How would you square that against one of the core objectives of targeting rural, unserved/underserved communities? E.g. consider Iowa[1], a single state which is ~3.5x larger in land (144,660 km^2), ~63% smaller in population (3.2 million), and ~90% lower density (22/km^2) compared to Switzerland...never mind that there are roughly a dozen other states in similar or more challenging situations.
Suppose a small business establishes infra in a way that must be "accessible to any competitor". After laying the ground work and establishing a customer base, what's to stop an asymmetrically well-capitalized competitor from stepping in with the intent of swallowing a relatively small loss to operationally bleed out a much smaller incumbent with no margin? E.g. if your local addressable market were half the population of Iowa with service aggressively priced at what Switzerland customers pay, we'd still be talking about a notional revenue cap that's ~1% of what whales like AT&T and Verizon with growing fiber segments generate annually.
I can imagine how outcomes might work out favorably for consumers when the addressable market is a small, wealthy sovereign nation with significant population density...much less when considering rural communities in fly-over states that the rest of the country has a tendency to neglect yet whose economic contributions remain significant.