Month: March 2008

On Fiber in Europe (& Here)

Europe is pulling out in the race to fiber up and Holland and the Scandinavian countries are leading the way. A report from the European FTTH Council is stuffed with qoutables. Let’s indulge:

The battle over the future of broadband will be fought in the streets and houses…

Fiber Rules:

There is also evidence that operators that are first with fibre find it easy to attract and retain customers. John Quist of the Dutch incumbent KPN described how 85 per cent of households covered by one municipal FTTH network in the Netherlands converted to paying customers.

“The cable companies and KPN and the other telcos were just wiped out,” he said. Another Dutch municipal network, Neunen, claims 90 per cent take-up, while Sweden’s ViaEuropa claims 78 per cent. One municipal operator said that its FTTH services were so appealing that it did not need to market them to the younger population, hence the coffee mornings for the older generation…

First little piggy to market wins…

The problem for conventional telecoms operators is that there is more at stake than just subscriber numbers. If one operator beats others to wiring a house or apartment block, it will have a monopoly on that infrastructure that will likely last decades. In order to serve these customers, other operators will have to rent capacity at least on their competitor’s in-building wiring, even if they take the risk of laying their own fibre to those properties.

Municipal networks are scarfing the incumbent’s lunch:

Municipal networks in particular pose a challenge to conventional operators. Driven largely by social rather than commercial motives, these publicly funded projects are spreading from Europe’s northern states to its larger markets, having been sanctioned in France and Spain.

Reggefiber, the owner of the network Quist referred to, already has FTTH infrastructure covering 200,000, or nearly 3 per cent, of the Netherlands’ 7.2 million homes and is expanding. One of its projects, Citynet, plans to eventually cover 450,000 homes in the capital, Amsterdam. Municipal networks in Sweden, meanwhile, pass more than 6 per cent of homes and counting…

Municipal networks in particular pose a challenge to conventional operators. Driven largely by social rather than commercial motives, these publicly funded projects are spreading from Europe’s northern states to its larger markets, having been sanctioned in France and Spain…

Another advantage the municipal networks have over incumbents are their close links with communities. Organising town meetings, door-to-door sales and recruiting well-known local figures as ambassadors for their wares is not much of a stretch for them.

Who’d a thunk it?

Today’s New York Times waxes worrisome about the lead the Scandinavians and the Dutch have amassed:

“We have four countries that are world leaders — Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands and Finland,” said Viviane Reding, the European telecommunications commissioner. “We have eight countries which have higher penetration rates than the U.S. and Japan. We are not doing badly at all.”

Now in bone-wearying fashion the good gray lady of the New York Times doesn’t ask HOW those countries pulled ahead. Even though it’s apparent that the municipalities of the the Northern countries have been the engine. But the NYT in a fine fit of presumptive understanding knows it must be some new competitive scheme that the European regulators are cooking up. (The European Regulators are happy to tout that as the explanation.) But contemplated competitive regulation does NOT explain how the leading European countries got out front. The real explanation for the burst of energy from Europe is that the municipalities of the north were free to compete. And their stunning success has scared the rest of the European Union into action.

It’d be nice if Lafayette and few of its brethren could do the same for the United States.

“What’s the Deal?” Cox & EATEL

The Independent picks up the EATEL ad in Sunday’s Advertiser we reported on earlier. Reporter Nathan Stubbs gets on the phone and tries to get the half price deal Cox is publicizing only in Ascension and southern Livingston parishes. Initially he’s given the runaround but after checking in with EATel’s Communications Manager gets the secret password: “Special Promotion R-123” he is offered access to the deal.

More fun: the Independent reporter was able to bargain the price down further by not taking phone or HBO….though Cox is certainly not required to go that far in order to meet its legal obligations to offer promotions fairly throughout its area. It certainly seems logical to allow this base price to be the starting point if you want to add on channels or tiers at the regular price as one would normally do.

And, what’s more Cox is claiming that you don’t have to sign a yearly contract. That’s nifty. The Cox phone rep tells the IND that they “don’t do conracts” and a quick review of the local website seems to bear that out. But Cox certainly does demand contracts for special deals in other parts of the country and has here in the past. (A Cox attempt to tempt small businesses into a 3-year contract with a paltry 3% discount was especially noteworthy.) So it’s interesting that they aren’t doing that any longer in this locale—where LUS has, from the very beginning said it would not require any kind of contract. It sounds like pricing is not the only concession Cox is making to the specter of local competition.

