If you have spent any time at all thinking about the cost of building next-generation access networks, you know that customer density really matters. Where rural fiber deployment costs range from $3,000 to $6,000 per household passed, for the most part, urban costs are $700 to $1,500 per household passed, primarily because of customer density.
Very-low population density (less than 10-20 households per square mile) is one challenge. But challenging terrain also matters, which is why fixed networks are so scarce in mountainous regions, for example.
To be sure, government subsidy programs can help, but there are always going to be some locations in the United States, for example, that simply won’t be logical candidates, even with subsidies. One reality is that about six percent of the U.S. land mass is “developed” and relatively highly populated.
Conversely, about 94 percent is unsettled or lightly populated, including mountains, rangeland, cropland and forests.
So it is possible that AT&T might find that up to 15 percent of its copper access lines cannot be upgraded for fiber, and will have to use some form of wireless access.
Verizon, with a denser customer footprint, might ultimately find that up to 10 percent of its access lines, likewise will have to use a wireless platform.
Lumen, with the least-dense territory of all the former Regional Bell Operating Companies, could easily find that 20 percent to 30 percent of remaining copper access lines cannot be upgraded for fiber.
The point is that there are physical reasons, beyond customer preferences, for using fixed wireless, mobile wireless or satellite for access to customers in remote and thinly-populated areas.
No comments:
Post a Comment