mixdup join:2003-06-28 Alpharetta, GA |
mixdup
Member
2014-Jun-4 8:18 am
Additional 13 million?Is there any confirmation that the "additional 13 million" will just be LTE?
It seems there are some outlets that are claiming it will be U-Verse upgrades, and of course around here the thinking is that it will be wireless. Since they're already basically committed to expanding LTE to their entire wireline service area through their push to decommission TDM network, it seems like possibly (hopefully?) this "new" broadband expansion will actually be wireline not wireless. | |
|
| |
Re: Additional 13 million?Remember they promised 100,000 new jobs in the T mobile sale | |
|
| | jmn1207 Premium Member join:2000-07-19 Sterling, VA |
jmn1207
Premium Member
2014-Jun-4 10:10 am
Re: Additional 13 million?said by tigerpaw509:Remember they promised 100,000 new jobs in the T mobile sale I'm sure this will happen. It seems I am defecating winged primates. | |
|
| | |
to tigerpaw509
Those 100,000 jobs would have been not direct AT&T jobs or for any period of time. Those jobs would have been... a) Marketing (have to rebrand) b) People to sell off T-Mobile locations c) People to sell/merge infrastucture d) People to pay off politicians | |
|
| |
to mixdup
It will be mostly LTE. From AT&T's original announcement: quote: AT&T will use the merger synergies to expand its plans to build and enhance high-speed broadband service to 15 million customer locations, mostly in rural areas where AT&T does not provide high-speed broadband service today, utilizing a combination of technologies including fiber to the premises and fixed wireless local loop capabilities.
With no CAPEX bump, and AT&T being AT&T, you're just not going to see any meaningful "fiber to the prem" expansion of any scale. The lion's share is going to be LTE. | |
|
| | karpodiemHail to The Victors Premium Member join:2008-05-20 Troy, MI |
Re: Additional 13 million?Karl - T's wireless margins are being compressed though. Say they get their wish and completely dump DSL/POTS - I have to think somebody would do a WISP or coax overbuild at that point; LTE will never support streaming video on a meaningful scale. Those same consumers can get their video programming via Direct TV, but stable/fast internet is more sought after, and LTE just won't cut it.
They are driving themselves into being a dumb pipe faster than they realize (in the consumer space, they still make good coin on enterprise stuff).
Also, gotta tip my hat to Apple with Wifi calling in iOS 8. Yes, Android has had this for years but this is the tipping point that will force VZW into offering it, which delights me tremendously (heard whispers they were looking somehow meter VoLTE). To hell with the carriers! | |
|
| | | rradina join:2000-08-08 Chesterfield, MO |
Re: Additional 13 million?I read about some new scheme that creates some kind of cell around each device. There was a recent article (possibly referenced here) where someone showed a bunch of iPads streaming video at the same time using the same LTE node. | |
|
| | | | karpodiemHail to The Victors Premium Member join:2008-05-20 Troy, MI |
Re: Additional 13 million?that would be pCell - » www.marketwired.com/pres ··· 5386.htmDish was actually taking a look at it, they are the only provider (I know of) that has publicly acknowledged that they are trialing it. we're probably 5-7 years away from it, if the technology is even viable. | |
|
| | | |
| |
| |
yugga to mixdup
Anon
2014-Jun-9 5:48 am
to mixdup
It's not going to be straight LTE. It's going to be a point to point wireless solution they're using to replace last mile copper and fiber deployments. This solution does not seem to be LTE-based, at least not the LTE we know from the phone side of the house. | |
|
| | mixdup join:2003-06-28 Alpharetta, GA |
mixdup
Member
2014-Jun-9 2:29 pm
Re: Additional 13 million?said by yugga :It's not going to be straight LTE. It's going to be a point to point wireless solution they're using to replace last mile copper and fiber deployments. This solution does not seem to be LTE-based, at least not the LTE we know from the phone side of the house. Are there any details on this? Is it something they're trialing or discussing publicly? What are the caps going to be like? | |
|
|
Yeah right.2 buildings will get fiber and the rest will get LTE. | |
|
|
bsbunch of bs, the places that will see the 1Gbps will already see it anyways as it will be in the most dense populations...
Freaking liars | |
|
rradina join:2000-08-08 Chesterfield, MO |
Sounds Like a Jewelry Store Sale...Quietly raise prices the week before the big 50% off sale.
Perhaps ATT is cutting fixed-line investment now so when they close the DirecTV deal, they can increase it to the former level and amazingly, show an increase. | |
|
| |
Re: Sounds Like a Jewelry Store Sale...I was about to suggest that, good ol Macy's pricing. | |
|
| openbox9 Premium Member join:2004-01-26 71144 |
to rradina
said by rradina:Perhaps ATT is cutting fixed-line investment Not according to AT&T's financial statements. | |
|
| | |
| | | openbox9 Premium Member join:2004-01-26 71144 |
openbox9
Premium Member
2014-Jun-7 9:45 pm
Re: Sounds Like a Jewelry Store Sale...I reference financial statements every time Karl Bode claims that AT&T and Verizon aren't investing in wireline infrastructure. » Re: Maybe..... | |
|
|
....Ha - why not just spend the 48.5 billion and give everyone fiber | |
|
| |
jorcmg
Member
2014-Jun-4 9:20 am
Re: ....They wont for the same reasons google wont. | |
|
| SimbaSevenI Void Warranties join:2003-03-24 Billings, MT |
to GoodOmens
But.. But.. that would make sense!
