dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
108

why60loss
Premium Member
join:2012-09-20

why60loss to batterup

Premium Member

to batterup

Re: offload debt = free money

said by batterup:

said by why60loss:

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu ··· ip_mania

The above is what will likely happen if shorting was taken away.

A huge volume crash would happen if you took away day trading. Do you even want to know what would happen to things like Oil, copper, gold and other futures if day trades stopped on those.

Tough question. Buying a futures contract is necessary for those who's business relies on a commodity but hurts when they are used by gamblers who bet on gasoline prices. I do know that churn loving brokers would foam at the mouth in protest.

What does this have to do with Ma Bell being dead? If Ma were still alive the widows and orphans would hold her stock for life collecting dividend.

Gamblers don't need to day trade or short in order to jack up gasoline prices and it would likely happen even more if you took those choices away.

I agree with you that the market can be abused sometimes, but really worse things can happen without 3rd party's being able to join in. The commodity's market does a lot more good than bad right now as many business's depend on it's liquidity to buy or sell product to keep themselves running.

As for Ma Bell, I side tracked for a bit and got off topic. Sorry about that. When I first read the post I thought it was about something else.

Ma bell was both good and bad, in truth it's hard to know what would happened if they had stayed whole. Much dark fiber from the old days still around and it would be interesting if we had a way to know what would have happened if the government didn't break them up.

I am sure our prices would be higher, but I wonder if they would have kept pushing R&D into today and have FTTH deployed nation wide by now?

Zenit_IIfx
The system is the solution
Premium Member
join:2012-05-07
Purcellville, VA
·Comcast XFINITY

Zenit_IIfx

Premium Member

FTTH nationwide, or at least very short copper FTTN loops in some places would be the norm under Bell in 2014. Bell Labs knew as early as 1980 that Fiber would replace Copper. By 82 it was clear that the Copper was a dead fish for the upcoming data revolution - a network designed for analog voice could not be migrated to handle high bandwidth digital data without hacks. So, Bell Labs crafted a plan for the next decades (if the System stayed together, or as a roadmap for the RBOC's - a parting gift from AT&T). They made a 4 part video about the plan, but AT&T removed it off of their tech channel a few months ago...I asked why and no response. Probably will never see it again.

The plan had these main tenants:

-Copper loops are obsolete. Reality is that most loops can only pull off 56k without modifications. (this changed with the introduction of DSL later on)

-Data is the future. Computers need to be interconnected. The "Connected Home" was becoming a reality.

-Cable Companies will compete with the Bell System for Data and Voice by the 90's by implementing Fiber to the Node, HFC infrastructure. Trials of data over Cable TV networks were ongoing in the early 80's in NYC connecting investment firms.

- GTE, MCI and other telephone companies will try to compete with wireless circuits - microwave, cellular, and future technologies.

-The RBOC's must deploy the newest technology and shorten the copper loops to get ready for the future. Remote Terminals will bring fiber ever closer to the customer premises and allow for quick deployment of service without building Central Offices.
------

The best case alternate reality scenario would be that the Government let AT&T stay as one (RBOCs/Long Lines/WECO/Bell Labs) so long as they opened up to be a common carrier and allowed long distance competition.

Who thought it was a good idea to destroy the best telephone system in the world? We had the best telecom infrastructure in the world, now we are pretty much a joke outside of the internet backbone and long distance telephone network.

tschmidt
MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
·Consolidated Com..
·Republic Wireless
·Hollis Hosting

tschmidt

MVM

said by Zenit_IIfx:

Who thought it was a good idea to destroy the best telephone system in the world?

We are getting really off topic. I think you are overly romanticizing the old Bell System.

I agree with the technical advantage of fiber over copper. That being said the Bell System envisioned a closed data network, much like Cable. DSL was developed not for Internet access but to deliver video.

Don't forget AT&T refused to participate in ARPA's early Internet for two reasons: 1) did not think it would work - some Bell-heads still hold to that and 2) if it did why would they want to support a competing network technology.

I fail to see how divestiture did anything to reduce the RBOCs ability to roll out FTTP. Long distance had been a huge technological challenge in the days of analog and copper, today distance is largely irrelevant. Allowing customers to own their own equipment reduced rental revenue but was sound from a regulatory perspective.

