Inflection Point for Gigabit Access?

To the extent that faster home broadband speed tiers cost more, there is a clear and compelling argument to be made that fixed network providers can increase average revenue per account as customers migrate to higher-priced tiers of service. 

Also, we might be on the cusp of a bigger opportunity for telco gigabit services, as history suggests take rates for gigabit services has reached an inflection point. 

source: Openvault

Historically, popular consumer products accelerate after adoption reaches the 10-percent of homes level, and gigabit internet access now has reached that point. 

Openvault data shows that consumers are migrating to speed tiers faster than 100 Mbps. 

source: Openvault

At the same time, markets for 4G fixed wireless are likely to be centered on rural areas, as urban customers move to services operating faster than 100 Mbps. 5G fixed wireless might be competitive for significant percentages of urban market customers.  In fact, 5G fixed wireless offering speeds between 100 Mbps and 200 Mbps might appeal to nearly half the market.

It is hard to quantify demand for symmetrical services. It seems clear that services with faster upstream speeds, such as telco fiber to home services, could be the near-term winners in that regard.

Digital Transformation is More than Data, but Builds on It

Digital transformation is much more than digitizing or relying on data, but the ability to harness data arguably is a requirement for DT. 

In surveying 4,036 data decision-makers, Forrester researchers found 55 percent of respondents struggling to meet their digital transformation goals. Some 15 percent of data strategy decision-makers say they have already realized their DT goals. 

Data decision-makers have already increased their investment in DT over the past three years by 77 percent and plan to increase their investment by a further 57 percent over the next three years, Forrester says. 

Three-quarters of data strategy decision-makers have seen the volume of data their firm generates increase over the past three years. Some 56 percent have also seen an increase in the amount of data they collect. 

source: Dell Technologies 

User Experienced Speeds are Slower than Delivered Speeds

Data from Speedtest Intelligence shows that 17 percent of U.S. counties with sufficient samples did not meet the minimum median speeds for the current FCC definition of broadband (25 Mbps download, 3 Mbps upload) in the second quarter of 2021, Ookla says. As often is the case, the data must be interpreted.

Those figures are based on end user speed tests, in most cases conducted on devices that are Wi-Fi connected. 

So one caveat is that the samples are not random. How many of us routinely test our access speeds when they are not a problem? Almost by definition, speed tests are conducted when there is a perceived problem. Also, most of those tests happen on Wi-Fi connections that are far slower than the actual speeds delivered to the router. 

Wi-Fi speeds can often be an order of magnitude slower than the wireline delivered speed, for all sorts of reasons. 

On this map, areas shown in dark blue do not meet the downstream minimum of 25 Mbps. The green areas show issues with upload speeds. Those areas are mostly rural. 

Aside from the “Wi-Fi speed, not delivered speed” issue, keep in mind that 86 percent of the U.S. land surface has home density less than 15 homes per plant mile.  

source: Ookla 

Most people in the United States live on just six percent of the U.S. land surface, according to the USDA. About 94 percent is unsettled or lightly populated, including mountains, rangeland, cropland and forests. 

That means people or locations unable to “buy broadband” are fewer than geographic coverage would seem to indicate. Networks serving most of the people can be built on a single-digit percentage of areas. 

But that still leaves huge amounts of space where networks are expensive. 

Some 92 percent of counties with sufficient samples were not operating at a minimum 100 Mbps standard in the second quarter of 2021, Ookla also says. 

What cannot be ascertained from the Ookla data is the actual speed delivered by internet access providers to the router. What we appear to be measuring is device experienced speed using Wi-Fi. Distance from the router; in-home obstructions; interfering devices operating; age of the router or devices all can reduce experienced speeds.

Has FTTH Business Case Changed for AT&T?

As difficult as the fiber to home business model has been for firms such as AT&T, some positive changes to the business model have occurred. First, take rates seem to have increased. 

Where AT&T has been deploying its new FTTH facilities, it is seeing that almost 80 percent of the net additional accounts were not AT&T customers prior to the deployment, according to John Stankey, AT&T CEO. So AT&T is capable of taking market share from cable companies. 

In past years, AT&T and Verizon, for example, might have been doing well to get to about 40 percent overall take rates, over several years of marketing, and most were likely upgrades of existing customer accounts. 

Since cable share of the installed base is about 70 percent in most markets, AT&T has room to grow if it can take share. 

It is conceivable that the value is not just gigabit speeds, but more upstream speed, compared to cable hybrid fiber coax offerings, which support gigabit downstream speeds as well, but are more limited in return bandwidth. 

But deployment efficiencies also have been reaped, and it may be possible to do more, once the neighborhood-by-neighborhood FTTH gigabit networks have been built. There are marketing economies and physical plant economies that would allow metro-wide marketing, for example. 