Rip out all the copper and replace it with fiber. Spend $48.5bil now and get most of it back when they recycle all the copper. | |
|
| |
3 recommendations |
Re: ....In all serious I would pay an installation fee of under 200 bucks if they would guarantee a 1gbps FIBER TO THE HOME connection. The problem is the bean counters are too sold on milking copper when they could have installed fiber back when they did uverse initially and recouped most of those costs back by now as well as the savings they would have had from not having to deal with an outdated copper plant. Instead it was all about keeping capex to a min and profits to a max. What the dumb asses dont realize is that they would have had larger profits in the end because uverse would have grown more because they had a quality product behind it instead of a half assed one. Public opinion would have been diffrent with a FTTH uverse versus a FTTN uverse product. | |
|
| | | |
jorcmg
Member
2014-Jun-4 9:45 am
Re: ....ATT should sell its copper plant for scrap. Google fiber is building the new network. Lol | |
|
| | | |
to captinkirk
Perhaps if consumers saw broadband in terms they'd understand better, such as paying the same price or more for groceries and the manufacturer keeps shrinking the package size which increases profitability while the consumer is (almost) none the wiser-- at least for a time. Not deploying fiber and doing that required capex build is basically the same thing. You empty your wallet for obsolete broadband services, while ATT and now Verizon grows fat on offering service with little or no significant investment in wire line infrastructure.
By 2015, service offered by BPON ONT terminals and nodes (can you say 13 years old!!) will also be obsolete-- considering where the current available equipment is in the 1 - 100 gigabit range. If you had a computer or cell phone that's 13 years old, people would look at you funny. It will be worthless when 4k video rolls around. | |
|
| | | | BiggA Premium Member join:2005-11-23 Central CT ·Frontier FiberOp.. Asus RT-AC68
|
BiggA
Premium Member
2014-Jun-4 6:30 pm
Re: ....You're mostly right here, but BPON won't be totally obsolete. Although they can't go above 100mbps with BPON, because of ONT limitations (although can a GPON ONT installed on a BPON line get more than 100mbps?), it's definitely not inadequate for 4k video, and still is a much more solid system than what cable is using. They will need to upgrade, however. | |
|
| | | | openbox9 Premium Member join:2004-01-26 71144 |
to tmc8080
said by tmc8080:ATT and now Verizon grows fat on offering service with little or no significant investment in wire line infrastructure. Verizon Wireline CAPEX FY11: $6.4B FY12: $6.3B FY13: $6.2B FY14 projected: $5.5-6.0B AT&T Wireline CAPEX FY11: $10.5B FY12: $8.8B FY13: $10.1B FY14 projected: $10.1B | |
|
| | | | | BiggA Premium Member join:2005-11-23 Central CT |
BiggA
Premium Member
2014-Jun-5 5:51 pm
Re: ....For what? Where's the fiber? | |
|
| | | | | | openbox9 Premium Member join:2004-01-26 71144 |
openbox9
Premium Member
2014-Jun-5 5:55 pm
Re: ....I imagine it's being deployed. | |
|
| | | | | | | BiggA Premium Member join:2005-11-23 Central CT |
BiggA
Premium Member
2014-Jun-5 6:44 pm
Re: ....Where other than a few greenfield builds? | |
|
| | | | | | | | openbox9 Premium Member join:2004-01-26 71144 |
openbox9
Premium Member
2014-Jun-6 2:00 am
Re: ....Well, AT&T and Verizon's financial reports state they're spending on FiOS and Uverse. Where do you believe the multiple billions of dollars are being spent in wireline CAPEX each year? | |
|
| | | | | | | | | SimbaSevenI Void Warranties join:2003-03-24 Billings, MT ·StarLink
|
Re: ....said by openbox9:Where do you believe the multiple billions of dollars are being spent in wireline CAPEX each year? Lobbyists. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | openbox9 Premium Member join:2004-01-26 71144 |
openbox9
Premium Member
2014-Jun-6 4:30 pm
Re: ....Ok, but that's not CAPEX. Is it really that difficult to believe that telcos are indeed reinvesting billions of dollars into their businesses for wireline services, even when it's written in black and white? Stop fixating on Karl Bode 's headlines. | |
|
| | | BiggA Premium Member join:2005-11-23 Central CT |
to captinkirk
Exactly. AT&T has made stupid decision after stupid decision. | |
|
| | | justbitsDSL is dead. Long live DSL! Premium Member join:2003-01-08 Chicago, IL |
to captinkirk
Why would AT&T install FTTN or FTTH when they can make more money keeping competition out of the market place by eliminating "last mile" maintenance and charge more for wireless data? | |
|
| | | openbox9 Premium Member join:2004-01-26 71144 |
to captinkirk
said by captinkirk:In all serious I would pay an installation fee of under 200 bucks if they would guarantee a 1gbps FIBER TO THE HOME connection. What about getting everyone in your market to pay the $900-1500 cost to pull fiber to your doorstep? | |