The reason the RBOCs have fallen behind Cable is their reluctance to invest in first-mile fiber for the long term and preoccupation with wireless that is still pretty much a closed network.

/tom

Zenit_IIfx
The system is the solution
Premium Member
join:2012-05-07
Purcellville, VA
·Comcast XFINITY

Zenit_IIfx

Premium Member

Well, would forcing AT&T and VZ to divest their wireless divisions actually do any good?
I have had mixed thoughts on that lately...the Wireless side of the house brings in really good money, and while the sudden cut off would probably force action a financially weaker loop holder would not be a good thing.

As for open/closed data networks, it takes Government regulation to create true open networks - companies are going to protect their investments and try to be the only ones that can utilize said investment. What the UK did to BT I think was good - total unbundling of network elements and services, to the point that Service is a different company entirely from Infrastructure (even if they are both held by the same conglomerate).

Back to Fairpoint - I hope they can one day find their way to stability. Same for Frontier. They both got a bad deck of cards, time to make the best of it...

tschmidt
MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
·Consolidated Com..
·Republic Wireless
·Hollis Hosting

tschmidt

MVM

From a regulatory perspective I'm not in favor if regulating wired and wireless separately. Some of the problems we are facing today is because the regulatory regime was based on what the network carried. With the Internet bit are bits and as far as possible regulation should be physical plant agnostic.

My preferred way to attack wired deployment is to create a regulated utility to provide wholesale first-mile connectivity. That would decouple the capital investment in infrastructure from service delivery. But I'm realistic enough to recognize that is an impossibility in today's political climate.

I hope FairPoint is successful, both as a general case for northern New England telecommunication and a purely selfish one because I use a CLEC for voice and DSL so I am dependent on functioning copper loop.

/tom
BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
Central CT
·Frontier FiberOp..
Asus RT-AC68

1 recommendation

BiggA

Premium Member

Separating the connectivity from the ISP would be problematic for the US, since you can't open up an HFC network. It's just not technically possible. Sweden has a fiber-based system that's open for many different ISPs to provide service, and is owned by a series of local governments. That's one way to do it.

Another would be to somehow incentivize build-outs so that everywhere had competition with multiple physical plants. While this would work fine in suburban and urban areas, it wouldn't help rural, as no one wants to build one plant out there now, much less 2 or 3 plants.

So maybe two approaches make sense. Government-owned fiber where ISPs connect in via IP at the CO level in rural areas, with multiple physical plants, both FTTH and HFC in more suburban/urban areas. Or something like that.

There really isn't a good argument for keeping copper around, except maybe for applications like Verizon's FIOS VDSL, where idiotic landlords won't let them drill fiber in to the individual units. In that case, using pair bonded VDSL2 or G.Fast would be better than losing an entire competitive option, but it's got to come to that physical building with at least GPON speeds into the basement to feed the VDSL2 or G.Fast.

KennyWest
@98.28.97.x

KennyWest to BiggA

Anon

to BiggA
Munis have no control over the copper vs fiber. It's the states and the so called FCC who shouldn't control phone.

But if they did try and get rid of the fiber, DSLR would be bitching and complaining they wanted the copper and fiber option. So in the end VZ would be paying for both networks when they should only have to pay for one. The one they choose, and they're choosing wireless as they should. spin the landline business of pots off and be done with it- only keep the wireless side of the company and the backbone along with Terramark
Kalmus
join:2012-11-21
Boston, MA

1 recommendation

Kalmus to BiggA

Member

to BiggA
Just curious. Why the reference to Verizon? Fairpoint is a totally separate company that has no affiliation with Verizon.

Zenit_IIfx
The system is the solution
Premium Member
join:2012-05-07
Purcellville, VA
·Comcast XFINITY

Zenit_IIfx

Premium Member

Verizon is the one who let the networks in New England turn into a lot of obsolete junk, handing FairPoint a mess (like Verizon always does when it sells off an RBOC or GTEOC). The sour VZ deal lead to FairPoint declaring bankruptcy, and VZ shareholders loosing their shares of FairPoint.

