To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (1506 ) 4/26/2000 11:06:00 PM From: ftth Respond to of 1782
Hi Frank, on your comment "There wont be enough bandwidth for the TWO larger SPs who already have HFC in another year or two in many cases..." I agree, ultimately, this is true. In fact 6 months to a year ago, I probably would have used the same time frames. Now, I think I'd tend to push that out at least a year (but that's a post in itself, and I'm not quite sure I really want to go there anyway). >>and certainly not the pure coaxial ones These system operators have no future and will pay later for what they pay now. They'll be squashed by alternate delivery methods well before they recoup their losses from such a foolish band-aid "investment". Their hands will be tied--they invested and have nothing left to do a "real upgrade" with, so will watch the world go by. "What" alternate methods? It'll vary by region. It doesn't matter which one because SOME method will arrive as viable competition well before they have recouped enough to do the upgrade they should have done in the first place. These systems (or actually, the customers these systems serve) might even become the primary TARGETS of those alternate providers that can see the obvious progression of bandwidth versus time, because they know these customers will be the "low hanging fruit." They already "tasted the broadbandy goodness," once upon a time, but will be the first to suffer from indigestion. Even a DSL-lite will look appetizing to these folks. Which leads right into your next thought: >> This might be the biggest case for dsl --even low speed, asymmetric dsl-- yet. Lots more to address in your post. Hope to get to it soon, but with all that other stuff in the queue...you know how it goes...that "bandwidth-sucking sound."