off-topic: FTTH in Toronto

[John Moniz]

On 09/10/2013 11:17 AM, Anthony Verevkin wrote:
>> From: "Scott Sullivan" <scott-lxSQFCZeNF4 at public.gmane.org>
>>> The CRTC hasn't told Bell to share their new toys (yet), so they
>>> don't.
>> The reason other ISPs get access to the new FTTN speeds is because
>> they
>> are still using the copper lines for the last mile. It's those copper
>> lines which are a government supplied monopoly overseen by the CRTC.
>> That monopoly is there because the installation of the copper was
>> originally government subsidized.
>>
> Right. But that's not the case with Rogers. Rogers has built their whole
> cable network with no subsidies, but they now have to share their cable
> with others the same way Bell does. So there must be something else to it.

Neither Bell nor Rogers received government subsidies to lay their 
cables to houses or any customer buildings. In the case of Bell, the 
reason they had to share their infrastructure (not just cable) was that 
the monopoly pricing module within which they operated meant that 
everyone (in Ontario and Quebec) had paid for that infrastructure 
through local and long distance fees. So, if a bunch of customers left 
Bell for another provider, they could justifiably say that since they 
helped to pay for that infrastructure, they had a right to use it. That 
was the view that the CRTC adopted.


>
> Originally I also thought that the ruling for sharing the infrastructure
> had the intention for the small ISPs to be able to provide services to
> everyone during the transition period when they would roll out their
> own cable. However nobody does even start to put their wires.

There was initially a time period (I think 5 years) after which the 
other providers were suppose to look after themselves with their own 
infrastructure, unless they were simply a reseller. But who would be 
interested in that? The cost is huge. Much easier and much, much cheaper 
to have someone else do the work. In the 80's and 90's, Bell's network 
capital expenditures were around $10B per year (about 70-75% in 
Ontario). A good chunk of that would have been equipment, not just the 
last mile, but still big numbers. For a start-up, there's no way to make 
a small network investment and still have enough clients to make money. 
Unless it's to provide fibre to commercial entities in a small 
geographic area, which has been somewhat profitable for some small 
companies.
>
> Then I've heard a different opinion that municipalities and landlords
> don't want anyone other than a couple of established companies like
> Bell and Rogers (or Cogeco) to mess with cables on their property.
> And so only those will ever own the last mile and CRTC will keep on
> forcing them to share their infrastructure to create "the competition".
> We are living in a screwed world.
For municipalities, there's probably some truth to that. Each 
municipality has a very clear line of communication to Bell and Rogers. 
And before competition, every municipality received a receipts tax 
(about 6% I think) of revenue generated by the telephone company from 
customers within their borders. Rogers was likely the same. I suppose it 
compensated them for all the road allowances, easements and such. Having 
to deal with other providers would just add confusion. But since no 
other providers have been laying their own cable, I guess it's a mute point.

Landlords are just trying to jump on the bandwagon. Some would receive 
kickbacks from alternate providers for exclusive network access to their 
building. It was a controversial tactic since the whole idea of 
competition was being turned on it's head by this restriction. Rogers 
(and others who have since disappeared) were very aggressive at this and 
took a lot of business away from Bell.

After complaints by Bell that this was against the rules of competition, 
the CRTC ruled that they had no jurisdiction over private property. I 
haven't heard if Bell ever decided to pull the same stunt to get 
exclusive access, but initially they refused.

Developers constructing subdivisions would also get paid by Rogers (and 
others who are no longer around) for exclusive access to their trenches. 
That was allowed by the CRTC (private property) up to the date when the 
subdivision was turned over to the municipality, at which point no 
restrictions were allowed. By this time, of course, all trenches were 
filled and paved/sodded over, so not much chance of any competition there.

But the fact that no one else lays cable, aside from the old monopoly 
companies like Bell and Rogers, is simply cost.

>
> Regards,
> Anthony
> --
> The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
> TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
> How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists
>
>

--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists