ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Why Does the US Have Expensive & Obsolescent Broadband?

2003-11-03 20:46:19
Why Does the US Have Expensive and Obsolescent Broadband?

COOK Report, Comparing US and Canada, Scrutinizes Current State of Regulatory Gridlock

Introduction - Eyes Wide Shut

For the full story  http://cookreport.com/12.10.shtml

The talk is all about investment in broadband. But the reality is the use of lobbying and lawyers to twist the framework of regulations so that cablecos and telcos are free to sell expensive and obsolescent broadband. This issue of the COOK Report scrutinizes the current state of regulatory gridlock in the USA. It looks to Canada to answer questions like why Bell Canada's cost for DSL is only 10.95 Canadian and most American prices are nearly $40.

We claim that building a broadband infrastructure is important. The tardy telcos say that they need encouragement given the huge expense of the buildout. However, the poor quality, broadband DSL offered is likely so cheap to deliver that the result is a subsidy of the inefficiencies of the old phone network. The goal is supposed to be radical change. The result is likely more of the same. As we shall show, policy is built on a wing and a prayer because we simply have no way to find out what DSL actually costs companies like Verizon and SBC to deliver.

This issue of the COOK Report describes how and why telecom regulation in the US was successful until the collapse of the bubble at the end of the century. In discussions with Scott McCollough and Francois Menard it then explains the steps that the Powell FCC is taking to give the ILECs and Cablecos in the US what they want. Starting with the cable networks American policy, destroying incentive to innovate, is now founded on giving free reign to the TV content monopoly with its huge captive installed Internet base so that it can pay down some of its debt and have a cash flow large enough to pay the demands of the sports channels for increased viewing fees. These people who have no clue that Internet is something other than another form of entertainment and have no regulatory oversight are investing capital in the wage demands of sports figures and entertainers rather than in infrastructure and tools necessary to enable individual Americans to compete in the global economy. Japan, Korea and perhaps China are instead following policies that will enable them to do in telecommunications and information technology in general in the first half of this century what Americans did in the last half of the century just ended.

Watching the deployment of global broadband it is hard to see the United States as anything else except the 21st century "new" Roman Empire with Washington running the printing presses and our public and regulatory policy captive to the local phone companies that are unwilling and perhaps fiscally unable to cast off their 19th century roots. Extend to us the freedom that you have offered to the cable networks they say. While once staid and traditional Japan engages in creative destruction (or reconstruction) of its copper local loop with soon to be offered 40 megabit per second DSL, in the US, the two mega (SBC & Verizon) and two semi mega (BellSouth and Qwest) local phone companies invest in armies of lawyers to co-opt the FCC and the PUCs in each of the states fighting for their right to deliver what is usually sub-megabit-per-second, "so called" DSL broadband to American homes.

It should not be surprising that the market for DSL equipment innovation is Korea, and Japan. And Europe. Not the imperial US where the LECs invest in lawyers rather than innovation. While in Canada the LEC and cableco's are effectively competing, in the US they have a tacit agreement not to compete with the telco's beginning to drop the price of DSL significantly below cable modem which, rather than cut its prices, increases its bandwidth download from a possible maximum of 1.5 to a possible maximum of 3 megabits per second . Consequently, a small business like The COOK Report is stuck paying $43 a month to a Comcast that thinks the Internet is just a different form of TV and delivers abysmal service. Were it not for Vonage, we'd happily go back to dial up.

The situation is laden with irony. Given different priorities stemming from less backward looking imperial leadership, there is no technological reason that, on short urban cooper loops, the ILECs could not be delivering 10 to 20 megabit per second DSL in American cities. American ILECs acknowledge that DSL can reach 80 to 90 percent of their customers. But the wait is going to be a long time because there is no competition. As readers of our interview with Pedestal Networks will see, the coverage extension is achieved by installation in small LEC owned remote cabinets known as serving area interfaces. There is no way that an ILEC will give a competitor access to those interfaces. And with the FCC's intent to declare broadband an information service, the LECs are being signaled that they may refuse access to their networks to anyone but themselves.

Their options for pricing DSL are many and, as the articles in this issue show, they are so complex as to defy the ability of anyone with out access to multiple sets of LEC books to ascertain the true cost of delivering the service. We do however have some hints. Bell Canada can deliver DSL for $13.51 a month - a fee that includes a 15% markup over its actual cost. This figure is approximately 10 US dollars per month. Pedestal Networks asserts that their line powered remote installed DSLAM bricks can enable LECs to sell DSL at $19.95 a month and make a profit. Compare this to DSL prices of $35 to 40 a month with recently announced competitive prices in the $26 to 29 a month range.

What we see is the FCC and Congress in unholy alliance with the LECs to enable them to march forward on a 20 to 30 year path converting their networks to the new technology on a basis that is fully subsidized by individual and small business subscribers. Perhaps while condemning the United States to technology obsolescence, it will save the LECs and enable them to transition their networks by 2020. And of course if it does that, it may preserve shareholders investments. Of course if interest rates go up substantially, with LECs overall business flat to declining, one should not count on avoiding collapse.

Contents

Tour of Regulatory Jungle Shows Powell Effort to Undo 40 Years of FCC Policy -- Bigger-is-Better Ideology toYield Re-monopolization and Harm Economy Unless Stopped By Courts p.1

Understanding the FCC Regulatory Blueprint
Why the FCC Broadband Rulemaking Is a Path to the Re-Monopolization of the Telephone Network p.4

What Changed at the FCC?
The Role of Chairman Powell in Articulating a Bigger-Is-Better Worldview p. 10

Ninth Circuit Weighs in with Brand X Rebuff
Can ISPs Demand Action from State PUCs in Face of Stalemated FCC Policy? p. 12

The Short Happy Life of Verizon's PARTs
Shoving, Jousting and Obfuscation in the FCC's Playing of the Tariff Game p. 22

Rapid Changes in DSL Technology - More Powerful, Compact, & Cheaper DSLAMs Located in ILEC Remotes Can Bring DSL to less than $20 a month as ISPs are Locked out of ILEC Infrastructure p. 24

But in a Fight to the Death Between Telco and Cableco Who Will Pay For the New Infrastructure?
An essay by Tim Denton p. 29

Why Regulatory Forbearance of Broadband, Creates a Duopolistic Death Match that Will Leave only Municipal Public Works Standing an essay by Francois Menard with assistance from the COOK Report p. 31

McCollough on Importance of Regulatory Nuances Understanding Differences Between Telecommunications and Telecommunications Services - Parsing the Relationship Between Telecommunication Services, Tariffs, Issues of Access, Non Discrimination and Price p. 37

Why We Simply Don't know What it Costs SBC and Verizon to Deliver DSL Menard on ILEC Broadband Pricing and Regualtory Manuevers p. 41

EarthLink Shares a Jaundiced View of FCC
Brand X Reversal of Powell Holds Ray of Hope p. 47

Filling Up the Fiber:
A Look at Korean Broadband Infrastructure and Internet Traffic p. 49

Interview, Discussion, and Article Highlights p. 53

Executive Summary p. 62


--
=============================================================
The COOK Report on Internet Protocol,  609 882-2572 (PSTN) 703 738-6031
(Vonage) Subscription info & prices at http://cookreport.com/subscriptions.shtml
Independent ISPs Likely Demise? http://cookreport.com/12.09.shtml  Purchase 10
years of back issues at http://www.cafeshops.com/cookreportinter.6936314 E-mail cook(_at_)cookreport(_dot_)com or use cook(_at_)oldcolo(_dot_)com Free World Dial up 17318
=============================================================




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>