NYT buys into Verizon’s FTTH tripe

4 thoughts on “NYT buys into Verizon’s FTTH tripe”

  1. There is another (alternative) Municipal dark fiber builds that open the fiber up as open access to community and commercial operators. The Municipalities with their inherent right-of-way and “men in trucks” are the perfect people to deploy conduit, and dark fiber in the municipality. Finance the conduit and fiber with bonds where there is a match between the lifetime of the asset and the finance source.

    Let commercial (and community) entities fund and manage the short asset life (electronics/optics/services/support) and charge in an open market.

    Its just like roads. Without roads, there would be much much less commerce. They (and fiber) are a common good that can not be built with standard corporate ROI and require ether a monopoly or a municipal builder.

  2. what competitive phone service?

    Oh, you mean people playing rate arbitrage between below cost wholesale line arates and retail phone rates? Yep, whole lotta innovation there. Even the VOIP regulation/rate arbitrage guys are more technically innovative.

    For some of us, competition means getting more distinct lines run to the home, not just reducing price points for current services by remarketing the lines. The same effect the CLEC have had on phone competition could have been achieved by just reducing the ILECS retail rates.

    The business case for more wires will only be made if the regulatory regime reflects the real costs for networks as well as removes barriers to entry in building new networks. Right now, the wierd market distortions, both at the federal, state, and local levels, make it very unlikely for new wired competitors to emerge to build out new networks in the US.

    Om,
    I think that you are over-stating the barriers and problems of installing FTTH networks – this isn’t any different than overbuilding another MSO HFC plant. FTTH as a technolgy works fine, but no one if going to fund a startup to compete against the MSOs and RBOCs. The record of community owned networks is mixed at best – picking the right technical solution isn’t a strength of governments.

    Getting TV content for FTTH networks isn’t an issue – the content guys are more than willing to license their stuff at the same rates that smaller MSOs get as long as a good DRM solution is in place. In fact, they would like to get additional channel capacity to allow more of their content library to get aired.

    What analog problems with FTTH? What people costs? Could you explain a little more about these issues?

    The Bells are in a hard spot and their cultural limitations are making it harder for them to excape the trap. it isn’t like the MSOs are happily promoting competition either – their anti-community owned network lobbying is immense.

    As always, I enjoy your blog!
    Doc

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.