internet and TV service.

However, Google also said it would build the service first in the neighborhoods that registered their interest.  People in those neighborhoods needed to spend $10 to simply let Google know they wanted Google Fiber in their part of those cities.

As one might expect, a number of poor neighborhoods in Kansas City have yet to reach those internal Google Fiber goals. In a new update on the Google Fiber blog, Google said it has sent out street teams to reevaluate certain sections of both cities.

The blog states:

We found that, while we’d relied on a variety of sources to determine how many residences were in each fiberhood, the data wasn’t 100% accurate—specifically around vacant lots, abandoned homes and large apartment buildings—and therefore affected our pre-registration goals.

Google has now adjusted the registration goals of 73 of its "fiberhoods" which hopefully will allow those sections of Kansas City reach their Google Fiber numbers. The deadline to register for the service in those neighborhoods is one week from today on September 9th.

Source: Google Fiber blog | Image via Google

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft, Nokia give $1 million to Windows Phone developers

Next Story

Nokia Purity Pro wireless headset announced

23 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Version 1.0 of this google experiment is problematic because many communities are poor. Many poor are poorly educated and just do not care or just cannot justify the expense.

Google chose the area because they thought they could do it on the cheap. Delays were because costs were higher than expected. Saying it another way is google was lied to by the leaders of the Kansas city Kansas utility company (who owns the utility poles).

3owin said,
Version 1.0 of this google experiment is problematic because many communities are poor. Many poor are poorly educated and just do not care or just cannot justify the expense.

Google chose the area because they thought they could do it on the cheap. Delays were because costs were higher than expected. Saying it another way is google was lied to by the leaders of the Kansas city Kansas utility company (who owns the utility poles).

KCP&L lied? Noooo, surely you jest.

I'm happy to have fiber here I just have an issue where the roll out began. It's going to fail like a lead balloon in quite a few places in that area due to the ignorance and sheer stupidity of most people in Wyandotte. It's the city trying to 'restore' that area that talked Google into starting there first. The cities little baby - The Legends, speedway, and stadium. That's the only reason they started there first. Most of the residents in that area want handouts but when given something nice - they destroy it or drive away the Johnson county shoppers that they're trying to attract.

KCRic said,
KCP&L lied? Noooo, surely you jest.

I'm happy to have fiber here I just have an issue where the roll out began. It's going to fail like a lead balloon in quite a few places in that area due to the ignorance and sheer stupidity of most people in Wyandotte. It's the city trying to 'restore' that area that talked Google into starting there first. The cities little baby - The Legends, speedway, and stadium. That's the only reason they started there first. Most of the residents in that area want handouts but when given something nice - they destroy it or drive away the Johnson county shoppers that they're trying to attract.

Kansas City, Kansas would be the Board of Public Utilities. Not surprising you don't know that as what you said about KCK and the Village West Area is utter nonsense.

Just preregistered, only need 18 more people in my area.

Verizon's FiOS "Best" plan offers 75/35 Mbps and HDTV for $144/mo. They also offer a 15/3 Mbps internet only plan for around $65/mo. Their fastest plan is 300/65 Mbps, price not mentioned.

Time Warner, the biggest provider in the KC metropolitan area, charges $115/mo for 50/5 Mbps, and basic analog cable with no DVR. I know because this is what's on my bill.

Google's offer of 1/1 Gbps for $70/mo, or with HDTV, Nexus 7, and 1TB Google Drive for $120/mo is not only cheap, but it's by far a much better value.

FiOS will be lucky to offer half of Google's speed by the end of 2013 (especially upload), and will likely not cost less than $100/mo for that internet plan. FiOS isn't even available in my area and I'm 10 minutes from downtown KC.

"How Google Fiber Stacks Up Against Verizon FiOS"
http://mashable.com/2012/08/21/google-fiber-verizon-fios/

Edited by thomastmc, Sep 3 2012, 3:22am :

1Gb/s you will never see. 0.4 to maybe 0.47 of that number at best is all you will ever see on a per connection basis.

