Network sharing: government interference done right

Network sharing is gaining (a little) momentum in several places. Two recent ones stand out (below), also in light of Benoit's post on government involvement.
On the one hand, there is the traditional capitalist view of seeing every government involvement as negative. These s#%$bags screw up all the time. They should sell to the public, so that WE shall be in control, etc.
On the other hand, infrastructure investments require a long term view, which investors do not habitually seem to foster.

Forced or stimulated network sharing is one way for governments to get involved - even passively, without any dear taxpayer dollard/euros coming into play:

• Switzerland: the regulator calls upon the mobile contenders (sunrise, Orange) to join forces by sharing their networks, in order to create stronger competition against Swisscom. In other words, governments can help by providing regulatory clarity, and by allowing companies to not take spectrum license conditions too literally (regarding sharing, trading, technology).
• France: the government considers forcing MDU owners to fiber up their buidlings. In-home networking is a bottleneck in the (stalling) FTTH roll-out in France, so this could be helpful. (The next logical step could be to force municipalities to sink ducts in every single street they open up for any kind of repair work.)

I still believe there is scope for sensible government subsidies. New Zealand (or Singapore) may be a prime example, if the NZI gets its way.

FTTH: a financial model to the rescue

Last Friday I was invited to attend a meeting of the economics sub-committee within the Deployments & Operations committee of the FTTH Council Europe. A big honor and a chance to meet with some very real fiber guys, from companies such as Draka Comteq, Wavin, Corning and Van den Berg Infrastructuren.

The point of the whole council obviously is the promotion of FTTH, and this particular sub-committee wants to lure potential investors. One thing that was already agreed upon was that a proper financial model would be a great tool. The big issue with models however is that nobody trusts anybody else's model. Potential investors would no doubt be very suspicious of such a thing coming out of the FTTH Council.
So, for now it was decided that the sub-committee should aim for some sort of a generic framework (including all relevant parameters) that investors can toy around with. One consultant will be hired to build it, another to validate it. And all that is supposed to be available for next years's conference in Copenhagen.

Of course we got into all sorts of interesting discussions on this noble FTTH cause. One really stood out for me. I have been under the impression that most everybody agreed that all we need is a single FTTH network, but I have to admit that it shouldn't have come as a surprise that the vendor community (well, not all of them) have a different view. All they really want is to bury as much fiber as possible.
If the business case for FTTH is shaky to begin with, and if the FTTH Council wants to be credible, this may not be the direction it wants to go. Also, you run into all sorts of difficulties (an undesirable US style duopoly; who controls the in-home network?; there are limits to opening up the streets; etc.).

Another topic was the buried cable v. buried duct views. Did you know that the way the city of Amsterdam was constructed precludes ducts being put in the ground? There simply isn't the space for them. So, no business for Wavin here.

Finally, one of the commitee members said he notices interest in a fiber connections as such. This runs counter to conventional wisdom, according to which people are not interested in technology but rather value whatever they can do with it. Who knows, people are being educated on FTTH at a quick pace and understand the benefits. That bodes well for real estate developers who see FTTH investments as enhancing the value of their properties. Personally, I would add that having an office space in your home is another smart move to real estate riches.

I hope to be posting a lot more on the progress of this sub-committee. (Next meeting: May.)

Admire Sling

You have to admire Sling Media, not just for their basic Sling Box, that I wrote about long ago, but for their continous product developement. Yesterday they added HomePlug PLC connectivity for in-home networking. Check out this year's harvest:

070106: Plans launch of SlingCatcher (box) + SlingProjector (software)
summer 2007, < $200 (internet/PC-to-TV)

070109: Launches Clip+Sling: share content on-net (among Slingbox users), deal with CBS (beta)

070207: Launches Palm OS version (beta)

070322: SlingPlayer Mobile to be pre-installed on Amp'd Mobile's Q (from Motorola)

070410: Plans support of Apple TV

070516: Plans ISP service 2007 in the US

070606: Teams with NHL: allow Clip+Share

070618: Adds SlingLink Turbo 1 Port ($100) and SlingLink Turbo 4 Port ($150): in-home connection via HomePlug PLC

FTTH round-up

Since my last post updating the FTTH market, relatively many deals were announced:

• Hafslund, a Norwegian utility, will build a network in Ostlandet. Dirk van der Woude points me to the fact that this part of Norway, which includes Oslo, actually contains almost 50% of the entire population. Hafslund is controlled by the city of Oslo.
• More utilities and municipalities at work: the tiny town of Dijkerhoek (NL) will get a network; the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) of the US Department of Agriculture approves PacketFront's solution, which makes deployments eligible for RUS grants and loans; the Swedish town of Sundbyberg will get a network; both Powell and Cody (Wyoming) are exploring PPP (public private partnerships).
• And from the telco front: activities at Telekom Slovenije, Golden Telecom (Russia), neuf Cegetel (France) and France Telecom, and finally TEO (Lithuania).
• Finally, regulatory developments. Arcep (France) is consulting on two issues: duct access and sharing of the 'last 10 meters'. In related news to the latter, the FCC has issued rulings that should facilitate both telcos and cablecos easier access to MDUs (multiple-dwelling units). I always thought differently, but sheetrock is labelled 'physically inaccessible'.