Verizon "Fios" FTTH network (was Verizon Cable TV?)
Neal McLain
> The Phila Inqr (www.philly.com) had an article on this in
> general.
I assume the article you're referring to is "Cable's new rival: Phone
lines" by Wendy Tanaka
<http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/business/9523523.htm>.
> It stated that one change is that the new cabling will run
> fibre right to the house, cable uses fibre to the neighborhood
> only, then coax to the house (which is how cable serves my
> area).
That's why it's called FTTP (fiber to the premises) or FTTH (fiber to
the home). Monte Solomon posted an article about this network in TD
V23#340 ("Verizon Fios - Fiber-to-the-Premises Network")
<http://tinyurl.com/46q4s>.
> Given the price gouging, poor reliability, and community
> disrespect by the cable company, I am looking forward to
> Verizon's service offering.
> How this will work out for the consumer in terms of quality and
> price remains to be seen. It's very possible that competition
> will lower cable's price, but only slightly since Verizon will
> want to make big profits too and not go too far down in a price
> war.
Or that Verizon's video service will incur many of the same costs that
cable companies face:
- Copyright royalty fees: 1% to 2% of basic-tier revenue.
- Programming license fees: 25% to 35% of upper-tier revenue.
- Franchise fees: 6% to 7% of total revenue.
- Free channel capacity for public-, educational-, and
government-access facilities.
- Support for whatever other fancy goodies (color studios,
I-net, free basic service for schools and municipal
buildings) that the LFA originally extracted from the
incumbent cable company.
Barring changes in federal law, these costs will apply even if Verizon
uses the IPTV technology that Danny Burstein described in footnote [a]
of his post in TD V23#394 <http://tinyurl.com/3nchd>.
Which is, of course, precisely why Verizon is trying to get federal
law changed. Verizon Vice Chairman and President Lawrence Babbio
advocates the following:
"... Wireline telephone companies that offer video as part of
broadband services should not have to obtain cable franchises
in every local jurisdiction, since they already have the right
of way to deploy networks. Revenue needs of local governments
can be met without the delay and red tape inherent in the
franchising process.
"Adopt a national policy that pre-empts other levels of
government. Local jurisdictional borders do not apply to the
realm of the Internet. Current policy subjects investments to
the conflicting agendas and interpretations of regulatory
agencies at every level of government."
Source: Verizon News Release "Verizon Taking Lead to Transform
Telecommunications Industry, Bring Technology Benefits to Consumers."
Aug. 24, 2004. <http://tinyurl.com/4ldyt>.
Eliminating local-franchise requirements would definitely lower
Verizon's costs. But you can rest assured that the cable industry
will oppose any regulatory relief for telcos unless they get the same
relief.
Verizon's FIOS system in Keller, Texas is now up and running. One of
its first subscribers has posted some pictures of the install at
<http://tinyurl.com/4y9ca>.
Neal McLain
nmc...@annsgarden.com