Summary

1.  Verizon would be better off taking the high road in comparing fiber to coaxial. 2.  The RBOC is only sounding defensive with this kind of post. 3.  A backhanded compliment would go a whole lot further in Verizon effectively getting its message out.

Analysis

Verizon could have congratulated Cablevision rather than be critical.  It might have been something like the following: “We take our hats off to Cablevision for completing the monumental task of dealing with the rigid capacity constraints of coaxial.  The telecom industry needs to continue to find ways of increasing bandwidth to the access portion of the network.  Unquestionably, our solution, FTTH, is the only enduring one.”  Then Verizon could have talked about the virtually unlimited capacity of optical fiber.  

However in calling what Cablevision has done a “parlor trick,” what is it going to say later when the MSO offers a commercial offering at this speed that will probably do well in the market?  Also, when there is so much discussion about potentially clogged bandwidth pipes, how does one make the argument that “there is little evidence of market demand for the [higher] speed?”  In addition, it is disingenuous to say (quoted from a Wall Street Journal article) “because of the way cable Internet is distributed, a single user going at that speed could clog up the connection for an entire neighborhood” – when especially with PON architectures, there could be the same outcome.  

Instead of engaging in tit for tat and talking out of both sides of their mouths (as the WSJ article points out) -- on the one hand “there is little evidence of the market demand for the speed” -- on the other hand, “Verizon has been pushing the envelope for how fast its customers can surf the Web,” how about raising the level of discussion to the much higher rates that will be needed and that fiber is ultimately future proof.   That in the short-term future, it will be offering its own 100 MB service over pristine fiber and that in the long term, fiber will leave coaxial in the dust.

Samuel Greenholtz consults with leading institutions through GLG

Samuel Greenholtz, Principal

What is a GLG Leader?|GLG Leaders are a separate tier of Council Members with a Council Rank in the top 5%. These GLG Member Program participants are eligible for ongoing, in-depth consultative relationships with GLG clients.

Principal, Telecom Pragmatics

 
Analyses are solely the work of the authors and have not been edited or endorsed by GLG.