CCG Consulting

I am often asked about the role that broadband providers should take in making sure that we solve the digital divide. I think that people are somewhat shocked every time when I tell them this is not a role for broadband providers. In explaining my answer, let me start by parsing what is meant by the question. We are about to see a lot of grant funding for getting computers into homes and training folks on how to use them. The folks asking this question are hopeful that providers are going to take up that role in any meaningful way.

Losing email service reminded me of businesses' reliance on technology and web platforms that underlie our businesses. The number one issue I hear from businesses is how devastating it is to lose a broadband connection. A lot of businesses go dead when losing broadband. I don’t think the average person realizes how reliant businesses are on broadband. People are not surprised when broadband shuts down consultants, engineers, or architects who rely on broadband to exchange data and files on projects.

There is a provision in the Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment (BEAD) grant rules that says that if no broadband provider seeks funding in an unserved or underserved area, a state broadband office may engage with providers to find somebody willing to serve such areas. In order to make this work, states are allowed to offer additional inducements, such as providing additional state matching funds for the grant areas.

Netherlands is also the world’s top supplier of seeds for ornamental plants and vegetables. The country is a hub for agricultural research, with 15 of the top twenty agribusinesses having research and development labs in the country. All of this agriculture needs broadband. Like the U.S., the rural areas of the country are the last to get broadband. But the country has put a big push on connectivity. 100% of homes and farms can buy DSL. This is not like the slow rural U.S. DSL, but mostly with reliable speeds between 25 Mbps and 50 Mbps.

The Federal Communications Commission voted recently to implement consumer broadband labels. The pricing information alone must be giving shivers to the marketing folks at the biggest broadband providers. The requirement that I think will be the most controversial is the requirement to disclose the typical broadband speed and latency. Some providers will have a real dilemma with the speed disclosure. Some of the dilemmas include the following:

There are two ways to judge the Federal Communications Commission's new broadband maps—the mapping fabric and the broadband coverage story. The State of Vermont has already sent a challenge letter to the FCC that says that 11% of the locations in the Fabric don’t match Vermont’s own data. Even worse, Vermont says that 22% of locations it knows about are missing from the FCC map. Vermont also looked at the broadband coverage claims by ISPs. According to the new maps, over 95% of Vermont homes have access broadband to broadband of at least 100/20 Mbps.

There are three billing practices that are routine for large internet service providers (ISP) that smart competitors avoid. First is offering special low prices to attract new customers. The second is bundling, which means giving a discount to customers buying multiple products. Third is what has become known as hidden fees, where there are routine monthly fees that are not included in the online advertised price offers to customers. A lot of smaller ISPs wonder if they should match these same tactics.

Gigabit passive optical network (GPON, if you're scoring at home) is a great technology. It is the predominant technology in place that is delivering fiber last mile broadband. GPON quickly became popular because it allowed the provisioning of a gigabit service to customers.

I’m taken aback when I see fiber-based broadband providers offering what can best be described as stingy speeds. The other day, I ran across a broadband provider that offers a range of speeds between 25/3 Mbps and 100/20 Mbps on fiber. Earlier I ran across a provider that has fiber products as tiny as symmetrical 10 Mbps. This frankly mystifies me, and I always wonder why somebody with fiber would offer broadband products that are similar to their competitors. I figure that part of the reason is what I would call old thinking.

It’s been a busy few weeks with announcements from the satellite broadband industry.