[PLUG] Why Is Connectivity So Cheap In Stockholm?

Keith Lofstrom keithl at kl-ic.com
Mon Apr 20 17:53:01 UTC 2009


> >>>>> "Keith" == Keith Lofstrom <keithl at kl-ic.com> writes:
> Keith> Perhaps you should look at the numbers for a comparable
> Keith> non-capital city such as Upsalla, 

On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 09:20:59AM -0700, Russell Senior wrote:
> How dense is Lafayette LA?  Or the network in Burlington VT?  The dude
> from Burlington, Tim Nulty, says building fiber is cheaper than
> wireless (assuming you actually provide decent service).  See this:
> 
>   http://www.fiberevolution.com/2009/04/interview-tim-nulty.html

You tell us.  East coast towns are pretty dense, more like urban
Europe than eastern Portland.  I would like to see a map of fiber
endpoints in the broader region, not just these "rural" towns with
much-higher-than-Portland densities.

The fact remains that provisioning fiber to the home costs about
$1000 per endpoint for something durable (source: the guy that 
installed fiber to my house).  And that is here in suburbia, 
where they string the fiber between poles, and don't run it in
underground vaulting, which costs about $300/foot (source: a guy
from Electric Lightwave, whose company some of us helped get
permission to compete with Verizon here in Beaverton).

If you are willing to personally fork out the hundreds of millions
of dollars necessary to pay for this, go ahead.  Yuppies in the
city of Portland will be grateful, and I will be grateful that my
Portland friends finally get some decent broadband.  But in case
you haven't noticed, there are people in Portland with much more
immediate needs than our internet hobby.  I donate time and money
to them, too.  Go ask a city firefighter: if she could choose only
one,  would she rather have broadband internet, or a non-antiquated
fire engine?

In the Real World, most of this stuff gets paid for by companies
making long term investments, for stable customers who can be
counted on to make the investment profitable.  That is what
Verizon is doing out here in the 'burbs.  Companies don't make
investments in areas where their infrastructure is going to be
"seized", to use your word.  You talk about "paying" them - but
I doubt you will let them set the price.  If I steal your wallet
and let you keep your pocket change, is that "paying" you?

In the long term, fiber is better than wireless, and a lot better
than copper, especially here in the Pacific northwet.  I would
love to see Portland get fiber, and all that copper ripped out
and sold.  But the payback comes over a long period, and
politicians and their constituents want payback within one
political cycle.  Some longer term projects get built, sure,
but if you follow the money through the construction contracts
and back through campaign contributions, it is all short term
politics and short term money.  Provisioning fiber is not like
that, especially because Portland doesn't have the provisioning
companies (and campaign contributors) that can perform a task
of this magnitude.  If there are, you should be talking to them,
not to us.

We will see more fiber in the urban core, the Pearl, and such. 
That is mostly providing fiber endpoints to multifamily buildings,
which is a lot cheaper than bundles of twisted pair copper to
a central office.  A bit later there will be fiber to richer
neighborhoods, because they have political clout.  North Portland? 
Southeast below Powell?  Don't hold your breath.  Portland is a
vast, sprawling city, far less dense than LA.  Unless the city
becomes a lot more successful at attracting wealth, most of it
will stay unfibered for a long time.

Keith

-- 
Keith Lofstrom          keithl at keithl.com         Voice (503)-520-1993
KLIC --- Keith Lofstrom Integrated Circuits --- "Your Ideas in Silicon"
Design Contracting in Bipolar and CMOS - Analog, Digital, and Scan ICs



More information about the PLUG mailing list