 WeSRT4
join:2000-11-20
Mobile, AL | FTTH FTTH... pay me now or pay me later. If they don't deploy it now they will be 5 years from now. I for one think it makes more financial sense to do it right the first time. |
|
| Umm sure. Fiber is already being pushed to the curb. When it gets cheaper or they find a need, all they have to do is push it to the homes, holmes. |
|
|
|
 en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | I agree.. its really expensive to do the last mile, however prepping it by FTTN is not a bad idea, as long as they can make it work. Using the profits from FTTN, they can persue the last mile of fibre, bonded pairs, wireless, or any other tech. |
|
dynodbPremium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN | reply to WeSRT4
How does it make more financial sense to deploy when demand is low and costs are high?
As time goes by, technology gets cheaper (Verizon has already noted that connection costs have dropped significantly since they started their FIOS project).
Currently there's no great demand for FTTH- quite a few are still satisfied with 1.5M (or even less) DSL.
As much as many of us would like to see widespread FTTH right freakin' now, it makes more financial sense is to wait until demand is up and deployment costs are down. |
|
 alchav
join:2002-05-17
Palm Desert, CA | reply to WeSRT4
Well I went on the Record years ago when I declared Verizon with their FTTH FiOS was the clear winner. Verizon Stock Holders think differently, they think like some of the short sighted members on this board, that they should have used some of their Copper Infrastructure. I think AT&T is 5 years behind with their FTTN. Someone said they can just push Fiber from there to the home, but it's not that easy. I'm sure all the equipment has to be changed. So AT&T will be playing catch-up for a very long time, and their Stock Holders will be crying. |
|
| Is that what they teach people in the desert?
Fiber is fiber. No need to rip out existing fiber for new one if its perfectly useful. All they would have to do is piggyback onto the box.
Its like if I went from DSL to Cable HSI in the home. I wouldnt toss out my routers and ethernet. I would just throw out the DSL modem or sell it on ebay. |
|
| reply to alchav
AT&T won't have to replace customer equipment if it eventually upgrades to FTTH.
Verizon, however, will have to replace all of its equipment, including customers' set top boxes, when it eventually upgrades to a 100% IPTV platform (as it has said it will eventually). Those costs will be on top of the $30+ billion it's already spent. |
|
| reply to dynodb
No demand for fiber to the home?!?!?!@!W#$ said by dynodb:Currently there's no great demand for FTTH- quite a few are still satisfied with 1.5M (or even less) DSL. There's no demand for fiber to the home???? How do you figure that? I couldn't disagree with you more. Whitacre would like for you to believe that there is no demand for fiber and that dsl is sufficient. In fact he has stated that a few times in interviews. And he wants you to believe that because he already has a paid for copper network in place and he has already recieved payment to build out the fiber to the home network that was suppose to be 80% in place by 2004.
Instead of building out that network he invested in lobbying, restored the monopoly and entered vertical markets. In 1996, SBC maintained phone lines and wasn't even allowed to sell long distance. Now look at them!
Frankly, what is his motivation to build out this fiber network? There's no competitors to speak of beyond cable and that product is no better than dsl. So what's his motivation to replace his already paid for copper network with a billion dollar fiber network? He has no motivation. And that's why none of it is done.
As a consumer, an American and someone in the ISP industry, I can't stand Whitacre. But as a stockholder he did no wrong. After finding out about his announced retirement (on BBR) I set my trading account to dump my 177 shares first thing when the market opens Monday. I think that this day signifies the peak of the telco dynasty. In the next few years the power companies are going to enter the ISP market and for the first time the telcos are going to face real competition.  |
|
dynodbPremium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN | said by T1 Rocky:said by dynodb:Currently there's no great demand for FTTH- quite a few are still satisfied with 1.5M (or even less) DSL. There's no demand for fiber to the home???? How do you figure that? I couldn't disagree with you more. I said no great demand. BBR posters aren't representative of the market- for instance, Verizon is only getting 10% penetration the first year FIOS is introduced in an area, and 15% in areas it's been available for over a year.
When 85% of the people who can get it don't, I'd characterize that as less than great demand- especially given that they're deploying to more urban parts of the country where one would expect overall broadband usage to be higher. |
|
| They really aren't advertising it or pushing it that much. Many of the initial installs are word of mouth. The demand IS there when people learn about it. |
|
alchav
join:2002-05-17
Palm Desert, CA | reply to ninjatutle
Re: FTTH said by ninjatutle:Is that what they teach people in the desert? Fiber is fiber. No need to rip out existing fiber for new one if its perfectly useful. All they would have to do is piggyback onto the box. Its like if I went from DSL to Cable HSI in the home. I wouldnt toss out my routers and ethernet. I would just throw out the DSL modem or sell it on ebay. No, The Desert is way behind in Technology, but we do have FiOS. I'm an old PacBell Telco person, so I was talking about the Electronics or Termination Equipment. I know Fiber is Fiber, but FTTN is way different than FTTH. FTTN has more equipment, and I don't think most people like the large Nodes throughout their neighborhoods.
ALC |
|
