From: heller@deepsoft.com
At Wed, 02 Jul 2014 18:36:58 -0500 Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>
> On 02-Jul-14 16:42, Robert Heller wrote:
> > At Wed, 02 Jul 2014 12:40:12 -0500 Stephen Sprunk
> > wrote:
> >> On 02-Jul-14 11:57, Robert Heller wrote:
> >>> It is no more expensive than stringing copper on the utility
> >>> poles. Actually *fiber* cables are getting to be cheaper than
> >>> copper --
> >>
> >> For new lines, sure. However, in most cases the copper lines are a
> >> sunk cost, and replacing them with fiber would cost a lot of
> >> money.
> >
> > Unless the copper is falling apart (in places it litterally is). Yes,
> > it costs more to replace the *existing* copper with fiber, but if you
> > are going to *replace* the infrastructure, replacing it with *old*
> > [dead end] technology is just plain stupid.
>
> ... and that's part of why they're replacing it with FTTN. Going all
> the way to FTTH, though, makes it an order of magnitude more costly, and
> problems in the last few hundred feet are rare.
>
In the case of Western Mass, the "last few hundred feet" [of copper] are in
bad condition. And it is not a matter of a few hundred feet, it is thousands
of feet, more than a mile in many cases. I live about 1.5 miles from the
concentrator. There is no DSLAM and Verizon is *never* going to install a
DSLAM. I expect it is probably cheaper to do fiber to the home than FTTN,
since if you are talking about 'few hundred feet' from the node to people's
houses, you are talking about one node for each 1-3 houses. *That* cannot be
cost effective. We are talking about a very low population density, with
houses widely separated in many cases. The existing copper infrastructure is
in *very* poor condition and needs to be *completely* replaced.
> >>> Yes, Verizon has pretty much stopped rolling out FiOS.
> >>
> >> They're still marketing the heck out of it here. Perhaps you mean
> >> they're not introducing it in additional exchanges?
> >
> > Yes. They are looking to take market share from the likes of Comcast
> > or Time Warner. All of the ads *I've* every seen seem to be geared
> > in that light.
>
> "Triple play" is the holy grail in the telecom industry; the wiring
> plant and customer service expenses are mostly fixed, so the key to
> profit is selling as many things on top of the plant as possible.
>
> >>> Right now, Verizon has sold off almost all of their copper
> >>> telephone infrastructure -- only in Mass. does Verizon have any
> >>> copper telephone infrastructure,
> >>
> >> What? Verizon is still the ILEC for a big chunk of the country.
> >
> > No, they have sold off most of their *copper* landline business and
> > are concentrating on wireless. (At least on the East coast.)
>
> FairPoint bought Verizon's ILEC business in ME, NH and VT, and Frontier
> got their ILEC business in AZ, ID, IL, IN, MI, NV, NC, OH, OR, SC, WA,
> WV and WI. According to Wonkypedia, this "... primarily involved rural
And NY.
> exchanges that were formerly a part of the GTE system ..."
>
> So, one could say that Verizon was ditching _rural_ landlines, but they
> don't seem to be ditching urban/suburban landlines, which they really
> only had a lot of in the non-GTE parts of their territory--and that is
> also where they are pushing FiOS, which probably isn't a coincidence.
Pretty much the only _rural_ landlines Verizon still has are in Western Mass.
They would love to sell it, but can't because no one (in their right mind)
would buy it without also demanding that the FiOS in Eastern Mass be part of
the deal.
>
> S
>
--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / heller@deepsoft.com
Deepwoods Software -- http://www.deepsoft.com/
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments
--- SoupGate/W32 v1.03
* Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)
|
