Com'on guys... can't we keep posts in context? If we were all given "up to 5Mbps" service for free from all providers, would that be sufficient pipe to deliver smooth streaming HD from some cable TV replacement "new model"? And I don't mean hypothetically (such as pretending that 5Mbps actually delivers 5Mbps consistently). I've had anywhere from 25-50Mbps and even the 25 option can have trouble delivering a consistent stream of HD from iCloud. Might as well mix in an implication that the free Tmobile 500Mb via wireless is a great option too (ignoring that you can't steam an hour of HD in 500Mb).
So looking at the Google Fiber (as savior) choices per the link shared perviously, it's $70/month for "up to 1Gbps" or $130/month for their bundle of the same plus television.
Where I am, I have 2 choices for broadband... 2 choices often cast as among the greediest: Comcast vs. AT&T. I see them as devils myself. However, I get Comcast broadband + voice for $54/month. Yes, that's a promotional rate but they'll renew promotional rates if one threatens to switch to the competitor when the promotion is running down. AT&T offers about the same for a little less than that. If Comcast ever clamps down, I can actually switch to keep the cost about the same.
Within the context of this discussion, one doesn't need faster broadband... just consistently fast to stream whatever show or movie we're trying to watch to some little box without interruption. So Gigabit or 10XGigabit (if someone would promise that) doesn't deliver the show any more consistently than 50Mbps or 25Mbps. If the goal is to replace cable TV service with some kind of streaming service offering, the price of "fast enough" broadband seems like it is more important than some kind of consideration of "up to 1Gbps" vs. "up to 50Mbps" when both will deliver the movie at exactly the same quality.
So, if Google was where I am now, would I switch? Another option would be great. But at $70, I'd keep my $54 option which covers voice too. The net experience on my

TV would be exactly the same but it would cost me about $192 less each year to stay with the "greedy" Comcast (or AT&T) than switch to the more expensive broadband "savior".
Google would only be the better deal for me if the 5Mbps was "good enough" to deliver uninterrupted HD streams plus general Internet access for "$0/month*" (after the $300 "construction fee"). It's not, so then Google pricing must be compared to Comcast & AT&T pricing within this context. And there, Google loses unless someone needs >25 or 50Mbps for purposes beyond the context of a pipe for streaming "new model" replacement solutions... or Google gets more price competitive with established "greedy" cable companies.