For those of you out there that take advantage of this deal, remember who to thank: the little local fiber competition that could, EATEL and LUS. Nobody is getting a deal like this in New Orleans. Or in Los Angeles, for that matter.

FTTH satisfies consumers

Fiber T0 The Home is better than AT&T’s Fiber To The Node….according to a Corning program manager for fiber networking:

In a survey of customer satisfaction, respondents ranked Verizon’s Fios FTTH network highest in satisfaction with 96 percent of respondents satisfied with the service. By contrast, satellite-based services for DirecTV and Dish Network ranked at 89 and 82 percent respectively, and AT&T’s fiber-to-the-node (FTTN) service was in line with several cable TV services that ranged from 70 to 73 percent.

Separately, among consumers who said they were not satisfied with their new FTTN service from AT&T, about 70 percent said the reason was it offered inferior video service compared with their previous supplier, presumably a satellite or cable TV carrier.

In addition, adoption rates of the AT&T service have slumped recently, while those of Verizon are on the rise. The percentage of homes passed by the AT&T network that chose the service has gone from about 10 percent to about 6 percent. By contrast, figures for Verizon are trending up from about 4 percent to about 15 percent.

“inferior video service” —ouch.

So the FTTH service generates 7 to 14% more satisfied customers than satellite services and 23 to 26% more satisfied customers than cable or AT&T’s new cable service. And as people are becoming more familiar with AT&T’s service the phone company’s ability to get new customers is actually dropping. (You expect a new service to become more popular as the good word spreads and people become more familiar with its availability and advantages. If that isn’t happening it means that the bad word is spreading.)

It doesn’t sound like there is much hope that AT&T, if it should every get to Lafayette, will offer much of an improvement over Cox. If I had any I’d be selling my AT&T stock.

There is a rumor out there that AT&T will make another try at statewide video franchising in the coming regular session of the legislature. The last time around only Kathleen Blanco’s brave veto (at the behest of both rural and urban local governments) saved the state from giving away the farm on AT&T’s promise of a fancy new service. The evidence is starting to come in that its a service that is so bad that nobody much wants it. I hope the legislatures this time through trouble themselves to look at the evidence of whether or not people really want this thing before they offend both the municipal association and the police juries.

If Verizon can get 96% approval for its new fiber offering, just think of how happy a utility with hometown chops and fiber can make you.
I want my LUS Fiber. Now.

EATEL Joins Fiber Fight

The fruits of competition…

That image to the left is a full page ad in the A section of today’s Sunday Advertiser. Click on the image for a large, readable image…(caution, it’s a big jpg.)

EATel’s experience in their fight over in Ascension parish ought to inform ours. Clearly Cox “Greater Baton Rouge” is offering special deals only to EATel’s customer base—possibly only to those that have threatened to move to the local, more powerful, fiber to the home alternative.

That, as EATel is pointing out in this ad, isn’t fair pricing. You’ve got to offer the same deals to all. Otherwise you are engaging in a form of predatory pricing. —But you don’t have to promote the great deal everywhere…On the other hand you do have to be willing to give it to anyone who asks for it.

So EATel is engaging in the wildly unusual act of promoting a great deal from its competition so you can ask for it. Cox can refuse, of course. If it does you should tell EATel who is surely preparing a lawsuit alleging unfair competition if this deal isn’t offered fairly. Or Cox can honor the offer. Which would be hugely expensive if any number of people take it up outside of EATel’s relatively small service area on the south rim of Baton Rouge.

It’s a good deal. (And will cost Cox real revenue whenever and wherever it keeps this promise. It’s evidence Cox is running scared.) But folks here in the city of Lafayette that are in the first build area would be best served to hold off. (IMHO) A better product is coming in nine months with hugely faster net speeds that will keep those dollars in local hands. (That 100 megs of intranet speed is going to make a whole lot of difference. I had two conversations at a party last night that revved me up on that score.) And even if localism and a superior product don’t make your choice as easy as mine will be wait a little while anyway. –The closer LUS gets to launch the better the deals for Cox’s standard alternative will become. This is only the first offering.

Folks outside Lafayette’s first build should look into this. If Cox is going to push the bounds of fair competition with their small local competitors they shouldn’t be allowed to do it secretly or cheaply. Fair Competition. That was what Cox wanted. They ought to be held to it. Call ’em and ask for the deal. What you want to do if they give you any guff is mention “Special Promotion R-123” — that detail is in the fine print at the bottom of the ad.

