 Chris 313Come get somePremium
join:2004-07-18
Houma, LA
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·Comcast Digital ..
 ·Comcast
| The Future Fiber is the future. Verizon saw that when they started FiOS in the beginning. With them being able to basically offer any speed/content they want with a few equipment upgrades, things make me wonder how Cable will compete.
I'm glad Verizon is weathering the recession and hiring people to keep up. This project that'll take years to complete will give tons of people their needed jobs.
I think 2009-2010 will be a hell of a war in Broadband services. |
|
 MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | said by Chris 313:With them being able to basically offer any speed/content they want with a few equipment upgrades, things make me wonder how Cable will compete. Cable will be fine for years to come as well. It's AT&T and Qwest you should worry about. Coax has a ton of life left in it and cable has the ability to run FTTH if necessary. While some cable operators are experiencing a bandwidth crunch, it's nothing like the crunch other providers are experiencing and technologies like DOCSIS 3.0 and Switched Digital Video will help.
You have to remember, when cable did their HFC upgrades 10-15 years ago, their last-mile network put their competitors to absolute shame. I would argue that aside from Verizon's FiOS product, it still does.
Something few people also mention, is that by the time cable (or even AT&T) decide to run FTTH, Verizon will have blazed that trail so the costs of entry will be substantially lower. All one has to do is look at how rapidly Verizon's cost to pass a home with FiOS have plummeted since it was rolled out to realize that in 5 years, it might make financial sense for the MSOs to roll out their own FTTH product. |
|
 baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI
·Comcast
·magicjack.com
| reply to Chris 313
Not so fast The average price to run FTTH is $4000 per home. Obviously, Fios is a great product, and delivers what the consumer wants.
What it means though, if the average fios arpu is $100, its going to take 40 months (of a customer not missing a payment or switching providers) to BREAK EVEN.
we wont know if fios is truly a sucessful investment for at least another decade....when they have significantly more penetration in larger cities.
if there is a discovery in the next few years that cable other copper telcos can take significant advantage of (e.g. 2ghz systems) at a low cost, then the fios investment wont look as pretty. |
|
Reviews:
·Comcast
| You are correct, it is taking Verizon some time to recover the cost of the install. I think they are still smart in performing this upgrade - replacing copper plant that is dozens of years old with fiber plant that will last them dozens of years moving forward.
Plus, they now have TV revenue (especially HBO/PPV) that they didn't have before.
- Sherman |
|
Chris 313Come get somePremium
join:2004-07-18
Houma, LA Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·Comcast Digital ..
·Comcast
1 edit | reply to Matt
Re: The Future said by Matt:said by Chris 313:With them being able to basically offer any speed/content they want with a few equipment upgrades, things make me wonder how Cable will compete. Cable will be fine for years to come as well. It's AT&T and Qwest you should worry about. Coax has a ton of life left in it and cable has the ability to run FTTH if necessary. While some cable operators are experiencing a bandwidth crunch, it's nothing like the crunch other providers are experiencing and technologies like DOCSIS 3.0 and Switched Digital Video will help. You have to remember, when cable did their HFC upgrades 10-15 years ago, their last-mile network put their competitors to absolute shame. I would argue that aside from Verizon's FiOS product, it still does. Something few people also mention, is that by the time cable (or even AT&T) decide to run FTTH, Verizon will have blazed that trail so the costs of entry will be substantially lower. All one has to do is look at how rapidly Verizon's cost to pass a home with FiOS have plummeted since it was rolled out to realize that in 5 years, it might make financial sense for the MSOs to roll out their own FTTH product. Sure, but I was talking about in the long term. Say like 5-10 years when cable has been pushed to it's max in terms of equipment and all. What will they do? Run FTTH? Do you think providers like Comcast will have a FTTH plan on the desk as a backup plan or a possible prototype in an area or two?
Aside from that, I do believe cable will be fine for a while, though I'll always want faster, faster. Until you hit a button and have it there already with no waiting, it's never fast enough. I also believe D3 and SDV will help as well. I've seen and read all that Docsis 3 is doing and will be capable of thus far and I'm drooling for it.
I agree with you about how cable's last mile puts most providers to shame, aside from Fios, but they could also do a bit better since it is fiber.
I have AT&T here, and aside from Verizon cell service, there is no FiOS here and probably never will be. I'm not worried about them and think their U-Verse efforts are pathetic when Comcast can easily outdo them with Blast! and other speed tiers. Not to mention services like phone that they seem to be doing so well vs people like AT&T.
As for MSOs like Comcast running their own FTTH product, you bring up a funny thought. If Verizon's work drives down the cost of Fiber anything, Comcast is doing the same with Docsis 3, wouldn't you agree? |
|
 danclan
join:2005-11-01
Midlothian, VA | reply to baineschile
Re: Not so fast And as those install costs drop the ROI drops as well. The profit margin per subscriber is higher. The ROI is shorter.
Their investment is already paying huge returns in the eyes of the customer. They are the top rated cable, phone and internet provider. The publicity is helping them secure subscribers even in a down market economy.
