Instead they wasted money on DTV
https://www.telecompetitor.com/report-for-an-extra-70-billion-ftth-could-be-available-to-90-of-u-s-homes-by-2029/
8 replies (most recent on top)
Agree that the DTV money was largely wasted, but the problem with fiber to the home is "the last mile."
You not only have to lay fiber, you have to maintain it.
Last mile is more often better done by radio.
That's part of what 5G is supposed to be for in addition to somewhat better cellular. Stationary last-mile bandwidth.
However, it is not profitable to serve customers who are too rural. This has always been an issue as was rural electrification.
Absent government regulation requiring rural service (likely with rate-payer offset funding), the incentives are to serve more urban areas preferentially, a practice 5G will unfortunately continue, given the logistics of deployment.
TLDR: Stationary 5G should improve urban and suburban bandwidth choices in general, but rural folks will still do without.
coulda woulda shoulda - remember fiber isn't 20000% profitable like wireless - t is a wireless company and direct tv fit like a glove with a wireless company cause of the them satellites.
We could have easily overbuilt the whole 21 state footprint for less than we paid for DTV.
Interesting post. It's all about the pipe and pipe speed? Didn't Verizon do that with FIOS? How did that work out for them?
Still have dial up. Waiting for DSL to become available here in parts of Ohio.
I agree with the OP ... AT&T should have made the investment into the fiber infrastructure instead of DTV. Especially with consumers cutting the cord to cable.
Great article about fiber investment below.
https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/us/Documents/technology-media-telecommunications/us-tmt-5GReady-the-need-for-deep-fiber-pov.pdf
This company lost sight of it's core business years ago. They completed the requirements for fiber buildout for the DTV purchase then shoved all that to the curb. Even tho I have 50MB internet no reason they have not plowed in some fiber in my neighborhood.
Yeah that’s what blows my mind is why the company refuses to aggressively deploy fiber to the home. So many homes want faster internet and stuck with vdsl at best or dsl at worst with att. Att could easily have destroyed Comcast in the southeast region. Everyone knows Comcast internet s—s. It may offer faster speeds up to 100 Mbps at most homes but it’s like being on a hub. Unreliable and speeds vary greatly. I have so many Comcast customers asking me when is att going to provide them an alternative and I tell them the truth: probably never. At my own home the best I can do is 45 Mbps on bonded copper. Att has no intention of ever offering me or most folks fiber to the home. I don’t get it. Yes fiber is expensive to deploy. You know what’s more expensive ? Losing all your customers to comc-ap.