|
| | | man00 join:2003-07-25 united state |
to captinkirk
I remember years ago in Oklahoma, at&t wanted some bill passed. At&T promised all in the state would have the same options. Well about 12 years later there some in the state that can't even get dialup. | |
|
DrexBeer...The other white meat. Premium Member join:2000-02-24 Not There |
Drex
Premium Member
2014-Jun-4 9:53 am
PromisesNothing weighs lighter than a promise. ~German Proverb
For every promise, there is price to pay. ~Jim Rohn
Promises are meant to be broken. | |
|
|
2 Million?Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that around how many xFITL locations they serve? My bet is this is where the FTTP upgrades happen. | |
|
| ••••• |
|
SorryNo deal AT&T. If you expanded FTTH to 100% of homes with lesser wireline AT&T service, we could talk. Now if only I was in charge. | |
|
| •••••• |
2 recommendations |
Odd..So is AT&T saying without the directTV deal it would not be able to deploy those 2 million fiber connections? This sounds more like extortion than bargaining. | |
|
| |
Re: Odd..No, they are saying thats the cherry on top. We'll be saving so much money we can now do this sooner then we may have planned. | |
|
|
Since when did...Companies in a merger get to set milestones in their merger for approval. Last time I checked we the people should set the milestone ?
Sorry But Im seeing this as we will give all our current fiber deploys gig if we can get this done. There will be no expansion, if there is it will be to very few places, probably mostly densely populated high rises in their service area and feed them all to a oversaturated backhaul. | |
|
|
dnoyeBFerrous Phallus join:2000-10-09 Southfield, MI |
dnoyeB
Member
2014-Jun-4 10:39 am
Copper vs. wirelessI know wireless has way more connectivity. But which has more bandwidth potential? | |
|
|
att tech
Anon
2014-Jun-4 11:55 am
rural areasI cant speak for what is going on in other areas, but here in kentucky we are actively deploying ip dslams in rural areas. We have halted uverse deployments recently and the focus is now ip dslams. | |
|
| ••••••• |
|
FiOSDoes anyone know what percentage of homes Verizon passes with FiOS (in Verizon territory) as a comparison to the current 0% of AT&T homes with Gigapower? | |
|
scheb Premium Member join:2007-04-14 Frisco, TX |
scheb
Premium Member
2014-Jun-4 2:30 pm
Enough!Enough with the carrot and stick approach already! | |
|
|
So...AT&T sez they promise 2 million "gigapower" homes IF their merger is approved.
So my question is... can't they do it without the merger ?
Will new homes magically spring up if the deal is approved ?
This "promise" must for the idiots who'd believe anything.
But again, there's a lot of idiots out there. | |
|
|
15444104 (banned)
Member
2014-Jun-4 3:32 pm
100% transfer of all present copper service to fiber serviceThe only way the AT&T should be allowed to buy out DirecTV is if all existing copper served residences and businesses are rebuilt with FTTH/FTTB.
Essentially AT&T needs to replace all copper wire line service with fiber line service. Period.
Randall Stephenson...if you are reading this you should have already been in the process, but you let the shareholders lead and YOU have followed, instead of leading yourself. Not the mark of a true leader. | |
|
| ••••••••• |
|
Termites
Anon
2014-Jun-4 5:02 pm
No ThanksThis is to ATT no Thanks
yes to Google...
Vote no on this merger higher prices,if they do approve this i will Disconnect Directv after 16 Years. | |
|
| openbox9 Premium Member join:2004-01-26 71144 |
openbox9
Premium Member
2014-Jun-5 12:08 am
Re: No ThanksYou want Google to acquire DirecTV? | |
|
1 recommendation |
KirkBranick
Anon
2014-Jun-4 5:02 pm
I'm confused...Fiber is unproven technology...and expensive. Wouldn't it be cheaper just to hire more lobbyists? | |
|
| |
Re: I'm confused...If fiber was so unproven and expensive then why has Verizon and google rolled it out with so much success! It's not as expensive as you think it is. I work in Broadcast and fiber more than enough and is totally proven to get major video links (in TB terms) from point A to point B so reliably. Infact I know all major video providers use it to push around video traffic across the country. If it was so unproven then why would everyone be using it! | |
|
| | |
PhotonMan
Anon
2014-Jun-4 7:49 pm
Re: I'm confused...said by captinkirk:If fiber was so unproven and expensive then why has Verizon and google rolled it out with so much success! » Illinois Muni-Foes Come Together | |
|
Cobra11M join:2010-12-23 Mineral Wells, TX |
hawhat lies they are spinning now!, they will do it with or without directv.. 2 million.. heck that's like dallas, las vegas.. or some other major city.. to easy! | |
|
|
|