You also fail to recognize the SIGNIFICANT reduction in costs they achieve in not having to power and maintain copper. Electricity costs are climbing and every user off copper reduces their costs. Every mile of copper they dont have refurbish or repair...saves them money.
The likelihood of a miracle occurring in the coax space is slim. The only technology on the horizon is IPTV and switched video. Both of these are short term solutions and still do not address the long term crunch. DOCSIS is still only a short term fix and robs peter to pay paul....
Any significant breakthrough will still have to be backward compatible with the millions of devices already deployed. that will subsequently cost the cable co's millions. Meanwhile, Verizon only has to continue to provide updated offerings over their existing established infinitely expandable fiber medium.....it wont take a decade its already providing them reliability and savings and more importantly profitability. |
|
|
|
 nycdavePremium,MVM
join:1999-11-16
Melville, NY
kudos:7 | reply to baineschile
said by baineschile:The average price to run FTTH is $4000 per home. Obviously, Fios is a great product, and delivers what the consumer wants. What it means though, if the average fios arpu is $100, its going to take 40 months (of a customer not missing a payment or switching providers) to BREAK EVEN. we wont know if fios is truly a sucessful investment for at least another decade....when they have significantly more penetration in larger cities. if there is a discovery in the next few years that cable other copper telcos can take significant advantage of (e.g. 2ghz systems) at a low cost, then the fios investment wont look as pretty. It does not cost Verizon $4000 per home for FiOS..... |
|
| reply to baineschile
said by baineschile:The average price to run FTTH is $4000 per home. Obviously, Fios is a great product, and delivers what the consumer wants. What it means though, if the average fios arpu is $100, its going to take 40 months (of a customer not missing a payment or switching providers) to BREAK EVEN. we wont know if fios is truly a sucessful investment for at least another decade....when they have significantly more penetration in larger cities. if there is a discovery in the next few years that cable other copper telcos can take significant advantage of (e.g. 2ghz systems) at a low cost, then the fios investment wont look as pretty. That MAY have been the cost years ago, but isn't even half that now.
You also forget that it is lower maintenance than copper, so money is saved on that end. It is also easier to upgrade. If you factored in all of the above, plus the fact that install costs are below half that now, you have a different story. |
|
 jmn1207Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA | reply to baineschile
It was a desperate move by Verizon. They realized that DSL could not compete with cable, and they were quickly losing their POTS customers to cheaper VoIP solutions.
For residential services, the telcos were doomed unless they made some drastic changes. And without the benefit of having TV services and their own VoIP solution, they would not have been able to sustain the cost of providing FTTH. Internet service alone would not have been worth the required expenses.
Personally I am thrilled to see competition spring up practically overnight. I'm rooting for cable to shine as well as fiber. I don't care what technology is being used, just as long as it keeps improving. |
|
| reply to nycdave
said by nycdave:It does not cost Verizon $4000 per home for FiOS..... So, what does it cost? And please back it up with links that prove what you claim.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
 Jmartz
join:2000-07-20
Tenafly, NJ | reply to Matt
Re: The Future said by Matt:said by Chris 313:technologies like DOCSIS 3.0 and Switched Digital Video will help. That is assuming companies like Cablevision can actually get Switched Digital Video working correctly. Cablevision has still yet to release the infamous tuning adapter for Tivo users.
I personally think Cable Companies are going to have to change their compression to MPEG4. It's going to require them to swap out lots and lots of equipment, and cost them lots of money, but they can't keep compressing these channels so they look like crap. At least FIOS has all the same channels as cable/dish, but they don't have the compression yet. |
|
JPLPremium
join:2007-04-04
Downingtown, PA
kudos:1
1 edit | reply to baineschile
Re: Not so fast said by baineschile:The average price to run FTTH is $4000 per home. Obviously, Fios is a great product, and delivers what the consumer wants. What it means though, if the average fios arpu is $100, its going to take 40 months (of a customer not missing a payment or switching providers) to BREAK EVEN. we wont know if fios is truly a sucessful investment for at least another decade....when they have significantly more penetration in larger cities. if there is a discovery in the next few years that cable other copper telcos can take significant advantage of (e.g. 2ghz systems) at a low cost, then the fios investment wont look as pretty. There's one thing that's missed in the discussion of the numbers, though. Verizon said that when their roll-out of FiOS is complete (~2012 IIRC) they should be SAVING about $1billion/year in reduced maintenance costs. Even if they only hit half that, think of what that means year after year. Fiber doesn't degrade - copper does. Fiber isn't prone to atmospheric conditions and disruptions, copper is. About the only thing you can do to fiber to get it to stop working is to break it.
Also, FiOS is more than just about laying fiber to the home. When one tech came out I started asking about the system over all. When he figured out that I had more than a rudimentary understanding of it, he got into some details. The automation that's baked into the system is impressive. The ability to diagnose and fix many problems remotely, without the need for a truck-roll, is a big savings to the company.
