|source: Technology Futures|
As much as most people would agree that robust supply of new next generation networks is a good thing for industry, consumers, government and education, as a practical matter many of those same constituencies oppose retiring legacy copper networks in favor of optical or other next-generation platforms.
It is not a new problem. Most consumers would say they want faster, more robust mobile networks with better coverage. But owners of real estate also frequently and normally oppose placement of the new tower sites that would bring such better coverage and performance.
Somewhat paradoxically, the same entities that can be expected to criticize too slow deployment of optical fiber and other advanced platforms also often argue against those investments, arguing that it is better to keep copper in place.
Telcos argue they need to--and just “want to”--replace high maintenance copper lines with lower-maintenance optical fiber connections (increasingly, they will argue that higher-cost fixed lines need to be replaced by lower-cost wireless access).
None of those are immaterial issues, as revenue fixed network providers can generate from those networks (whatever the access platform) are declining, as customer demand changes and as competitors on facilities-based alternative networks take half the available market share.