----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert Bonomi" <bon...@mail.r-bonomi.com>
> "Overbuild" is practical *ONLY* where: (a) the population density is > high,lowering 'per customer' costs, and (b) service 'penetration' is high > enough that the active subscriber base (as distinct from 'potential' > subscribers) sufficient to support the 'overhead' of two complete, parallel, > physical plants. This tends to be 'self-limiting', to up-scale, high-density > housing, neighborhoods. The 'raw economics' of the situation may well be > distorted by local government 'intrference' -- e.g., requiring a provider > serve > _all_ households within arbitrary boundaries, rather than just 'low hanging > fruit' areas. Yup. And that's just another argument in favor of muni fiber -- since it's municipal, it will by definition serve every address, and since it's monopoly, it will enable competition by making it practical for competitors to start up, since they'll have trival access to all comers. And since D-CATV is pretty much delivered over IP these days *anyway*, it won't even be technically difficult for cable providers to hook up customers over such a backbone. Gee... I wonder if the teeny little town I live in wants to be the first in our county to do that. :-) Cheers, -- jra