//as a note, the situation up in VZ New England territories was nowhere near as horrible as the situation in the VZ C&P Tel of W.VA territory which was pretty much toatled, but Frontier suckered up and bought it anyways.//

FairPoint has done more with the copper plant than VZ did in 10 years, they have expanded DSL where customers were told by VZ "No, Impossible". Other people report higher speeds.

Overall I would rate FairPoint higher than Frontier. Frontier is still largely a disaster in their ex-VZ markets.

tschmidt
MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
·Consolidated Com..
·Republic Wireless
·Hollis Hosting

tschmidt

MVM

said by Zenit_IIfx:

FairPoint has done more with the copper plant than VZ did in 10 years, they have expanded DSL

Part of the Verizon sale of: Vermont, NH, Maine was the requirement that FairPoint expand DSL to cover a high proportion of the population. I forget exactly what the magic number was. As far as I know FP has meet that requirement.

If would be nice if they were able to invest in expanding fiber, they renamed FIOS FAST but I doubt they have the ability to invest significant money to expand fiber.

As an aside NH has been aggressive in rolling out middle-mile fiber to reduce the cost of extending fiber to end users.
»networknhnow.org/
»www.newhampshirefastroads.net/

/Tom
Kalmus
join:2012-11-21
Boston, MA

Kalmus to Zenit_IIfx

Member

to Zenit_IIfx
I was referring to the comments that tie VZ to the current labor issue faced by Fairpoint. Hard to find any connection there.

batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium Member
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ

batterup to Kalmus

Premium Member

to Kalmus
said by tschmidt:

Don't forget AT&T refused to participate in ARPA's early Internet

Why should they; they had Bell Labs the greatest think tank the world has ever known. Every invention was public domain too because of the regulated status.

Bell Labs is now a hustle a buck French company.
said by Kalmus:

Just curious. Why the reference to Verizon? Fairpoint is a totally separate company that has no affiliation with Verizon.

Verizon dumped the unwanted great unwashed and Fairpoint bought it. This goes back to the break up of the Bell System and the end of universal service at a reasonable cost. For some, north New Jersey, it's great as there are choices of who one wants 100 meg service from. As for the great unwashed; sorry, see what MCI will do for you.
BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
Central CT
·Frontier FiberOp..
Asus RT-AC68

BiggA to KennyWest

Premium Member

to KennyWest
said by KennyWest :

Munis have no control over the copper vs fiber. It's the states and the so called FCC who shouldn't control phone.

They would if they built their own fiber separate from the incumbent telcos, and then leased it out to any ISP who wanted to connect to it on a town by town or system basis to access the end users. Incumbent ISPs could choose to jump on the muni system or build their own competitive physical plant.
said by KennyWest :

But if they did try and get rid of the fiber, DSLR would be bitching and complaining they wanted the copper and fiber option. So in the end VZ would be paying for both networks when they should only have to pay for one. The one they choose, and they're choosing wireless as they should. spin the landline business of pots off and be done with it- only keep the wireless side of the company and the backbone along with Terramark

Verizon should be trying to get an agreement with DPUCs where they can drop a customer from the copper network once they get that customer wired with fiber. Fiber is the future of wireline, of physical plant infrastructure, and they should be rolling it out as fast as they can. If they told new areas for FIOS deployment that it's copper -OR- FIOS, I bet they would get a lot of FIOS takers, and it would allow them to decomission much or all of the copper plant in those areas, saving huge amounts of money.

However, I will say that in terms of redundant infrastructure, they already have significantly thinned out their copper plant in FIOS areas. I drive from CT to RI sometimes a few times a week, and the AT&T lines in CT are multiple massive bundles of copper for telephone and U-Verse, while the lines in RI, with fiber AND copper are very thin and pretty new looking. I think they basically rebuilt a much smaller copper plant when they rolled FIOS out.

Verizon has the best wireline technology in the US, short of Google Fiber. They should be leveraging that, upgrading the whole existing FIOS system to symmetrical gigabit, upgrading the whole TV side to H.264, 100% finish deployments in existing franchise areas, and start deploying in areas that currently have no cable provider. Then they should deploy in areas that do have a cable provider, both in their own territory, and outside of it, where they would be a pure fiber overbuilder.
said by Kalmus:

Just curious. Why the reference to Verizon? Fairpoint is a totally separate company that has no affiliation with Verizon.

