Should Incumbents Just Provide Bandwidth?The fear of being 'dumb pipe' providers ( old news - 02:02PM Friday Apr 21 2006) tags: dsl · competition · bandwidth · contentLooking at Bellsouth's quarterly earnings, journalist Om Malik wonders if telcos should just focus on providing bandwidth, and give up on their TV dreams. "It is increasingly obvious that the Bells should stop fooling around with television and instead focus on selling bandwidth," he opines. "a lot of it, for a premium price and make their numbers accordingly". The race is on for the triple or "quadruple" play, and cable will have the early lead. A recent study predicts that Cable will have 22% of voice customers by 2009, while telcos will have 6% of video customers by that year's end. The telcos are gearing up to get into home-networking as well as IPTV, because as Light Reading recently noted, they're terrified of being a "dumb pipe" provider. Obviously the telco and cable exec dream is every household subscribing to four services (wireless, VoIP, data, video) and paying $150-$200. But is the dream realistic? Should they focus on simply providing terrestrial and wireless bandwidth?
Related:- Qwest a 'Sitting Duck'
- Google Voice Ban Is Clear Network Neutrality Violation
- Canadian Regulators Send Another Love Letter To Bell Canada
- Frontier To Inherit Some Very Shoddy Verizon Copper
- Verizon's New Wireless Pricing Is An Insult
- What Network Neutrality Is REALLY About
- FCC To Investigate Special Access Pricing
- AT&T: Google Is The Enemy Of Nuns
|
 chemaupr
join:2005-06-06
Alexandria, VA
1 edit | WRONG "It is increasingly obvious that the Bells should stop fooling around with television and instead focus on selling bandwidth,"
That is wrong!!! no wonder why this guy is a journalist!
No company this days will succeed by having just one line of product. There is no growth in just dedicating to one thing, thus investors will not follow. | |
|  | 
footballdude
Premium
join:2002-08-13
Imperial, MO
| Re: WRONG said by chemaupr  :No company this days will succeed by having just one line of product. There is no growth in just dedicating to one thing, thus investors will not follow. Not only that, but it puts the entire business at a terrible risk should a new technology emerge to provide faster or cheaper bandwidth.
--
If Darwin was right and evolution really works, why are there so many stupid people out there? | |
| | RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | Om Malik runs a blog. He's as much of a journalist as Geraldo Rivera. What he is, is a pundit.
A pundit who needs to go take a few business classes.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
| 
odreian615
join:2006-01-18
Chicago, IL | 50/20 for 50 bucks a month is the American dream at least till 2012 so telcos listen up | |
| | 
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
 ·Comcast
| Re: 50/20 for 50 bucks a month said by odreian615 :is the American dream at least till 2012 so telcos listen up Typo in yout title there... 20/20 or 50/50... I'm sick of this non-symetrical BS!
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera | |
| NewMariner
join:2005-06-24
| Its all on Equal Footing It will all equal out. Cablecos dont have any wireless phones or providers, which telcos do and own. Cablecos will lag behind in this area. Telcos will lag behind in the tv area....It will all come down to who has the most reliable, most readily available and cheapest service....Let the battles begin! | |
| | GigahertZ420
join:2001-10-02
Fairbanks, AK | Re: Its all on Equal Footing If their plan of TV over IP involves a Microsoft set top box, I will refuse to support their service.
I personally would pay 150 a month just for a super fast pipe like a 15/15 or 30/30 symetrical fiber connection. | |
| | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Re: Its all on Equal Footing Why is a Microsoft set top box bad? | |
| | NGOwner
join:2000-11-21
Leawood, KS
| said by NewMariner :It will all equal out. Cablecos dont have any wireless phones or providers, which telcos do and own. Cablecos will lag behind in this area. Let's not forget about the CableCo/SprintNextel Joint Venture. It wouldn't be too hard for an MVNO (Mobile Virtual Network Operator) to be set up by that entity to immediately give the CableCos a Cellular provider. Think of it along the lines of Boost, Virgin Wireless, Disney, ESPN.
CableCos (at least the ones in the JV) are a lot closer than you think.
[NG]Owner
--
It is impossible to create an idiot-proof product. Humanity is simply too adept at churning out better idiots. | |
| Cod
join:2000-07-05
Greensboro, NC
| Earnings are down because of Katrina not TV BellSouth's earnings are down because of Katrina costs, not "TV dreams" as implied.
Wall Street Journal Excerpt:
BellSouth's net declines by 26% on Katrina costs -- WSJ
By DIONNE SEARCEY
April 21, 2006; Page B2
BellSouth Corp. said first-quarter net income fell 26% from a year earlier, citing costs related to Hurricane Katrina. | |
| | 
cableties
Premium
join:2005-01-27 | Re: Earnings are down because of Katrina not TV They have insurance to cover losses! this kills me! | |
| | | 
hayabusa3303
Over 200 mph
Premium
join:2005-06-29
clubs: | Re: Earnings are down because of Katrina not TV Company of this size is more likely Self insured than anything.
Why are they after google to pay for damage again? | |
| Hipjones
join:2004-05-14
Smithfield, VA | Distribution 99.9% of all homes have phone lines unlike cable.The telcos have more opportunity to provide more people with the infrastructure they already have,just a few upgrades. | |
| | 
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Distribution Hell BellSouth can't even provide me with anything higher than 3 Mbps even though I live 1000 feet from a central office. So when in the world are they going to be able to provide me with TV, 2026? | |
| kdandaoc
join:2003-10-13
608052427
| I can see it now... having ATT handing out $400 charges to fix their proprietary pile of s*** 2 wire wireless setup. Or maybe they'll just subcontract to geek squad.
