Wireless Internet Access Might be Entering a New Phase

Telco or cable TV bashing is a bit of a sport in some quarters, just as non-critical support for clean energy is dogma. The problem is that neither position (non-objective opposition or support) is a reasonable intellectual approach. Most transition processes (both energy and communications are in transition) are simple.

And we often discount new technology as reasons for making prudential judgments about the assumed motivations of contestants in virtually any market.

Caution about the wisdom of fiber to home, or fiber to business access platforms--in terms of the business case--is not unusual. In many cases, the optimism has not been rewarded. Verizon was the foremost proponent of the value of fiber to the home, but has learned that the business case was not as good as expected.

AT&T historically has been even more skeptical. But the skepticism is based on business case issues. And with rapidly-evolving wireless and mobile access capabilities, the skepticism might yet prove to be correct, for substantial numbers of potential customers and users.

Google, for example, has asked for permission to test fixed wireless access in 3.5-GHz shared spectrum. That presumably suggests Google also believes some deployment scenarios will not support a fiber to home approach.

AT&T already has committed to installing 13 million new fixed wireless connections, a similar judgment that fiber to home does not work, in rural and lower-density areas.

Competitive dynamics now sharply shape the business case, as cable TV operators are proving they can upgrade much faster, at far lower cost, than telcos can do. Under such conditions, ubiquitous fiber deployment is almost certain to fail, over the longer term, as cable proves to be the lower cost provider.

And with fifth generation access speeds initially slated for 1 Gbps per device, and plans to extend to as much as 10 Gbps, wireless increasingly will be a functional substitute for fiber to home or other fixed access technologies.

The point is that skepticism about the business case for any particular access platform, in any particular deployment, in severely competitive markets, is simply prudent.

To the extent that any fixed network service provider expects to survive, it must somehow figure out how to continue upgrading Internet access speeds. But “how” to do that, in a sustainable way, continues to evolve, with wireless becoming ever more viable.

To be sure, proponents have been arguing precisely that point for decades. But the background is changing. Moore’s Law makes possible more reliable service, under a wider range of commercial conditions.

Mobile networks based on 5G will offer additional options. Shared spectrum allows even more options.

The point is that huge capital investment decisions are risky at a time when business conditions are changing so fast. For many Internet service providers, while fiber to location has its place, most deployment scenarios might actually prove sustainable using wireless access.