Cox was foolish to combine the Baton Rouge and Acadiana markets. Now they’ve got a two front battle on their hands and the contrast between little, local alternatives with a superior technology and the huge predatory out-of-state corporation with old technology will be inescapable.

Justathought: LUS should consider some coop advertising deal with EATel. I get the Baton Rouge Advocate and there’s no similar EATel ad in it today.

Why LUS Will Be Cheaper

Or at least one reason, anyway:

Randall Stephenson, the AT&T Inc. chief executive who replaced a respected long-serving predecessor last year, earned roughly $18 million in compensation…

The traditional “justification” for such nonsense is that the CEO’s take is justified by how much value they (they?) created for their shareholders. That doesn’t hold much water:

Since the start of the year, however, AT&T’s shares have been pummeled by fears that the sputtering economy will hurt growth in revenue. Shares rose $1.44, or 4.2 percent, to $36.09 Tuesday but are still down about 13 percent this year.

(From the Houston Chronicle.)

Could it be just compensation his consideration of and respect for his customers? ……..Nah.

Why Voting in Fiber Was Smart

Ok, every so often I see something that just snaps my head around. An “upbeat” report from Parks Associates, reported by Broadband Reports, demonstrates just how different my frame of reference has gotten. I think about the technical future differently from my compatriots.

This report is pleased to say that a bit more than 10% of the US population will have access to 10 Mbps of broadband by 2012.

This is regarded as good news.

Really.

That strikes me as crazy. Here in Lafayette 10 Mbps or so will be the least capable, el cheapo tier offered by LUS. Not the best. The least. Everyone…100% of the community…will have access to that kind of capacity. Within our own network we’ll be able to communicate at 100 mbps at NO additional charge.

And the rest of the US is supposed to be happy at the idea that 10% will get access to 10 mbps by 2012?

There is a better way than waiting for the incumbents to do it for you. You can do it for yourself.

We figured that out on July 16th, 2005.

We made the right decision.

F2C: Highly Recommended

The 3rd Freedom To Connect Conference (F2C) is being held in Washington on March 1st and April lst.

I recommend it highly. Go get on board now. Prices go up March the 7th (this Friday!) I went to the inaugural meeting and am going again this year. A fascinating crew shows up and, like most good conferences the best takes place in the halls and over lunch-time hoagies — but unlike most the sessions are worth every penny. Smart people saying what they actually believe. Nothing is more invigorating—including that silly trip to Cancun you thought might be energizing.

F2C is the brainchild of David Isenberg, a funny, fiesty fellow of just the gadfly sort we approve of here at LPF. The idea is to get a bunch of smart committed people interested in sustaining our “Freedom To Connect” over modern networks together and let them go to it. (Isenberg has a more reasonable-sounding description, I think he’s being politic.) This year the theme is “The NetHeads Come to Washington” and the contrast is implicitly between the beltway “bellheads” and the insurgents from the restless hinterlands. Isenberg is the “Original NetHead®;” he is the fellow who coined the approving phrase “the stupid network” to describe the architecture of the internet, which places processing “intelligence” at the edges of the network (i.e. at Google and at your ‘puter) and to contrast it with the old Bell telephone network (where all the intelligence is in the switches and your phone is as dumb as a rock). You might be under the impression that Net Neutrality is a new issue. You’d be wrong–at least about the underlying philosophical differences involved. Those are as old as the internet itself. Check out the 1996 Wired screed that is the first reference I know of to “Netheads vs. Bellheads.” The contrast between the two sides—right down to the core issues of money, control, and Quality Of Service vs. raw bandwidth have been on the table for years for those in the know. Isenberg gathers up those sorts of prescient folks. If you’d like to be a decade ahead of the curve you oughta consider the conference.

Take a look at the agenda. You’ll find folks from all over the world (Amsterdam’s FTTH guru Dirk van der Woude anyone?), industry stalwarts (like Ron Sege, head of Tropos that is supplying LUS’ wireless network), all around brilliant types (Clay Shirky, Susan Crawford and almost anyone you care to pick off the list), legal eagles and advocates, (Jim Baller, Matt Stoller) and even the occasional local activist type (modesty forbids)…

It should be interesting.

Get a clue: if you can, go.

And if you can’t click into the web stream; that’s what I did last year and thoroughly enjoyed it.

