41–50 of 193 posts
The article brings up DSL, but I thought DSL was a short haul technology (you have to be pretty close to a branch office or something)? Would it really affect rural customers anyway? I'm also curious if the newer faster fiber technologies are sort of "subsidizing" the carrier's copper business.
They put in cabinets/huts and run it from there.
Highly relevant quote: At one time, 80% of AT&T's capital value was the copper in the local loops. AT&T was then, in effect, the world's largest copper mine. Fortunately, this fact was not widely known in the investment community. Had it been known, some corporate raider might have bought AT&T, terminated all telephone service in the United States, ripped out all the wire, and sole the wire to a copper refiner to get…
It is likely that someone did realize this, did the math on the labor costs to pull all the wire up across the country, and realized it wouldn't actually be profitable. There are guys that track individual ships across the ocean to decide what/when to trade, I doubt everyone missed the value of ATT's physical assets.
Pardon the possibly ignorant question, but what do the telecom companies have to gain by destroying their own infrastructure? I feel like I'm missing something about the US telecom market here. Aren't these companies making a profit on this infrastructure? Are they selling more profitable services and they want users to switch over? Are the maintenance fees that high?
Wireline is costly (and copper is more costly than fiber on an on-going basis). Your business is sitting in the ground depreciating and requires expensive unionized workers to make repairs every time there is a storm, etc. Verizon basically makes no profit on its wireline division despite $31 billion in revenue: https://www.verizon.com/about/sites/default/files/annual_rep... (page 22). At this point, POTS service is probably losing money even in urban and suburban areas. (You need to maintain the copper in an entire neighborhood even if only a few people subscribe to copper phone service.)
Its silly to think that copper itself is going away simply because the phone system won't be using much of it anymore, almost all electricity from AC to DC wires run over copper and various alloys.
Aren't most OPLs aluminium these days?
Its silly to think that copper itself is going away simply because the phone system won't be using much of it anymore, almost all electricity from AC to DC wires run over copper and various alloys.
It's going to be here for awhile.
Highly relevant quote: At one time, 80% of AT&T's capital value was the copper in the local loops. AT&T was then, in effect, the world's largest copper mine. Fortunately, this fact was not widely known in the investment community. Had it been known, some corporate raider might have bought AT&T, terminated all telephone service in the United States, ripped out all the wire, and sole the wire to a copper refiner to get…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not destroying the infrastructure, it’s abandoning it. The article states that prior to this ruling they’re required to maintain or replace with comparable functionality for existing copper customers. This ruling let’s them abandon them altogether from what I gathered.
Ok, but there are still paying customers on the end of that infrastructure. Are they not profitable enough?
Its silly to think that copper itself is going away simply because the phone system won't be using much of it anymore, almost all electricity from AC to DC wires run over copper and various alloys.
I remember having an labouring job installing power supply cable underground. It was all aluminium, and you rolled it off a giant spool because you could barely bend it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From Wikipedia: "...for local loops shorter than 500 m"
It's doable in many cities. A large part of the infrastructure you need to replace when upgrading is inside buildings. With a 500m radius, you can avoid rewiring buildings and have loops terminate in the street.
Pardon the possibly ignorant question, but what do the telecom companies have to gain by destroying their own infrastructure? I feel like I'm missing something about the US telecom market here. Aren't these companies making a profit on this infrastructure? Are they selling more profitable services and they want users to switch over? Are the maintenance fees that high?
It’s not destroying the infrastructure, it’s abandoning it. The article states that prior to this ruling they’re required to maintain or replace with comparable functionality for existing copper customers. This ruling let’s them abandon them altogether from what I gathered.