Showing posts sorted by date for query Comcast homes. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query Comcast homes. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Wednesday, October 25, 2023

C-Band is a Huge Deal for Verizon: Extends Home Broadband Addressable Market from 25% to Virtually 100%

One iron rule for internet access services is that if one has enough bandwidth, access speeds can be very high. For mobile operators, bandwidth expansion can come in a few ways: adding more spectrum, building smaller cells or deploying better modulation techniques or radios.


In that regard, for 5G, mid-band spectrum has been key for firms such as Verizon, which have had less mid-band spectrum than others. The difference is striking. 


After deploying C-band spectrum, Verizon mobile peak speeds “go from 9 Mbps to an amazing 2.4 gigabits per second,” said Hans Vestberg, Verizon CEO.


That has implications for home broadband as well, as, in principle, peak speeds might reach gigabit per second levels. And that, in turn, is important because it dramatically extends the addressable market for fixed wireless from perhaps 25 percent of buyers to perhaps 99 percent of buyers (those who buy home broadband at speeds up to about 2 Gbps, and do not require symmetrical access)


True, Verizon has millimeter wave assets to deploy in urban areas, but C-band means fixed wireless has higher bandwidth in suburban and rural areas as well. 


For Verizon, which has a smaller fixed network footprint than many of its leading competitors, that really does matter, as it means Verizon can compete for home broadband customers who want higher speeds in most U.S. geographic areas. 


Of a total of 140 million U.S.  homes, AT&T’s landline network passes 62 million. Comcast has (can actually sell service to) about 57 million homes passed.


The Charter Communications network passes about 50 million homes, the number of potential customer locations it can sell to.


The number of Verizon homes passed might be 27 million. Lumen Technologies never reports its homes-passed figures, but likely has 20-million or so consumer locations.


The point is that Verizon cannot easily expand its fiber to home footprint outside its historic service areas, for reasons of investment magnitude. So fixed wireless makes eminent sense for a firm that can presently reach only about 19 percent of U.S. homes using its fixed network. 


The same sort of logic holds for T-Mobile, which historically has had zero access network fixed network footprint. There is neither time nor money for T-Mobile to wire the entire country, or even a substantial part of it, using FTTH. 


So C-band is a really big deal. It extends Verizon’s home broadband addressable market from about 25 percent of homes to up to 100-percent of homes.


Saturday, October 21, 2023

Debt, Not Strategy, Often is the Telco Problem

The conventional wisdom is that AT&T and Verizon should never have ventured into the subscription video business or content ownership in general. Perhaps more to the point, neither firm should have taken on so much debt to acquire content assets. 


Similarly, many mobile operators got into financial difficulties in the 3G era by overpaying for spectrum assets.


In other words, the problem is debt load, not the strategy. Lots of telcos and service providers globally are in the subscription video business, and all are profitable. Beyond that, executives believe their bundled video offers help with customer acquisition, reduce churn and boost cash flow and overall profits.


The problem AT&T has had a few times in the past is making acquisitions that required assumption of excessive debt. It was the debt, not necessarily the strategy, that proved to be a mistake. When long-distance providers MCI and AT&T was casting about for a strategy to enter the local access business at scale after deregulation, AT&T decided to acquire and then upgrade cable TV assets.


Given the success cable TV companies have had in the home broadband market, the strategy was rational. The issue was simply that AT&T took on $64 billion in debt to acquire Tele-Communications Inc. in 1998, and then another $54 billion in 1999 to acquire MediaOne.


You might wonder why AT&T did not simply embark on a massive fiber to home building plan. The reason is simple: it did not have time to do so.

If any of us were asked whether AT&T could afford to build a national FTTH network--within 10 years--we would rightly doubt it was possible. Even if it had the money, it did not have the time.

No single firm could afford to spend $300 billion over 10 years to connect even 100 million homes, which is the scale of the problem AT&T faced. 
And even if it had the money, AT&T did not have the time. 


At a high level, growth by acquisition has generally worked for telcos when using their own currency (stock) to purchase similarly-valued telco assets. Generally speaking, many telcos have gotten into trouble when using debt to fuel such acquisitions.


Acquisition Target

Acquisition Amount (USD billions)

P/E Multiple Paid

Financing

Acquisition Type

Sprint (by T-Mobile US)

26.5

10.4

Debt

Telco

T-Mobile US (by Deutsche Telekom)

31

11.2

Debt

Telco

DirecTV (by AT&T)

67.1

9.8

$67.1 billion. $48.5 billion debt.


Telco

Time Warner (by AT&T)

85.4

12.3

$85.4 billion. $45 billion debt.


Content

HBO Max (by Warner Bros. Discovery)

43

10.1

Debt

Content

Crunchyroll (by Sony Group)

1.2

15.2

Equity

Content

TCI acquired by AT&T

64


$48 billion stock, $16 billion debt

Telco

MediaOne acquired by AT&T

54


Equity

Telco

WhatsApp (by Facebook)

19

10.2

Equity

Application

Instagram (by Facebook)

1

12.0

Equity

Application

LinkedIn (by Microsoft)

26.2

14.5

Equity

Platform


But globally, many tier-one telcos do provide subscription video services and own content assets. 


We might debate the revenue or profit margins such efforts produce. But it is hard to escape the conclusion that it is debt burdens, more than anything else, that have proved troublesome for AT&T and Verizon in content-related businesses. 


Estimates of revenues and profit margins sometimes have to be inferred, but, generally speaking, video services generate five-percent to 15-percent profit margins for telcos. 


Firm

Video Service

Revenue (USD billions)

Profit Margin (%)

Comcast

Linear TV

29.0

20.0

Comcast

Peacock

8.0

10.0

AT&T

AT&T TV

4.0

5.0

Verizon

Fios TV

3.0

10.0

Orange

OCS

2.0

15.0

Vodafone

Sky TV

1.5

10.0

Telefónica

Movistar+

1.0

5.0

China Mobile

Migu Video

0.8

15.0

China Unicom

Wo+

0.7

10.0

China Telecom

Tianyi TV

0.6

5.0

SK Telecom

Wavve

0.5

15.0

KT Corporation

Olleh TV

0.4

10.0

LG Uplus

U+ TV

0.3

5.0

Deutsche Telekom

MagentaTV

0.2

15.0

Telefónica Deutschland

O2 TV

0.1

10.0

Altice USA

Optimum TV

0.1

5.0


Likewise, many telcos own content assets, in addition to selling video subscriptions. 


Firm

Subscription Video Service

Content Assets Owned

Comcast

Peacock

NBCUniversal

Orange

OCS

Orange Studio

Vodafone

Sky TV

Sky Studios

Telefónica

Movistar+

Telefónica Studios

China Mobile

Migu Video

China Mobile Migu

China Unicom

Wo+

China Unicom Wo+

China Telecom

Tianyi TV

Tianyi TV

SK Telecom

Wavve

SK Planet

KT Corporation

Olleh TV

KT Corporation

LG Uplus

U+ TV

LG Uplus


Will AI Disrupt Non-Tangible Products and Industries as Much as the Internet Did?

Most digital and non-tangible product markets were disrupted by the internet, and might be further disrupted by artificial intelligence as w...