Newsletter
Google Left Banner
Iowa the Center of FTTH?
03 Jun, 2008
Those of us that follow telecom closely recognize that Iowa is somewhat of a unique telecom situation. For a state that is relatively low in population, Iowa has the most (by # of actual carriers) telecom service providers than any state – somewhere north of 130 carriers. So it’s no surprise that Iowa has been identified by the FTTH Council as the state with the most FTTH carriers. Does that make it the epicenter of FTTH? Joe Savage, the president of the FTTH Council seems to believe so, based on his guest column in the Des Moines Register. “While the number of FTTH subscribers in the state is still relatively low - about 41,000 - this number will grow because there are many small telephone companies in Iowa looking to stay competitive. In fact, the state ranks No. 1 in the country with regard to the number of FTTH service providers it has - nearly 40 in various stages of deployment …” says Savage in his column.
Truth be told, there’s a lot to learn from Iowa. These 40 FTTH carriers don’t get the press coverage of Verizon FiOS, but their operational insight and experience on FTTH is quite valuable. You could easily call them pioneers. There is a popular opinion that suggests all telecom carriers will be compelled to offer FTTH eventually. The competitive reality of the marketplace may dictate it and the falling price per port for FTTH (although the construction costs will still be hard to swallow) will eventually justify it. Telecom carriers that follow in the footsteps of these early adopters of FTTH will have a good base to learn from.
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

Thank goodness for USF
How else can all these small companies build FTTH!