dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
298
share rss forum feed


dmconwa1

@qwest.net

Qwest FTTN deployment

Qwest has earmaked $300 million THIS YEAR to provide FTTN service to 1.5 million customers. This is the first launch. You're fooling yourself if you think that is all they will do.

If the service is succesful I'm sure they'll deploy more next year.

The Seattle plan is looking at $500 million to build. Assuming they stick to budget. That will never happen. How long do you think it would take to build it out?

Corydon
Cultivant son jardin
Premium
join:2008-02-18
Denver, CO
Qwest simply doesn't have the money to aggressively roll out FTTN on a widespread basis.

Some financials:

2007 CAPEX for Qwest was $1.67B.

By comparison:

Verizon:  $17.54B
AT&T: $17.72B
Comcast: $6.56B
Charter: $1.24B

That last one should tell you a lot: Qwest and Charter are spending about the same amount on capital expenditures, while Qwest has obligations to cover a lot more territory that is harder to service than Charter does. Telcos have to spend a lot of money servicing all that copper in rural areas, and Qwest's territory is very sparsely populated and geographically interesting. MSOs, by contrast, tend to stick to cities.

This is why Verizon is trying to drop Maine and New Hampshire, btw. They'd rather concentrate on areas with denser population (and more money) like Boston, New York City, etc.

Unfortunately, we won't be seeing a lot of advanced new services popping up in Qwest's footprint (and seeing how I live in Denver, that hurts me too).

Seattle recognizes that Qwest is unlikely to roll out the kind of service they'd like to see, and the MSOs, knowing that Qwest is weak, will only invest just enough to keep ahead of Qwest. The result is that Seattle (and Denver and Phoenix) don't get the same kind of attention that cities like Boston and New York are getting, so they're trying to get the ball rolling in another way.