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 : LAST MILE TECHNOLOGIES - Let's Discuss Them Here -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rob S. who wrote (10964)	4/16/2001 11:57:33 AM
From: rr_burns	Respond to of 12823

another 2 cents in this bbfw discussion... isp-planet.com >>>>>>>>>> "There's no major cost difference in delivering business or commercial service, so it's always been hard to justify the difference in price. The same ADSL equipment that delivers $39 ADSL to consumers can deliver symmetrical 384K (or even 768K at short distances) for business. The difference in cost is the Internet backbone connection, implying better service due to a lower over-subscription ratio. " —Dave Burstein, DSL Prime <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Interesting quote on DSL costing (business vs residential) sort of goes to Frank's questions in his recent posts. The point is DSL and Wireless are / will be no different on the congestion issue. These two links below are suggestive of the idea that the copper solution for BB access really isn't very far ahead of BBFWA. When one considers the deployment time involved in the wired solution, the reality is a US$500 wireless cpe being highly available would eat up the DSL lead in _very_ short order. We haven't seen one yet though. isp-planet.com isp-planet.com My final thought is that DSL seems to be priced at $40/month or so, but I am fairly certain the telco costs are generally subsidized heavily. What does a DSL central office device that serves 1000 homes cost? _really_? I've been reading information suggestive of the idea that the manufacturers heavily subsidize these with a view to recovering costs "later" and that the current telco supplier distress is going to change that (i.e. consumer dsl prices will rise sharply). One has to wonder about the same effects across the fibre build out... Since the wireless folks haven't penetrated the market much ( I haven't found bbfwa stats like the above anywhere), presumably they don't have such debt issues (yet?). If the fibre build out debt "solution" is more bits per customer per month lighting up the fibre (i.e. video, any form) and _paid_ for, then a network of short range ( 2000 meters? or so) wireless hubs and routers to connect the customer to the fibre may well be the fastest possible build out for the fibre optic financing issues that IMHO are looming. economist.com What should DSL really cost the consumer if the equipment used was on the telco books at accurate real costs? Are the european "pay per use or bit" cost models actually more honest? Certainly in Europe the wireless bbfwa seems to be going stronger than DSL - because of the consumer pricing. My 2 cent opinion. FWIW. ..rr