We were talking about Verizon and Verizon's rollout of FIOS, both in their own current areas, and in Fairpoint areas prior to the takeover.
said by tschmidt:

Part of the Verizon sale of: Vermont, NH, Maine was the requirement that FairPoint expand DSL to cover a high proportion of the population. I forget exactly what the magic number was. As far as I know FP has meet that requirement.

Yeah. They even have several islands in the big lake covered with DSL via RDSLAMs that they put right before the 1950's era telephone cables go under water. Although it's technically not any harder than any other RDSLAM, it is kind of cool that they have DSL on the islands now, although it's kind of irrelevant with LTE now, since you can't live on the non-bridged islands year round anyways.

MetroCast was forced to wire one of the islands, since their franchise agreement stated that if 10 homes in a cable mile wanted TV, they had to wire it, and 10 homes on Bear Island did. Since they had no existing plant there, they were forced to go through US Army Corps of Engineers permitting for a submarine fiber cable to feed a node on the island. Those folks look kind of silly in hindsight, but at the time, they didn't know what the future held for their fiber-fed RDSLAM and LTE connectivity. The plus side is, the island has two decent ISPs, which is more than some permanent residences can say.
said by batterup:

Verizon dumped the unwanted great unwashed and Fairpoint bought it. This goes back to the break up of the Bell System and the end of universal service at a reasonable cost. For some, north New Jersey, it's great as there are choices of who one wants 100 meg service from. As for the great unwashed; sorry, see what MCI will do for you.

Some areas near NYC, and some Boston suburbs have 3 providers offering 100mbps service, Comcast, RCN, and Verizon, but that's not the norm in MA or nationwide.
BiggA

BiggA to Kalmus

Premium Member

to Kalmus
said by Kalmus:

Just curious. Why the reference to Verizon? Fairpoint is a totally separate company that has no affiliation with Verizon.

I was also talking about Verizon FIOS VDSL2. I don't believe FairPoint inherited any FIOS VDSL/VDSL2, but I could be wrong. The only Verizon VDSL/VDSL2 installations that I know of are in NYC and Providence.

Those types of applications are the only places that I see copper as being reasonable, and even then, they need to upgrade the speeds, and bring the FTTB-based FIOS pricing in line with FTTH-based FIOS.

Zenit_IIfx
The system is the solution
Premium Member
join:2012-05-07
Purcellville, VA

Zenit_IIfx

Premium Member

There are some FIOS VDSL2 deployments in Loudoun County, VA in Leesburg. They were done during the first wave of FIOS deployments way back.

There are probably some others in VA too, possibly in Fairfax County or the Richmond area.
BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
Central CT

BiggA

Premium Member

Oh ok, that makes sense. Large urban MDUs?

batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium Member
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ

1 recommendation

batterup to BiggA

Premium Member

to BiggA
said by BiggA:

said by KennyWest :

Munis have no control over the copper vs fiber. It's the states and the so called FCC who shouldn't control phone.

They would if they built their own fiber separate from the incumbent telcos, and then

Sell it to Google fo $1 and stick the tax payers with the bill for the bonds.


Zenit_IIfx
The system is the solution
Premium Member
join:2012-05-07
Purcellville, VA
·Comcast XFINITY

Zenit_IIfx to BiggA

Premium Member

to BiggA
Not really urban MDUs, suburban MDU's in the leesburg case, not really highrise. Probably some old urban MDU's in Fairfax or Richmond too, but those seem more likely for VZ to skip over.

In those Buildings Comcast actually offers better speeds, so VZ shot themselves in the foot.

Then again back when FIOS was first being deployed they had not yet mastered MDU deployment. Have they used Magic Wire yet or was that just a PR stunt?
BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
Central CT
·Frontier FiberOp..
Asus RT-AC68

BiggA

Premium Member

Yeah, sounds like they did a bad job there. The areas where it made sense was in NYC with combative landlords or co-op boards in giant, old high-rise buildings that are really hard to wire. Even then, they need to go back in an do some upgrades. They should be able to push at least 100/20 with pair bonding...

They don't need the magic thin fiber, they can just drill bigger holes in the walls, and use the regular fiber. It just helps a lot in ultra-high-density areas like parts of Manhattan...