Yeah it's a heavy up-front cost, but in the end, there are huge cost savings as a result. One last item on this front - copper is powered... the fiber isn't (well, it's not when it gets to your home). The signal doesn't degrade like it does with copper. Cable companies are therefore required to have boosting stations along the way to keep the signal strong when it gets to your house. That's not a problem that FiOS has. Also, Verizon doesn't supply the power for the sigals in your home - you do. Think of how many homes will be serviced by fios, and calculate how much that saves the company in electricity costs as a result. |
|
1 edit | reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:said by nycdave:It does not cost Verizon $4000 per home for FiOS..... So, what does it cost? And please back it up with links that prove what you claim. »blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=571
edit to add answer: $700 per home currently, they hope to reduce it to $650 in 2010. |
|
nycdavePremium,MVM
join:1999-11-16
Melville, NY
kudos:7 | reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:said by nycdave:It does not cost Verizon $4000 per home for FiOS..... So, what does it cost? And please back it up with links that prove what you claim. No need. If you would bother to look at a VZ quarterly earnings report, the cost to build out is listed. The average cost to pass a single premises now is less than $1000... |
|
| reply to MrSpock29
said by MrSpock29:said by fAcEtIOUs:said by nycdave:It does not cost Verizon $4000 per home for FiOS..... So, what does it cost? And please back it up with links that prove what you claim. » blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=571edit to add answer: $700 per home currently, they hope to reduce it to $650 in 2010. That certainly CLAIMS lowered costs. But no proof is supplied. All this is is the CLAIM of a blogger - hardly proof. He doesn't even reference company sources for his numbers.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
 tim_kButtons, Bows, Beamer, Shadow, KaseyPremium,VIP
join:2002-02-02
Stewartstown, PA
kudos:13
1 edit | reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:said by nycdave:It does not cost Verizon $4000 per home for FiOS..... So, what does it cost? And please back it up with links that prove what you claim. The cost to run the fiber through neighborhoods is also falling below $760 per home passed, Verizon’s initial estimate. (The company spends an extra $650 in equipment and labor to hook up each house ordering the service.) »www.nytimes.com/2008/08/19/techn···business
edit: I see some have beat me to it.
--
RIP my babys Buttons 1/15/94-2/9/07 & Beamer 7/24/08, Buttons, Buttons video, Beamer
|
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:That certainly CLAIMS lowered costs. But no proof is supplied. All this is is the CLAIM of a blogger - hardly proof. He doesn't even reference company sources for his numbers. As Dave says, read the quarterly and annual reports. I don't have time now, but it has been much discussed on here about how much installation costs have declined. $4000 is way off the mark. |
|
Chris 313Come get somePremium
join:2004-07-18
Houma, LA Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·Comcast Digital ..
·Comcast
| reply to Jmartz
Re: The Future said by Jmartz:said by Matt:said by Chris 313:technologies like DOCSIS 3.0 and Switched Digital Video will help. That is assuming companies like Cablevision can actually get Switched Digital Video working correctly. Cablevision has still yet to release the infamous tuning adapter for Tivo users. I personally think Cable Companies are going to have to change their compression to MPEG4. It's going to require them to swap out lots and lots of equipment, and cost them lots of money, but they can't keep compressing these channels so they look like crap. At least FIOS has all the same channels as cable/dish, but they don't have the compression yet. Yes, I'm aware of the SDV problems Cable is having with things like Tivo, lucky for me, I don't have that problem as I've neither a Tivo, nor SDV rolled out in my area. I'm using a Motorola DVR supplied by Comcast. (I'm having strange problems with this box, so I see now why everyone is hating on them.)
I would say that they would have to change out a good bit of equipment, but that'd be natural progression since the boxes in use in areas are at least 4-5 years old. Makers would've had to come out with something newer or better that supports new things like MPEG4 or added feature goodies.
Take this for instance: »www.motorola.com/business/US-EN/···b00aRCRD
Though it does only support MPEG 2 in the specs.
As for FiOS, If I remember right, they're running on a cable system themselves. 870Mhz if memory serves. They also use boxes like this: »www.motorola.com/business/US-EN/···b00aRCRD
Still, these boxes only do MPEG 2 as well. |
|
2 edits | reply to MrSpock29
Re: Not so fast said by MrSpock29:said by fAcEtIOUs:That certainly CLAIMS lowered costs. But no proof is supplied. All this is is the CLAIM of a blogger - hardly proof. He doesn't even reference company sources for his numbers. As Dave says, read the quarterly and annual reports. I don't have time now, but it has been much discussed on here about how much installation costs have declined. $4000 is way off the mark. Here is a link to the quarterly report. Other than Verizon's claim of lowered costs to install, there are no hard numbers listed.
»yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/dis···ype=html
As the deployment of the FiOS network gains scale and installation and automation improvements occur, costs per home connected are expected to decline. That is the extent of FIOS install costs mentioned in the report.
The annual report repeats the same info verbatim:
»yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/dis···ype=html
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
approval from:
Core0000 
| reply to baineschile
Interesting claim for cost per home. Is that a homes passed or homes served cost? What industry sources is the $4000 coming from? Obviously Verizon will not publish their exact cost. I can only speak as someone who was recently in the industry with peripheral access to actual costs by carriers. With that said, I can assure you that the cost per home passed and to serve homes has decreased dramatically within the past 3 years. So much to the point where your claims are no longer in the ball park. |
|