I sincerely hope someone in DC is paying attention to the maneuverings by the telcos, because I foresee the future argument for the raising of USF funds. | |
| | NewMariner
join:2005-06-24 | Re: I can see it now... Actually my USF fees were lowered this month...not higher... | |
| 
Spiral
No Easy Way To Be Free.
Premium
join:2003-03-04
Baltimore, MD
| Monthly expenses I don't see a $150-200 entertainment bill being viable, with the increasing cost of gasoline and electricity. Some states are looking at 50-60% increases in electric rates, or more, due to deregulation. An extra $50 a month or so, for electricity...guess what I'm gonna cut to pay for that - cable TV. | |
| 
Dryvlyne
Far Beyond Driven
Premium
join:2004-08-30
Newark, OH
| Screw triple and quadruple play! I'm so sick of companies bundling sh!t and trying to force it down consumer's throats. How ironic that if I want fewer services from a company then I'll be raped in the price I pay compared to someone who bundles. It's just utter bullsh!t that I (and others) are and will continue to get bent over because we either choose to hold our services with various companies or not have some of them at all.
--
In relative terms life is shorter than the blink of an eye. Remember that each and every day because in the end it's not about what you've done but how you've lived.
| |
| | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
·Charter Pipeline
| Re: Screw triple and quadruple play! While I agree that the prices for unbundled DSL and cable HSI seem unjust, how far do you want to extend this rant? Combo meals, gallon vs. quart (milk, OJ, soda), 6" vs. 12" sub, and on and on...
Businesses have and always will try to get you to buy a bit more by making the deal sweeter. As a consumer it's up to us to determine whether more is really a better. Isn't this a foundation of our country's economic prosperity? | |
| | | 
hhawkman
Premium
join:2001-02-08
Port Hueneme, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Screw triple and quadruple play! said by rradina :While I agree that the prices for unbundled DSL and cable HSI seem unjust, how far do you want to extend this rant? Combo meals, gallon vs. quart (milk, OJ, soda), 6" vs. 12" sub, and on and on... Here's one step farther. At one point we could buy a usable stereo system with built-in turntable, Tape, radio, Amp, and speakers in one package, by one manufacturer. But it never could compete with a separate component system, with sections hand picked from various manufacturers. IOW, for example only, Teac might have made great tape drives, but crappy turntables. Harmon Kardon made great amps and tuners, but crappy speakers.
If you wanted the best of everything, you had to go with the strengths of the individual manufacturers, to put together a decent system.
Though I would have little problem getting phone services from Bell South, lets face it kids, DSL has been pretty much a disappointment. Now they want to start selling services they are in no way set up for, and have no experience with, over a technology that hasn't really flown yet.
And lets look at VOIP services over various media. When the signal, and situation is right, it's indistinguishable from land lines. (Unless you want local 911, and assurance of connecting to everyone everywhere. ) And the cheap service VOIP isn't going to last forever. By the time everyone puts in their 2 cents, the price is going to go up to somewhere between a land line and a cell phone. | |
| nike303
join:2003-08-28
Franklin Square, NY
| Why Not If someone already has my internet and telephone coming in...why not just make it my TV. You get better deals, and I dont have to deal with another content provider.
Keep in mind, I have Cablevision as the cable provider in my area (Town of Hempstead). So...I cant wait to see another offering. | |
| | ashworth
join:2001-10-06
Pittsburgh, PA | Re: Why Not Didn't Hempstead just get a Verizon FiOS TV franchise or am I mistaken ? | |
| PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
| Not a Chance!!! The "Bellhead" telcos have no interest in only selling flat-rate bandwidth. They want the same cash-cow business model the cable companies have, where bandwidth is sold per-bit: in the form of TV. Just like they used to be able to sell long distance telephony, before competition from cellphones "ruined" that business. | |
| GhostDoggy
join:2005-05-11
Duluth, GA
| There are points to consider ... 1. Time to market on new technology isn't rapid in the telecom world. We started hearing rumblings of IPTV in late 2004 & early 2005. SBC & BellSouth will not have a substantial deployment probably until late 2007 at the earliest.
2. Market approach to support video is questionable, unproven on scale, and will require immense development, planning, and large expenditures for questionable returns on market penetration.
3. Market protection against IP-based video competition will lead them into erosion of their customer base as they treat the WWW as the enemy, and in turn abuse their own customers in the name of their protection.
4. The continued denial of bandwidth-need will be their Achilles heel. Cable companies didn't deploy large bandwidth for RF modulated video transport because they were nice, they did it because they had to. Accepting this and deploying FTTH is the most logical technical approach.
5. Spending money on lawyers, lobbyists, and misinformation endeavors wastes time and money and the end results are a bad projected company image based on dollars not spent on company assets, and all for the sake of an unproven plan.
6. Ignoring the neutral-competition is a disaster in the making. Municipal broadband will only lead additional competition when the telephone companies think "bandwidth is not needed or justified", "bandwidth will not be delivered", and "what bandwidth is delivered will be treated with the greatest prejudices ever known to the industry."
So, in the end the telephone industry will spends a lot of money delivering minimal bandwidth while treating their customer poorly in order to protect an unproven market technology that they are entering late while their projected image get's derailed like the worst train wreck ever seen.
I would have much better confidence had they simply deployed a neutrally-managed 100-Mbps pipe based on fiber that could grow with applications some other knucklehead could spend money on in development. | |
| 
TechSponge
join:2001-05-14
Hillside, NJ | Take yer pick Incumbents should be stripped of their layer1 infrastructure if they also want to go after services revenue. Then we have a fair playing field for true competition.
One or the other. Not both. | |
| | | |
|
|
