 RickPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT
1 edit | reply to moonpuppy
Re: Comments? IMHO..I wouldn't be too eager to sing the praises of the cost of FIOS. If anything, Verizon is going to have a lot of heat on them to raise prices MORE than Comcast ever will.
Why? Because # 1..Fios is SO expensive to rollout.
#2..so many of their customers are coming from DSL..meaning they're cannibalizing their own customer base. And
#3...They're losing landlines left and right.
There is an amazing amount of pressure on Verizon to make Fios work. And while the price might be competitive now..it's that way because they have no other choice. I ask you though..how many more landlines and dsl customers do they lose before they can simply no longer subsidize fios at current prices?
To sum it up..I think the REAL risk in future price increases is with Verizon.
In that regard..AT&T probably does have it right with Uverse..with it not being as costly.
The problem with that though is it technologically enough to withstand what Comcast is throwing at them?
Time will tell. |
|
|
|
| said by Rick:IMHO..I wouldn't be too eager to sing the praises of the cost of FIOS. If anything, Verizon is going to have a lot of heat on them to raise prices MORE than Comcast ever will. Why? Because # 1..Fios is SO expensive to rollout. #2..so many of their customers are coming from DSL..meaning they're cannibalizing their own customer base. And #3...They're losing landlines left and right. There is an amazing amount of pressure on Verizon to make Fios work. And while the price might be competitive now..it's that way because they have no other choice. I ask you though..how many more landlines and dsl customers do they lose before they can simply no longer subsidize fios at current prices? To sum it up..I think the REAL risk in future price increases is with Verizon. In that regard..AT&T probably does have it right with Uverse..with it not being as costly. The problem with that though is it technologically enough to withstand what Comcast is throwing at them? Time will tell. DOCSIS 3.0 is not cheap either and that further puts pressure on Comcast to up their prices.
Landlines are the bread and butter of telcos because while the basic rate is regulated, all the additions like caller ID, etc. are cash cows. Those start going going down in numbers, then you have a problem.
Comcast raises its rates too on TV due to programming costs which both sides will incur. I have already spoken to this issue many times and have said the cable companies and telcos need to grow some balls and take the issue to the subscribers. Watch how fast the tables turn on the content providers when they are held responsible for the extra money customers have to pay.
FIOS has one advantage in that fiber is already at the home so upgrading will be cheaper in the future. Fibet to the node can only go so far and we all know bandwidth is being used up by HDTV and internet.
As you said, time will tell but you also have to take into account that Verizon has a smaller footprint right now that will continue to grow. |
|
| said by moonpuppy:said by Rick:IMHO..I wouldn't be too eager to sing the praises of the cost of FIOS. If anything, Verizon is going to have a lot of heat on them to raise prices MORE than Comcast ever will. Why? Because # 1..Fios is SO expensive to rollout. #2..so many of their customers are coming from DSL..meaning they're cannibalizing their own customer base. And #3...They're losing landlines left and right. There is an amazing amount of pressure on Verizon to make Fios work. And while the price might be competitive now..it's that way because they have no other choice. I ask you though..how many more landlines and dsl customers do they lose before they can simply no longer subsidize fios at current prices? To sum it up..I think the REAL risk in future price increases is with Verizon. In that regard..AT&T probably does have it right with Uverse..with it not being as costly. The problem with that though is it technologically enough to withstand what Comcast is throwing at them? Time will tell. DOCSIS 3.0 is not cheap either and that further puts pressure on Comcast to up their prices. Landlines are the bread and butter of telcos because while the basic rate is regulated, all the additions like caller ID, etc. are cash cows. Those start going going down in numbers, then you have a problem. Comcast raises its rates too on TV due to programming costs which both sides will incur. I have already spoken to this issue many times and have said the cable companies and telcos need to grow some balls and take the issue to the subscribers. Watch how fast the tables turn on the content providers when they are held responsible for the extra money customers have to pay. FIOS has one advantage in that fiber is already at the home so upgrading will be cheaper in the future. Fibet to the node can only go so far and we all know bandwidth is being used up by HDTV and internet. As you said, time will tell but you also have to take into account that Verizon has a smaller footprint right now that will continue to grow. DOCSIS3 is expensive, however it's much cheaper than building an entire system. It can also be deployed much quicker and on an as needed basis.
