Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MikeM54321 who wrote (943)	10/3/2000 9:03:30 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 46821

Mike, if T deploys their lightwire model with 65 homes wired to a field node, and statistically only 15 to 20 percent of them on line at any one time, then they will have already achieved fiber to the curb or home performance levels. Two things - at least - are stopping them at this time. First, they still haven't completed the upgrade$ that they inherited from TCI. Second, they don't want to cannibalize the for-fee services like VoD and interactive that they plan to implement via the set top box. T will not begin implementing lightwire in earnest until well after FTTH begins to make a dent in their revenues. It's still a game of chicken with these guys.

To: MikeM54321 who wrote (943)	10/4/2000 12:40:38 AM
From: ftth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 46821

Hi Mike, lightwire is fiber deeper (FTTMN fiber to the mini-node). It's also a science project that probably never will come to be any more than that. In any event, it just extends the lease, so to speak. It's still shared and asymmetrical. Shared isn’t necessarily bad, but why share if you don’t have to. Asymmetrical isn’t even necessarily bad, as long as its adaptively scalable. But it isn’t. There are lots of ways to extend the lease besides lightwire. There will be lots more going forward. Trouble is they’re all “month to month” lease extensions. Bottom line is if 64Mbps is sufficient well in to the future, the future of “broadband” isn’t very exciting. That's a pretty minimal amount of growth (arguably, very little growth is required to fill that pipe today), and growth that doesn't require much in the way of new value chains to support it. Surely 64Mb will be at or near one of the steps taken on the way to real broadband, but it’s just that—a step. These are the wrong kinds of steps to build though. They require you build a new house along with the new steps. Build the house only once. If we make a comparison to Personal Computers just to make a sweeping point: My 133 MHz Pentium (this was 1994 I think) cost half as much and had about 10x the processing power, 20x the hard disk capacity, and 100x the RAM of the 12MHz 286 machine I bought in 1988, if memory serves. Few would have ever predicted the need, low cost, or size of the market that would evolve for that P133 machine, back in 1988. Now that 133 machine is (and has been for years) a cobweb collector (an elementary school won't even take it for free). You’re aware what you can get today and the price comparison to that 1988 machine. I do believe there is some relevance in using the 12MHz PC as a comparative benchmark for where we are today in “broadband” and fiber optics. One of the problems with the above Personal Computer comparison is that you couldn't buy the 10x improvement at the same time you could buy the original...it took years of semiconductor process evolutions. You still can’t buy the 1000x improvement. But….. A person doesn’t even have to stretch to reach a 1000x improvement in so-called broadband as it exists today. It's not even bleeding edge anymore. It already exists today. With GbE/FTTH, for example, you could get a 1000x improvement over what’s called “broadband” today. Forget the cost comparison today--nobody's claiming 1000x for free or at parity right now--but let's revisit this comparison in about 5 years and see if the numbers don’t scale in a huge way. History is on our side. Yep, I know what you're thinking--you don't need 1000x today. That’s not the point. The point is no technological evolution is necessary to reach it...it already exists. Even the services to consume that bandwidth exist today but aren't deployed in any appreciable way. Going forward what scales rapidly is cost (in the downward direction) and by the time you do need it (just humor me and assume that you will at some point), GbE and all the network components will be a couple/few generations below leading edge and will be dirt cheap. Lightwire probably wont even make economic sense at that time since all its proprietary components will have far less "economies of scale" cost benefits, and it’s per-subscriber capabilities may not look very attractive either. That 64Mbps best-case Lightwire system supports about one compressed high resolution video stream. I have a hard time believing that high resolution video (and new reasons to use it) will gain no ground over the next 5 years and beyond. Too many forces are pushing it from all directions, both directly and indirectly. It is the catalyst. Watch for the chain reaction.