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: ftth who wrote (30171)	6/11/2009 3:17:52 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 46821

Hi ftth. Thanks for that seeming superb paper. I hope to give it a thorough read, probably sometime tomorrow or over the weekend. The numbers cited in your reference passage appear reasonable, given the broad and widely diverse base of localities from which it is drawn. In contrast, my region of Brooklyn, NY alone is dependent on only one or two central offices servicing more than a quarter-million subscribers of all types, both residential commercial. But it's not about ruler measurements, as much as it's about the need for, and the subsequent rewards for, streamlinig plant and operations. More specifically, it becomes a matter of "dematerializing" physical assets associated with nodes and transmission facilities, always striving to, but never quite reaching, a singularity of substance and function with the RF domain :) If you look at the enterprise as a fractal representation of the WAN mosaic, you'll note some interesting analogies here. When deploying Fiber to the Enclosure/Zone (FTTE/FTTZ - see: tiny.cc ) from a centralized switch location in a building or campus, say, and farther out still, Fiber to the Desk (FTTD), you'll find that greater than 70%, conservatively, and possibly up to 95%, of all equipment closets and telecom rooms can be eliminated due to the superior distance handling capability afforded by fiber, compared to the 90 meter link lengths/overall 100 meter channel lengths, when patching at the desktop and in the equipment room is included. These considerations play very heavily into our biz model, in fact. The analogies extended further, still, when you consider that the centralized switch location in the building must, by design, be larger than any of the former dependent equipment rooms, just as in the data center realm today, entities that provide cloud services globally must be larger than the individual customers' server farms they've supplanted. Of course, there are other factors one must take into account when considering the eradication of central offices vs. workgroup switching closets supporting only LANs. Where public carriers are concerned, for example, "broadband" services constitute only one of a plethora of customer services that might have to be fork-lifted if a central office were slated for closing. Many customers may be outright hostile to the idea of foregoing their copper lines for a number of different reasons, including dependency on legacy T1/T3 services, the inability of some applications to yet perform as desired over glass, and then there's the main problem of the cost of getting fiber pulled to many end points, which puts the kibosh on any notions of fiber substitution right off the bat. I'd say that this last item related to the feasibility of having fiber installed in the first place is the most compelling of all. FAC ------