Your right FIOS is great because it goes to the house, but cable wouldn't have to do that since they are using coax. They could get away from running fiber to the house by deploying fiber to feeder. Basically after the node you only feed tap strings, at that point going out to 3ghz+ is much easier.
On the other hand if they still had concerns about coax, they could use the RF over glass(RFOG)solution. That could use existing fiber thats being used for HFC plant to deploy it and also keep the existing headend.
Cable has many option to compete with telco's without the need to spend as much as them. |
|
 mikepdDiscoveryPremium,MVM
join:2000-10-26
New Port Richey, FL
 ·Verizon FiOS
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Rick
Verizon's cost to install FIOS is going down not up:
»telephonyonline.com/home/news/ve···_092706/
They are almost done wiring up Florida as I got notice a couple of week ago that the contractor would be along to mark off the utilities prior to the burial of the underground fiber and that work has just been completed.
Here is where they stand in Florida, along with speed offerings and prices:
»www.foxbusiness.com/story/market···ridians/
I currently have Brighthouse 7/512 as well as 3/768 Verizon DSL on a dual WAN router since both the wife and I use the Internet for academic research and need redundancy in case one ISP goes down.
We still have not decided whether we will keep cable or go with two ONTs even though by doing that we lose redundancy.
Both DSL and cable have been reliable but the 20/20 speed for a reasonable price is very tempting.
As for technology updates, Verizon can go to GPON simply by changing out the electronics which is a cost-effective solution and will not require a major overhaul of the network.
--
Always Reach Beyond Your Grasp |
|
RickPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT | reply to MOTO6809
As you mention, docsis 3.0 is not only much cheaper..but time is a huge factor in all of this.
Imagine Comcast having a docsis 3.0 network all but finished by the end of 2009, while Verizon is struggling to wire manhattan by 2014 and other places by...??? who knows when?
By then, a fios rollout could be perceived as a non event if comcast is sailing along at 50Mb + speeds in many areas that many years before them.
And again, people are forgetting some key points. All the while..verizon could be losing landlines bigtime..losing dsl customers bigtime..while spending huge bucks on fios. This is a recipe for them to have to charge more for fios.
We'll see how it goes but my early estimation is..
Fios = Rambus and
Docsis 3.0 = DDR.
And we all know who won that race.
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic! |
|
| "And we all know who won that race."
The lawyers?  |
|
| reply to MOTO6809
said by MOTO6809:DOCSIS3 is expensive, however it's much cheaper than building an entire system. It can also be deployed much quicker and on an as needed basis. Your right FIOS is great because it goes to the house, but cable wouldn't have to do that since they are using coax. They could get away from running fiber to the house by deploying fiber to feeder. Basically after the node you only feed tap strings, at that point going out to 3ghz+ is much easier. On the other hand if they still had concerns about coax, they could use the RF over glass(RFOG)solution. That could use existing fiber thats being used for HFC plant to deploy it and also keep the existing headend. Cable has many option to compete with telco's without the need to spend as much as them. You forgot the main reason for switching from copper to fiber optics. This is the first major upgrade Verizon has done to their infrastructure in decades. Some of the copper lines have been around since before many of us were born. It has a finite capacity and it is affected by changes in weather. Fiber is an upgrade and part of the rationale for it is high speed data (includes voice, video and data.)
All Verizon did was upgrade everything at one shot and the upgrades would have been needed in the future anyway. |
|
RickPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT | reply to meh37
said by meh37 :"And we all know who won that race." The lawyers? lol. true. 
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic! |
|
rody_44Premium
join:2004-02-20
Quakertown, PA | reply to mikepd
the main reason verizons cost for installing fios isnt really the reason they want you to believe. they started out running ALL the lines and as time goes by they are skipping by lines and only running them if and when a customer orders the service. they started that around 2 years ago and the practice continues. the only thing it accomplishes is is they dont have to run it when nobody orders the service. i know because i was running it. |
|
