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: aladin who wrote (18295)	12/10/2006 7:24:31 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 46821

Interesting citation, John. One shouldn't be too surprised to read about how some 800 pounders, indeed probably most, tend to behave when their territories are at stake. One comment, and a recurring notion that is expressed in your reference, however, needs to be corrected, IMO: "The phenomenon of broadband uptake has all to do with renegade samurai and it has absolutely nothing to do whatsoever with any of the institutions or people you mentioned in your article." There were other factors to consider that were equally influential, if not more so, as well. The Japanese ministry, along with mandates issued by the then single NTT, itself, which date as far back as the early Nineties, established the goal whereby all of Japan would be fully fibered by the year 2010. Every five years since then my skepticism has been a little less vociferous, until recently I'm not deriding or doubting the idea at all, fwiw. Also, while the term "broadband," itself, is an misnomer as it is applied to higher-speed access capabilities today, it wasn't even a term that was used back in those days when referring to residential access except in its proper place to denote cable tv's use of frequency division broadband techniques. Nor was the crippled model of HSI that we've all now come to accept as normal "broadband" today. But I digress ... Even absent the influences of the renegade samurai and the WWW, itself, I submit that some semblance of enhanced multi-media capablities supported by access lines with far greater throughput rates today than existed in the mid 1990s would have eventually been delivered by NTT, anyway. On the matter of visible signs of economic improvement due to the uptake in broadband? I've opined in the past that, in developed nations, especially, the availability of HSI is becoming less of a differentiator that gives its owner an economic advantage, but rather, at some point it becomes merely a license to hunt. FAC ------

To: aladin who wrote (18295)	12/11/2006 2:48:27 AM
From: axial	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 46821

John, thanks. No problem, about the delayed response. The first thing I'd like to point out is that the discussion about the broadband performance (so to speak) of the Asian Tigers was without reference to the economic model that drove it. It's been recognized upstream that there were differences in the drivers: "At the extremes, change seems to fall into 2 categories - proactive (Korea, Japan, Sweden) and reactive, of which the US and Canada are two good examples. In the first category, some countries have been able to take impressive steps because the move to broadband was largely accomplished by governmental or governmental/industrial elite fiat. Not always, though: the impressive gains in Sweden and the Netherlands were more democratically enacted." Message 22394876 "Decisions can be made democratically (Sweden, the Netherlands) or by fiat (China, Korea, Japan). The instrument is policy." Message 22867250 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Some of the drivers behind Asian broadband buildout don't exist here. Your use of the term "command economy" sums up many of those reasons succinctly. There are also cultural differences, and intra-national competitive aspects to their motivations. But here's the thing, John: Previously discussed here was the Euro policy construct, which permitted Sweden's early broadband lead. Sweden is now being joined by Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Iceland, the Netherlands and more recently by the UK. These countries don't have "command economies". They're all democratic nations, acting on what they believe best serves their nations, and their people. So what's the driver? Good telecomms policy. The EU policy construct allows those nations aspiring to high-throughput networks to move as far, and as fast, as they can. Are the companies involved losing money? Nope. They're making a profit. Are they being subsidized? Nope. They're benficiaries of policies that create a level playing field. Any argument that "... it's different here... we don't do things that way," must founder on facts provided by the Euro experience. Most would argue that high-throughput networks are desirable. They are also technologically feasible and economically viable: in "command economies" and democratic, demand-driven societies just like ours. So what's holding us back? 1 - Successful but counterproductive efforts by entrenched interests to maintain status quo dependencies 2 - Political failure to articulate the national and public interest, and to create and enact effective policy. JMO, Jim