LAST MILE TECHNOLOGIES - Let's Discuss Them Here Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : LAST MILE TECHNOLOGIES - Let's Discuss Them Here

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: elmatador who wrote (11548)	6/23/2001 4:28:47 PM
From: Crossy	Read Replies (2) of 12823

Elmat, I believe it's good business sense to opt for multiple revenue streams for your pipe. In 1995-96 it was predicted that cable and PSTN would invade each other's turf - now we are seeing some real moves into this - really odd how long the "old order" was pretty much locking 2 local monopoly industries captive.. There's a funny "twist" in the incremental upgrade economics when you compare HFC with the PSTN.. Initially cable has/had the upper hand. Why ? It's easier to provide voice services and broadband internet over the cable network than over the PSTN. Why ? Because HFC is not so much a step up for many MSOs as xDSL was for the ILECs & PTTs. The "defensive" tactic the ILECs could counter with was not really a "full scale" attack at cable's bread & butter biz: video service. Why ? Because DSL in its low grade speeds cannot really compete with the bandwidth of HFC - it's pretty unsuitable for delivering video. So to compete in the transfer of SDTV or just analog TV in a competitive offering the ILECs have to be able to provide at least VDSL over their PSTN. This is the reason why I see the so far completed xDSL upgrades not as an "aggressive" open of the ILECs - but as a rather defensive move on their part.. At the VDSL stage it will become an all-out attack of the ILECs. If you look at bandwidth and architecture (shared, non-shared) alone, VDSL might blow away HFC on data access, the MSOs might counter by providing a bigger "data" only ratio of their HFC basic banwidth. The "odd" aspect of the VDSL upgrade appears to me that it should be easiest to upgrade (at lowest costs) in areas where brand new NGDLCs were deployed. The areas were ADSL (and RADSL) were deployed that didn't need a NGDLC to obtain those classes of service are way more expensive to move to VDSL. MEans that those who got/will get ADSL last should be the first to obtain VDSL. Funny somehow.. Finally it shouldn't be too difficult to move from VDSL to FTTH, maybe it will skipped over finally. When reading my own text above I get the impression that cable upgrade costs were higher initially but ILEC upgrade costs will be higher progressively in the future, especially in the VDSL upgrade rush (if it ever started) However I predict that the ultimate future will not lie in bundled offerings as the FT article suggests but the contrary: I firmly believe that finally (after a long battle) when broadband becomes ubiquitous there will be a firm separation of infrastructure and content. Let's see how the future will shape up.. rgrds CROSSY

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next