Doubt me? Copy files across a gig connection in your home. Networking gear a only a few years old might hit 0.8Gb/s.

Google claims 100x faster than today's average broadband. I have read the average is 3.6Mb/s.

thomastmc said,
Just preregistered, only need 18 more people in my area.

Verizon's FiOS "Best" plan offers 75/35 Mbps and HDTV for $144/mo. They also offer a 15/3 Mbps internet only plan for around $65/mo. Their fastest plan is 300/65 Mbps, price not mentioned.

Time Warner, the biggest provider in the KC metropolitan area, charges $115/mo for 50/5 Mbps, and basic analog cable with no DVR. I know because this is what's on my bill.

Google's offer of 1/1 Gbps for $70/mo, or with HDTV, Nexus 7, and 1TB Google Drive for $120/mo is not only cheap, but it's by far a much better value.

FiOS will be lucky to offer half of Google's speed by the end of 2013 (especially upload), and will likely not cost less than $100/mo for that internet plan. FiOS isn't even available in my area and I'm 10 minutes from downtown KC.

"How Google Fiber Stacks Up Against Verizon FiOS"
http://mashable.com/2012/08/21/google-fiber-verizon-fios/

3owin said,
1Gb/s you will never see. 0.4 to maybe 0.47 of that number at best is all you will ever see on a per connection basis.

Doubt me? Copy files across a gig connection in your home. Networking gear a only a few years old might hit 0.8Gb/s.

Google claims 100x faster than today's average broadband. I have read the average is 3.6Mb/s.

If I get .8 Gbps... I'll be happy. That's still much better than FiOS's best speed advertised of 300 Mbps.

No one will really know what actual speeds are going to be until it goes online. Speculation that the speed will not be what Google says is pointless.

Google claims the 100 times faster average is based upon 5.8 Mbps.
http://fiber.google.com/about/ (read small print at the bottom)

Edited by thomastmc, Sep 4 2012, 12:35am :

I thought the entire deal was FREE Fiber ? whats going on with that ..
and who in their right minds would want google to bring fiber into your home ?
my god they would know everything about your family there would be no privacy at all..
how do they get away with this ? facebook gets killed with privacy but every one turns their heads with GOOGLE!!! .. nuts.

It is not free for consumers. Free for schools and a few other categories which I cannot recall.

It costs households money. Either pay 300 for the install and get a 5M connection for 7 years.

Gibbyhome said,
I thought the entire deal was FREE Fiber ? whats going on with that ..
and who in their right minds would want google to bring fiber into your home ?
my god they would know everything about your family there would be no privacy at all..
how do they get away with this ? facebook gets killed with privacy but every one turns their heads with GOOGLE!!! .. nuts.

As someone that lives in the area, the inner city has soooooooo many vacant homes it's not even funny. Also there are a lot of renters that are less likely to invest in the $300 instalation because they may not stay there long.

Glad Google is revising this, but they should've done it sooner. One week will likely not make enough of a difference.

Darth Tigris said,
As someone that lives in the area, the inner city has soooooooo many vacant homes it's not even funny. Also there are a lot of renters that are less likely to invest in the $300 instalation because they may not stay there long.

Glad Google is revising this, but they should've done it sooner. One week will likely not make enough of a difference.

It simply costs too much for these areas and they should eat the registration fee. 70/120 in these areas for Internet and TV, that's laughable. Those areas are running basic cable and NetZero.

Salty Wagyu said,
$70 a month for fibre is a lot isn't it? So not many will be interested.

You havin' a laugh ?

£44 for a 1Gbps fibre line is cheap. I'd pay that all day long for them kinda speeds !

Ferret said,

You havin' a laugh ?

£44 for a 1Gbps fibre line is cheap. I'd pay that all day long for them kinda speeds !

