Re: what LU is getting from TeraBeam, the information we have at this stage is still rather sketchy to me, but my first impressions are that ...
... aside from information on some proprietary approaches that TB might be using which LU would become privy to under NDA terms and other covenants which define their relationship, I suspect that LU's primary enticement would be one of expanding their own normal business growth through the types of infrastructure financing that they and others in their class have been known to do with startups. CLECs. DLECs. ISPs. FiberBarons. You name it. In short, this arrangement affords LU the benefit of having a long-term, captive customer.
I don't see LU coveting or needing anything that TB has to offer from a proprietary technology standpoint, if that is what you were asking. Oddly, in this case LU appears to be taking on the role of part owner in a new service organization. So it may be a little different from a structural standpoint, but the net effects work toward the same goals as if they were only doing the financing, only a little less (or more) risky in this case, in an offsetting manner, depending on your perspective.
It is less risky to be an actual partner because LU will have a say in matters going forward, but it can in other ways become more risky from the standpoints of technology rejection, or due to the possibility of LU alienating other SP customers in the same markets. It is a bit more unusual and risky, IMO, to see LU taking on the role of part owner in an SP organization because they stand a chance to alienate those other service providers who are also their customers in the same locales where TB will operate, whose fortunes would be adversely affected by the success of the free space model ventures (using infrared transmission), such as TB's.
------
LU, like CISCO, NT and many others of their stature over the years, have financed many service providers of all types, which is what it appears that TB is becoming more than anything else at this point, a service provider. But as such, being a service provider instead of a maker of hardware, TB will be free to use not only their patented architecture, but any other architecture or product line that fits their needs. LU's OpticAir product is one such option they have to choose from, as is the UK CableFree supplier being another, and their are at least another dozen more in this space of notable size, as well, who could also satisfy the point to point requirements that TB will face with their larger clients... clients who will not fit the economy class of the point-to-multipoint user in many instances. Point to point links will also be more highly sought due to security reasons, as well.
Others may differ on what LU's incentives are here, but I see them as being the same as they have always been when they have financed many previous CLECs' Class 5 switching requirements, SONET gear, DWDMs and actual fiber to be placed, as well as the project management personnel to see it through. Only in this case, they would also be interested in supplying (read: locking in the long term provisioning through long term financing) of not only all of the above, but their own Optic-AirLink IR free space apparatus and Internet-grade routing and other ancillary networking gear, as well. I'd be interested in hearing others' opinions on this matter.
FAC |
