Newsletter
Google Left Banner
Comcast Thinks Voice Self Installs Offers Advantage
05 Sep, 2007
Comcast is testing self installation of phone service in San Francisco, and aims to expand it across major markets in 2008. Truck rolls have always been a double edged sword. On the one hand, they provide a valuable customer touch point. On the other, they are quite expensive. Bloomberg News reports about Comcast’s self installation tests, and reveals that the strategy may save them $200 - $300 per installation. There may be more benefit. “It not only reduces costs to Comcast, but it helps accelerate the rollout,'' said Thomas Eagan, a New York-based analyst with Oppenheimer & Co. Comcast projects to grow from their current voice subscriber base of 3 million to 11 million by 2010.
Contrast this with Verizon’s estimated costs of $800 - $1,000 for a FiOS installation. Verizon does not have the luxury of self installs because of their need to install a fiber drop to each home. Cable companies have a clear advantage, at least initially. They are able to leverage their coax connection to the home and conceivably limit expensive truck rolls. Verizon would counter and say that advantage will be short lived. Once a subscriber has fiber to the home, Verizon will be able to add and remove services quite easily. However short lived, the advantage is present today. And it does offer cable advantages, both in accelerating and/or easing triple play adoption, while also positively impacting cash flow and earnings.
Read this Bloomberg News article for more analysis.
$800-$1000 dollars?
I just bought a new construction, and called Verizon to have the FiOS installed. Now i thought that they would run the lines when the house was built, but no. They wanted $950 dollars just for them to run the line, and then anouther $200 to install the service! I called Comcast, and had free installation, and no extra charges.
Post new comment
About Telecompetitor
Channel
Webinars/Events
Upcoming Webinars
Packet Optical Networks – Enabling Your Future
Dec 16, 2008
Upcoming Events
NTCA Wireless Symposium
Jan 7-9, 2009 - Austin, TX
Featured Article
Should Telephone Service be Free?
12 Oct, 2008
Comcast announced a new promotion last week that offers 12 months of free basic cable service for new customers who also sign up for an additional service. Customers who don’t want an additional service can get Comcast’s basic service of about 20 -30 channels for $10/month. The promotion is tied to the digital TV transition of February 2009 and entices potential customers to avoid the transition “hassle” by getting “free” cable service. “The simple fact is that basic cable is the easiest path through the digital transition and now consumers can get it for free,” said Derek Harrar, General Manager and Senior Vice President, Video Services for Comcast in a company statement. This move is similar to strategies pursued by other video service providers, who are hoping to leverage the digital TV transition for new subscriber additions.
But is this strategy a leading indicator for the future? Should basic core services like basic cable and basic telephone service be offered for free, used as a “carrot” to entice customers to buy “more important” services like broadband? Maybe a very basic phone service, with no LD, access to landline 911, and maybe outgoing service only (to avoid telemarketers) should be a free component of a bundled offering. Such a wireline service may appeal to a customer who previously cut the cord for wireless only, but also needs broadband. There is a growing portion of the population who find the value of traditional wireline phone service elsewhere – either through wireless or broadband/IP services. But, if they could get the security of landline 911, and an extra dial tone in their home as a free value add for subscribing to broadband (or video from a telco’s perspective), maybe a telco’s bundled offering may look more attractive than a comparable cable offering. I realize this idea is not appealing to the hundreds of ILECs who are a part of the current access/settlement system (in fact, it couldn’t work in the context of today’s regulatory structure), but I wonder whether it’s inevitable. In this possible future scenario, the current settlement system adapts to broadband as the underlying service, as opposed to voice.
This scenario cuts both ways. From a cable company’s perspective, a growing portion of the population is turning to the Internet as a source for their video content, and no longer see value in paying for a broad package of video as a part of a traditional subscription pay-TV service. But, if they could receive basic TV (which includes local broadcast affiliates) as a free value add for buying broadband, maybe the cable bundle is more attractive. In a true IP/broadband world, very basic phone and video service is relatively easy to deliver, and has little impact on bandwidth and network performance. Maybe the digital transition is opening the door to a future where free basic services are a regular component of a bundled offering. Thoughts?

digg this story
google

Another example of how cable
Another example of how cable will beat telcos. It's just so much more simpler for them to get into the phone business than it is for telcos to get in the video business