ernieJohnstn
join:2005-02-27
Lilburn, GA
| reply to Skippy25
Subsidized Fiber Network
STOP! HALT! BACK-UP!
I think Skippy is on to something here.
Both parties are going about this all wrong. It's time for a new direction.
What Lafayette wants is a ubiquitous high-speed network to fuel economic growth. What they also need is competition for customer services.
But Lafayette, UTOPIA (Utah Telecommunication OPen Infrastructure Agency, SaLt Lake City suburbs), iProvo or AnyTown, USA, don't realize that in designing and building their own compLete system, they have limited the scope and fLexibility of the infrastructure. There is no room for upgrades without affecting all users. There is no room for competition and innovation, only differentiated marketing.
iMHO (in My HumbLe Opinion), what the (BeLLSouth) TeLco wants is economic certainty, as in reduced financial risk. They also don't want competition, but this
is the 21st Century.
ALso iMHO, what the (Cox Communications) Cable Company needs is to increase its bandwidth by moving to fiber, though they probably don't know that yet.
How can these entities work together?
At $30,000 / mile or roughLy $6 / foot the largest category of expense in deploying FttH (Fiber To The Home) is in the buried fiber. With fiber costing only about $1 / foot, and the conduits about $0.25 / foot, the largest singLe cost then is in BURYING the fiber conduit!
Therefore, the best thing Lafayette could do is to work with the TeLco, the CabLe company and an overbuilder or Data CLEC (Competitive LocaL Exchange Carrier) to obtain assurances that if they bury conduits (4x) or fiber, most of those companies would build out the electronics necessary to deliver services over those fibers. By providing the raw fiber or multiple conduits, various vendors are able to develop differing services depending upon the perceived market. I for one, would be willing to form a company to compete with the incumbents with a high-end service.
While the world needs fiber to every premise, it is redundant, inefficient and expensive to run multiple fiber pairs to a single location that could have been placed to one that doesn't have it.
How do the munis (municipalities) win?
Besides encouraging investment and development today, they would benefit from the lease of the fibers and the RoW (Right Of Way) AD INFINITUM, or at least for a very long time. I'm estimating about $0.02 / fiber-foot / month or $0.04 / fiber pair. That's $0.48 / year or about a 15-year pay back, after which its mostly profit.
How do the incumbent TeLco and MSO (MuLtipLe cabLe System Operator) win? With lower costs of entry, the risk is reduced. The higher bandwidth means more services and greater sales, as in tripLe pLay+. Raw fiber means they could deveLop various services using 10 MB/s to 1GB/s access speeds.
How do the munis constituents win?
Consumers would benefit from competing providers.
Dig it?
ernieJohnston@MaiL.Com |