That changes the consumer fixed networks business into a growth opportunity that AT&T previously had not deemed so feasible. Right now AT&T believes the current business model works for about another 30 million U.S. homes. Any subsidies would grow that number. 

Right now, the new FTTH builds produce profit margins “in the mid- to upper teens,” said Stankey. While that is not the 40-percent range that once was feasible in many parts of the access business, that figure is notable because it is not a negative number. 

“I'm not going to be happy until we have a 50-50 share split in places where there's two capable broadband providers,” Stankey says. That means a split of the market with cable operators, where today cable has about 70 percent share of the installed base. 

Today, “we've driven to 40 percent penetration levels to basically be the threshold for us to get to warrant an investment,” said Stankey. 

If a new infrastructure bill passes, that could well result in subsidies for building new FTTH plant that favorably affect the business model for AT&T and others.

Mid-Band Will Change 5G User Experience

Mid-band spectrum powers 5G in most countries globally. The relative lack of deployed mid-band spectrum in the U.S. market explains the slower speeds we tend to see for 5G services in most areas. The difference so far has been millimeter wave spectrum deployed by Verizon and AT&T. 

source: Opensignal 

The shift from low-band spectrum to mid-band spectrum for 5G coverage will make a huge difference in user experience. Simply put, low-band is for coverage, not speed. Millimeter wave is best for capacity, but not coverage. Mid-band is the best blend of coverage and capacity. 

source: Opensignal

Despite Assertions, U.S. Broadband is Neither Slow Nor Expensive

One often hears it argued that U.S. broadband is expensive or slow. That might not actually be the case, as data published by the European Telecommunications Network Operators’ Association suggests. 

Simply put, the ETNO analysis suggests U.S. downstream speeds actually are higher than in South Korea, Japan, Europe or the global average. 

Comparing prices, some point to costs that are not indexed for currency values. Looking at spending as a percentage of gross domestic product or household spending over the last decade or so, U.S. prices have dropped since 2010, as have prices in South Korea, Japan and Europe. 

source: ETNO 

The universal trend in those regions--and throughout the world--is lower prices. 

source: ETNO 

There are lots of nuances. For example, “fiber to the home” does not equate to “gigabit speeds.” In South Korea, acknowledged to be a world leader in broadband access, “next generation access” is close to 100 percent. But “fiber to home” or “premises” is at about 40 percent. 

So the issue might not be “access media” but rather “capabilities.”

source: ETNO 

That is clear in the analysis of gigabit capable or “upgradeable” networks. In the U.S. market, cable operators lead the gigabit market. 

Also, not all FTTH networks actually are upgradeable to gigabit service levels without substantial rework. In South Korea and Japan, most FTTH networks are gigabit capable or upgradeable. In Europe, about a quarter of FTTH networks are gigabit capable or upgradeable. 

source: ETNO 

Also, average downstream speeds in the United States are faster than in South Korea, Japan, Europe, or the global average. 

source: ETNO 

The point is that the repeated assertion that U.S. broadband speeds are low, or that internet access is expensive, does not hold up, either internally over time, or in comparison to trends in other developed nations. Globally, internet access is getting better, fast.  

Adjusting for purchasing power, U.S. internet access was deemed “among the most affordable in the world” by the International Telecommunications Union. 

Also adjusting for purchasing power, using the purchasing power parity method, internet access prices are around $35 to $40 a month. IIn developed nations  prices are less than $30 a month.  

Internet access in the developed world--including the United States--simply is not that expensive.

In Defense of Connectivity Provider Video Services

There is a simple reason why connectivity providers globally have invested in linear and streaming video content services: large markets; significant revenue upside; higher profit margins and cash flow implications. 

There actually are very few consumer connectivity products with near-universal appeal: mobile phone service; internet access; voice services and messaging and entertainment. Add in gaming or music and you have a list of the apps and services that drive nearly all the available revenue for a connectivity provider. 

Also, video entertainment has growth rates up to four times that of connectivity services. Where the global telecom industry grows revenues about one percent a year, entertainment grows at about a five-percent compound annual rate. 

source: PwC 

In some markets, growth is even greater. In India the growth rate has been greater than 10 percent per year for entertainment and media, for example. 

source: PwC 

The other angle is that media consumption brings the potential for additional revenue from advertising. 

source: PwC 

Criticism of telco investments in media and content often draw derision. Invest instead in the core networks and services, it is argued. Sometimes that makes sense. But not always, and not always strategically, if one believes growth will remain at the one-percent-per-year level. 

Odds are better in markets where core connectivity revenue arguably does grow closer to five percent per year, and where there is much unserved demand. 

It is not always appreciated, but revenue growth in media and advertising is virtually always greater than for core telecom services. Also, entertainment is among the biggest connectivity-related services a network can sell. 

Aside from entertainment, voice, mobility and internet access, there are few other apps or services nearly every customer might buy from a communications service provider.