Lumen FTTH Revenue Assumptions Show FTTH Business Case has Changed

Lumen reports its fiber-to-home average revenue per user at about $58 per month. For those of you who have followed fiber-to-home payback models for any length of time, and especially for those of you who have followed FTTH for many decades, that level of ARPU might come as a shock. 

Though some honest--and typically off the record--evaluations by some telco executives 25 years ago would have predicated the FTTH business model as “you get to keep your business” rather than revenue increases. 

Few financial analysts would have been impressed. 

The theory was that upgrading to FTTH would allow incumbent telcos to essentially trade market share with cable companies: gaining video subscription market share from cable as cable took voice share. The assumption was that home broadband share would remain about where it was. 

The thinking was that per-home revenue could range as high as $130 to $200 per month, even as overall market share was gained by cable and lost by telco providers. 

So the $58 ARPU is a shock. Essentially, telcos are investing in FTTH to reclaim market share in home broadband, but largely harvesting video and voice revenues, both of which are dropping. 

Some telcos able to operate in both mobile and fixed network segments of the business have seen revenue growth shift decisively to mobile sources. 

Incumbents restricted to fixed network services only have faced huge challenges, which explains why many have been acquired by private equity and institutional investors with different financial motivations. 

Much investment in digital infrastructure is made to gain exposure to alternative assets that in past decades would have consisted of real estate holdings. The objective is asset diversification into a category that offers stable long-term cash flow with some presumed moats, but not necessarily revenue or asset value growth. 

If FTTH ARPU for home broadband remains in the $50 to $60 range, then payback models from FTTH will have to incorporate additional revenue sources, especially for publicly-traded firms. 

That is why one hears so much about FTTH value for supporting 5G small cells, edge computing, internet of things and private networks and network slicing. 

Monthly recurring FTTH revenue of $50 to $60 for home broadband might be strategically important for a telco’s sustainability, but unattractive if the argument is made that “FTTH will boost consumer revenues.” It might not.

On the other hand, without the upgrade to FTTH, most fixed network telcos face extinction. Investors will not like the idea that FTTH basically allows the business to remain viable, but does not necessarily lead to additional revenues. 

The same sort of worry also exists for 5G and coming mobile next-generation platforms. These days, the upgrades are necessary for business survival. Hopefully, new revenue sources develop, at scale.

But even if they do not, the capital investment is required. If not, the viability of the business is threatened.