I would guess you are not "poor" then.

Actually 70/mo is a lot. Consider 20/mo will get a 3meg connection. Slow is much better than no connection.

Kansas City Kansas [wyandotte county KS] and many parts of Kansas City Missouri are poor and and a good fraction of them are poorly educated.

Ferret said,

You havin' a laugh ?

£44 for a 1Gbps fibre line is cheap. I'd pay that all day long for them kinda speeds !

Ferret said,

£44 for a 1Gbps fibre line is cheap. I'd pay that all day long for them kinda speeds !

Considering you can get 80/20 Fibre in the UK for about £20~ then yeah £44 is a big increase for more speed (which you'd seldom need when you have 80mbit already)

Salty Wagyu said,

Considering you can get 80/20 Fibre in the UK for about £20~ then yeah £44 is a big increase for more speed (which you'd seldom need when you have 80mbit already)

Why would you compare it to the UK? Compare it to other speeds in the US; where FiOS is $70/month and you only get 15/5.

3owin said,
Actually 70/mo is a lot. Consider 20/mo will get a 3meg connection. Slow is much better than no connection.

Kansas City Kansas [wyandotte county KS] and many parts of Kansas City Missouri are poor and and a good fraction of them are poorly educated.

Yes that's true. It has nothing to do with the money aspect. Nothing at all. Most of them are already paying $80 - $120 for internet, cable, and phone. Or just internet and cable. They're just stupid 'Dotte trash honestly and I wish they would have came to Johnson County first. Would have been much more effective.

It's typical Wyandotte thinking. Free super fast internet for our schools and libraries. Free wifi in places. Super fast internet for us at the same or slightly higher price than we already pay? Nope, I'll continue to pay a crazy amount and get ripped off, have crap or no internet for our schools, and pay for 4 lines all with data plans with my sell carrier. Let's not forget those 22's on my rust-bucket.

If I understand this article correctly it's costing people 10 bucks just to register interest? it's little wonder pooere areas aren't taking it up. If it was available in my area at that price (which amounts to about £40/mo) i'd be on it like stink on poo

Javik said,
If I understand this article correctly it's costing people 10 bucks just to register interest? it's little wonder pooere areas aren't taking it up. If it was available in my area at that price (which amounts to about £40/mo) i'd be on it like stink on poo

With the amount of technology kicking around these days and more people turning to the Internet, with the want to go faster, the need is there but companies don't seem to care.

Here you go Google, take some of my wages each month and give me fast Internet.
Nah, we'll just roll our service out to 1 state in the US only and claim how brilliant it is for only 1% of the planet.

Crisps said,

With the amount of technology kicking around these days and more people turning to the Internet, with the want to go faster, the need is there but companies don't seem to care.

Here you go Google, take some of my wages each month and give me fast Internet.
Nah, we'll just roll our service out to 1 state in the US only and claim how brilliant it is for only 1% of the planet.

If they could roll it out to the country as easy as it is to say they would. There's a reason they chose the Kansas City are. It's not easy AT ALL to roll out 1G Fiber to homes where it does not exist.

Crisps said,

With the amount of technology kicking around these days and more people turning to the Internet, with the want to go faster, the need is there but companies don't seem to care.

Here you go Google, take some of my wages each month and give me fast Internet.
Nah, we'll just roll our service out to 1 state in the US only and claim how brilliant it is for only 1% of the planet.

It's not some simple thing. It's taking them years to roll out Google Fiber in Kansas City alone. Who knows how long it would take to roll it out across the country.

Javik said,
If I understand this article correctly it's costing people 10 bucks just to register interest? it's little wonder pooere areas aren't taking it up. If it was available in my area at that price (which amounts to about £40/mo) i'd be on it like stink on poo

That $10 goes towards your first bill.

Have they even released their channel lineup? That could be a good reason. It seemed, from some reports I had read, that they were light on popular channels. Channels, of course, that were more expensive.