On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, Shawn wrote: > Phil Mendelsohn wrote: > > Hang on -- be careful about distorting geography. The difference between > > the eastern and western 'burbs is that it's fifteen miles from downtown > > St. Paul to the WI border, whereas that same 15 miles west puts you in > > Plymouth or Eden Prairie (more or less.) Different pattern of development > > too -- the cornfields in Woodbury were a lot closer to 3M world HQ than > > the cornfields in the west/SW 'burbs... > > > > > Part of the issue is that given development and expansion, they (meaning > telco's and such) will go to where money is. True, but all I was saying is that all things being equal, you make money where you have less overhead. There is more existing infrastructure in the east metro, particularly with state govt facilities, than in new suburban housing developments. Doesn't mean service is any better there! Doesn't mean they won't be putting more energies into western burbs. But downtown St. Paul has a really fat pipe, and it's easier to get to than running new copper, because even if the old copper is bad, it doesn't have as far to go due to geographic constraints. Your point still seems valid to me, but sometimes physical reality does have effects in virtual reality. :) (And sometimes, I'm not firing on all cylinders -- you guys are bigger telco gurus than me.) Phil M. -- "To misattribute a quote is unforgivable." --Anonymous