Cox: New Building, Old Line

Cox Communications has opened its new headquarters for what is left of its operations on our side of the Atchafalaya basin. (Cox shed its former holdings to the north and west back in 2005) It’s a serious investment in the region and looks like a nice building—complete with meditation rooms. The Advertiser‘s tone is in the traditional laudatory vein that local newspapers inevitably adopt whenever a company opens a new building or invests in the area. It’s a welcome relief, I am sure, from the usual grind of the news beat where “good” news usually means “no news” and I’m pleased that Cox, its employees, and the area have a new building.

But I can’t help but be annoyed by Cox continuing to run out its silly “Me too!” line about it having fiber and nobody knowing about it. [Note that the online version has a final “press release” paragraph on fiber that didn’t make it into the print version.] This is smoke and mirrors and it is intended to confuse the public about the difference between Lafayette’s new system and its older one. It also reveals that Cox still doesn’t understand what happened during the fiber referendum fight and why it lost that fight.

Cox has tried, in its press releases and its advertising to say that it has “a fiber network.” This article, to its credit, doesn’t repeat the silliness of using that phrase—whether that is due to the good judgment of the writer or the fact that Cox has quit trying to run that particular form of misinformation is not clear. Just for the record: the implication that Cox has anything like the fiber to the home network that LUS is currently building is just silly and Lafayette is now sophisticated enough to both understand that and to understand why Cox would want to obscure the difference. Every network in town has a fiber core: Lafayette’s ring, AT&T’s network, Cox’s, and the miscellaneous national networks that also have terminations in our city. Cox, like all its competition uses fiber’s massive capacity as a the cheapest way to handle massive amounts of bandwidth where it has to have that capacity: in the backbone that supplies the less capable copper leading to homes. Having a fiber backbone just isn’t noteworthy—what is noteworthy is how close you bring that fiber to your final customer. Only LUS will bring that massive capacity all the way to your home or business.

What’s more interesting to me than that old story is that telling it seems to mean that Cox actually believes that it lost the vote in Lafayette because the people believed that they wanted “fiber.” So Cox is determined to pretend that it will give us fiber (not quite to the home) too…. But “fiber” is not the reason that Cox lost that election. It lost because it tried to deceive us about fiber to the home—something it is still trying to do with its current PR double-talk. In the end it all came down to trust. And Cox proved itself, through deceptive PR, silly “academic forums,” insulting push polls, threats to our jobs, and endless rhetoric about the dangers of a trusted local utility providing local services cheaply that it couldn’t be trusted. Every time its PR personnel try pass off some half-true claim about fiber networks Cox reminds us why we didn’t trust them back then. Until it figures out why it lost in 05 Cox will continue to lose in Lafayette.

—–on reflection——
Truth is that fiber isn’t all that Lafayette wanted by the time we got to the end of the fiber fight. By the time we voted we knew we wanted to control our own destiny and the fiber fight just proved the context for coming to that decision. As our national history has played itself out telecommunications has turned out to be an essential, and a monopoly business. Those sorts of businesses ought to be public utilities, not private monopolies. It took our wanting fiber and the ugly battle to win it to get Lafayette to realize that. But now we understand that every community should own its own network. Even if it isn’t fiber. The social and economic benefits of controlling that locally and keeping that economic stimulus entirely in local hands is enormous and every community that can ought to do the same.

It isn’t fiber…..it is trust…and local control.

French & Fiber

The old saw goes: “Play to your strengths.” The Advertiser’s Bob Moser pens a blip that points to a set of new economy jobs for Lafayette: “Foreign” language call center agents. It’s a work-at-home job that routes calls from non-english speakers to bilingual agents. The money, like all call-center money, isn’t grand but the job setting can’t be beat, especially for shut-ins or stay-at-homes.

Many of Arise’s larger clients in retail are expanding their call center contracts to regions of Canada where they sell to French-speaking customers. They’ve begun rerouting more English and French language customer calls from Canada to bilingual agents in the U.S., said Jared Fletcher, vice president and ACP of admissions and certification at Arise.

The job requirements are fluency in a second language and fast internet connection.

It’s no wonder that Arise Virtual Solutions is recruiting in Lafayette–according to the last census a healthy 13% of the city speaks french in the home. And, as readers well know, a really fast net connection—more than sufficient to access reams of data for customer suppor—will soon be both cheaper and faster from LUS.

Fiber and French make a good pairing.