support@semo.net
1573 686-9114​​​​

As most of you are finding out, inside your Municipal Utilities / City Cable bill in January is a flyer about new speeds and rates for Cable Internet. As people have noted, this flyer didn't just go to MyCityCable customers and it doesn't say "MyCityCable" on it anywhere. By the way our phone is ringing, this has caused mass confusion. We are confused as well, as to why City Cable would tell semo.net customers that your rate and speed are changing. But it's not fair that our customers get yanked around like this. We will honor the flyer that has been mailed with your bill. You should expect the speed change to take place in the next 48 hours. If

RECAP: A Missouri Statute which has already been tested in the U.S. Supreme Court requires the City to sell telecommunications services "at cost" to other telecommunications companies like semo.net or Big River Telephone. But the new City Ordinance has a column labeled "cost to serve" and "New Rate" which clearly shows over $3,000 dollars profit per month has been built into the new rates.

The following information was relayed by Brian Becker to City Council on Monday, Aug 2, 2010. Additional supporting information has been added for clarity: According to Mr. Bach, every time a light switch is turned on or the faucet is opened, citizens are subsidizing MyCityCable to the tune of over $1,000,000 each year. I am on record stating that these numbers ARE NOT accurate and the city IS NOT losing money on Internet.

According to semo.net: The cost to increase capacity from the current 150 Mb to 300 Mb should be a one-time cost of less than $50,000 and possible only $20,000. If the books of the Internet portion were separated from the TV income/expenses then I believe it could easily be shown that the Internet side is profiting and can absorb that cost. Remember, making the network better is better for the citizens. Making the prices cheaper by competition is better for the citizens. City Cable should not run it's network as a business. It should run the network as a government which provides infrastructure for citizens lives to be better. We welcome a response from the City.

Similar questions are: Shouldn't the city benefit from the network they put in? The simple answers are: Without profit incentives, no private business would compete. And without competition, there is no assurance of lowest price. Because the citizens should benefit from this network...not the city If you go to a concert at the Black River Coliseum by an independent promoter. If the concert is a success, both the promoter and the band profit from the use of city property. If the concert is not a success, the city still gets its basic costs covered for the use of their facilities. Do you walk away from the concert thinking...that promoter shouldn't get all those profits, it should be the city's money!