dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
87
share rss forum feed

Probitas

@teksavvy.com

Nice to here

Maybe more independents will start laying lines down and offering crazy speeds for rock bottom prices. This is why it's pretty stupid to sit on your butt and expect the status quo in the market because you practically have market lock and are raking it in. Eventually someone sees a need and decides to commit themselves to providing it. Expect the incumbents in those areas to lose customers. Wish it would happen in more places.

Treegravy
Premium
join:2011-04-21
canada
Reviews:
·Rogers Hi-Speed

Re: Nice to here

said by Probitas :

Expect the incumbents in those areas to lose customers.

The incumbents will lower prices. Because they'll have? Yeah, competition. Yes, this needs to happen in more places. $100 internet is an expletive.
prairiesky

join:2008-12-08
canada
kudos:2

1 recommendation

which would be great, except there's no money in it..... if there was, it would be done already
34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

Re: Nice to here

said by prairiesky:

which would be great, except there's no money in it..... if there was, it would be done already

Complete nonsense. The issue isn't whether there is money in it or not. It's mainly having the capital to build out. If there was no money in it all of the major telcos and MSOs in Canada would not be already rolling out fiber or doing field trials to be doing so soon. There is a lot of money in it, but it requires the network to reach the homes to be able to deliver the services.
prairiesky

join:2008-12-08
canada
kudos:2

Re: Nice to here

If there was tons of money to be made, investors would be clamoring to invest their money in infrastructure.... that's the way the system works. Just to be clear, when I say there's no money in it, I mean the margins are slim. The overall dollar figures are substantial, but that's not what investors and companies look for.

With regards to the existing ones putting money into infra, they can do it at their own pace and their numbers look much better than the 3rd guy entering the market.
34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

Re: Nice to here

said by prairiesky:

If there was tons of money to be made, investors would be clamoring to invest their money in infrastructure.... that's the way the system works. Just to be clear, when I say there's no money in it, I mean the margins are slim. The overall dollar figures are substantial, but that's not what investors and companies look for.

With regards to the existing ones putting money into infra, they can do it at their own pace and their numbers look much better than the 3rd guy entering the market.

No, investors won't invest because they're scared of any kind of risk at all. That's the way it works. And that's even worse in Canada.
zod5000

join:2003-10-21
Victoria, BC
Reviews:
·Shaw

1 recommendation

said by Probitas :

Maybe more independents will start laying lines down and offering crazy speeds for rock bottom prices. This is why it's pretty stupid to sit on your butt and expect the status quo in the market because you practically have market lock and are raking it in. Eventually someone sees a need and decides to commit themselves to providing it. Expect the incumbents in those areas to lose customers. Wish it would happen in more places.

I think its harder than you make it out to be. The reason we don't have a lot of competition is that the entry level cost to lay down all that wire is extremely expensive. That's why phone companies and cable companies emerged as the providers. They already had wire laid out everywhere.

These new startups tend to be localized to apartments/condo's in highly dense areas. Other fibre is laid down into new homes (because why not.. you gotta lay down wire anyway).

I think were a long way off from having a completely independent 3rd ISP on sizable level. It's still damned expensive.
34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

Re: Nice to here

said by zod5000:

That's why phone companies and cable companies emerged as the providers. They already had wire laid out everywhere.

Except that isn't true. Although MSOs have been running HFC networks for quite some time and have been fairly fibre rich deep into a lot of neighborhoods. They're far from everywhere and both parties but especially telcos have had to roll out A LOT of fiber.
prairiesky

join:2008-12-08
canada
kudos:2

1 recommendation

Re: Nice to here

which is a lot easier to do when you have cash flow and ~50% market share. Putting it in with 0 cash flow, no money to start with and hoping for 33% market share poses a whole different scenario.
34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

Re: Nice to here

said by prairiesky:

which is a lot easier to do when you have cash flow and ~50% market share. Putting it in with 0 cash flow, no money to start with and hoping for 33% market share poses a whole different scenario.

They wouldn't be in business if they had no money to start.
zod5000

join:2003-10-21
Victoria, BC
Reviews:
·Shaw
said by 34764170:

said by zod5000:

That's why phone companies and cable companies emerged as the providers. They already had wire laid out everywhere.

Except that isn't true. Although MSOs have been running HFC networks for quite some time and have been fairly fibre rich deep into a lot of neighborhoods. They're far from everywhere and both parties but especially telcos have had to roll out A LOT of fiber.

I wouldn't argue that, but the last mile (for the most part) still uses copper? If could lay down main trunk lines of fibre it would be expensive. Having to wire it into everyone's homes, thats super expensive. People's homes (allthough this is chaning for phone lines) pretty much came prewired for phone and cable for decades. If you're going to deliver fibre you have to wire right into peoples homes which would cost a small fortune.

I'm not arguing that telco's didn't spend alot laying down fibre, but what kept them back from giving everyone ftth? That's my argument
34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

Re: Nice to here

said by zod5000:

I wouldn't argue that, but the last mile (for the most part) still uses copper? If could lay down main trunk lines of fibre it would be expensive. Having to wire it into everyone's homes, thats super expensive. People's homes (allthough this is chaning for phone lines) pretty much came prewired for phone and cable for decades. If you're going to deliver fibre you have to wire right into peoples homes which would cost a small fortune.

I'm not arguing that telco's didn't spend alot laying down fibre, but what kept them back from giving everyone ftth? That's my argument

Yes, but personally I don't see that as being a huge issue. The copper that is there be it cable or what is used for DSL now is capable of a whole lot more. Both sides have work to do on their respective cable plants but there is a lot more potential with further work with DOCSIS 3.0 and 3.1 for cable and bonding / vectoring plus next gen G.fast pushing speeds upwards of 1Gb for DSL. Both sides are providing platforms allowing for the delivery of hundreds of megabits per second of connectivity.