Though physical media choices matter, take rates, in competitive markets, are decisive. In other words, the business model for virtually any fixed access provider (using hybrid fiber coax, fiber to home, fiber to curb or fixed wireless) hinges on market share.
That, in turn, matters because some of the access asset investment is stranded, when facilities-based carriers compete. In other words, some significant percentage of network assets do not produce any revenue. At 20 percent take rates, about 80 percent of the access assets are stranded, for example.
And there is some amount of access asset stranding even when fixed wireless is the platform, and the access is a simple point-to-point connection. That noted, the amount of stranding is fairly minimal, compared to use of any cabled method.
Google Fiber’s Webpass unit has activated fixed wireless internet access service to a building in Seattle, with a retail cost of $60 a month for symmetrical gigabit per second internet access.
The Webpass installation, serving 146 living units, actually uses direct fixed wireless access, not an optical connection, and the building already is wired for internal distribution. Webpass says it plans to similarly connect 100 more over a year’s time.
It is hard, and likely unfair, to compare internet access infrastructure costs to serve a single high-rise building with the cost of serving individual consumer homes. That is simply because getting access to the basement of a high rise building using optical fiber or fixed wireless connection involves one “access” connection, and then riser cabling to reach multiple dwelling units.
That typically is a less-capital-intensive operation than cabling individual homes directly.
Historically, fiber to the curb (in many markets) has been cost effective, compared to use of 4G mobile, at home densities higher than about 210 homes per square mile, according to Delta Partners. That analysis will change with 5G, in all likelihood making 5G a better option in more cases.
Fiber to the home involves higher costs, so LTE arguably works across a wider range of use cases as well, assuming retail pricing and usage patterns are relatively light, in terms of consumed gigabytes per month.
No comments:
Post a Comment