To: elmatador who wrote (5415 ) 10/3/1999 6:13:00 PM From: Frank A. Coluccio Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 12823
"...perhaps we don't need to see fiber everywhere. First it will go where you can raise most revenue with the least investment in infrastructure. Then -I think- it will percolate downmarket near and near the average customer." My previous remarks concerning fiber not being near ubiquitous enough yet, did not imply that it should be "everywhere," although, that would be nice, too. Rather, if you look at the major routes that the big fiber barons track, you will note that they follow the same NFL cities, or the top 36 or so MTAs in straight-through coverage paths, effectively servicing the major centers of commerce in those cities, only. Some of the newer carriers are also doing metro builds there, as well. That leaves some very large territories, the vast majority of the land mass, still unattended to, not only for end users' direct purposes, but for traditional service providers and other large SPs, alike. This is not to be taken lightly. In many rural areas there are ISPs who cannot get T1 services across minimal WAN distances without being placed on a list that sometimes takes many months to catch up to them. The author of that article was not alone, by the way. I've come across two other startups who are now saying that enough fiber exists in the ground right now to preclude any further trenching. Fine. What they are doing is renting lambdas and reselling them to niche market users. How far can that scale, I wonder. No problem, if all their users in clustered in the lower part of Manhattan, I suppose, but what happens when one decides to move to Westchester, or to Kew Gardens, Queens?