As Ken diplomatically points
out, rural telephone companies have already made broadband services
available to 95% of the cutomers. The problem is not one of
capability, but one of low-take-rates, which means that, after
spending billions of dollars on infrastructure capability, the
customers are not buying the services made available. They either
don't want it or just can't afford it. Economies in rural America
are different than they are in urban areas and the people are more
pragmatic. A $35 monthly phone bill takes a pretty good chunk out of
most yearly budgets. Another $20 to $30 for xDSL access so that you
can surf the Internet faster or boosting your bill to $100 per month
so that you can take advantage of triple play optiions where you get
telephone, xDSL, and TV service piped into your home over your
telephone lines can easily be unaffordable or prevent you from
making a rainy day deposit in your savings
account.
It also can prevent you from saving for your children's education or
eat into your monthly food bill. Life has taught the rural
population what is important and they would much rather spend a few
more seconds waiting for websites to come up than not have money to
fall back on, send their kids to school,
or eat.
After the Telecom
Deregulation Act created new CLECs, that dissappeared as
quickly as they appeared, and media hype promoting their wild
promises, pushed these rural TelCos into making the investment
to provide advanced services before a market for them existed,
people are not buying them and rural TelCos, while servicing the
required loans,
are seeing longer returns on their investments. While equipment
manufacturers developed and pushed business models to showing rural
TelCos how much more money that they could make by providing these
new services, their models did not include an exit plan if customers
didn't buy the services. The customers claimed to want these things,
but as usual, they wanted them for free. As a reult, TelCos will be
forced to service their debt
while it takes much longer for the business models to
develop.
Business models for rural
TelCos fall in line with those of their customers. Their investments
are well thought out and their success and continued existence
depends on having just enough revenue, manpower, and equipment
to reliably provide their existing services to their customers,
which normally number less than a thousand. There is no new way of
thinking about this. The money coming in must be greater than the
money going out and this will not happen by servicing debt that does
not create a return. Telecommunications services were only made
possible in rural areas, where customers are fewer and farther
between, by lower cost and longer term loans largely created by
the RUS.
Even if the money to upgarde
an exisiting network
or install a new one comes in the form of a grant, TelCos still have
ongoing maintenance, administrative, management, facilities, and
equipment costs involving their new netwrok. They must also market
the capabilities of their new network to their customers in order to
get them to buy advanced services. It can be years before a network
breaks even in low-take-rate areas even without a loan payment to
make. In the case of rural service areas, this problem is in the
process of being magnified as the federal legislature is in the
process of passing Senate
Bill 425 and HR
875 that will impose more costly regulations on small
farmers, who are rural TelCo customers, and put many of them
out of business.
Rural TelCos have and will
continue to encroach on low density service areas where the RBOCs
are not providing adequate service. Before they begin to initiate
this action, they will do as much planning and budgeting as they do
for anything else. The question, in this case, will be whether
the RBOC is not providing broadband service in an area because there
is no market for it or the busness model in the area does not
satisfy RBOCs' expectations for a higher return rate. If the
business is not available, rural TelCos won't do it
either.
This explains why some
areas in the country are underserved or not served with broadband
services. There are not enough customers, they don't want the
services, or they can't afford the services. In some cases,
technology does not exist to allow broadband to be provided over the
required distance. If TelCos could service these areas economically,
they would already be serviced.
The rural telephone industry cannot
absorb $4.7 billion by September of 2010. In order to do this, not
only would the telephone companies have to increase their payrolls
and capabilities, but manufacturers would have to ramp up as well.
Planning would have to be haphazzard at best. The illusion of
prosperity will quickly dissipate if the money does manage to get
spent, and the industry will again begin to suffer massive
layoffs and company closures after the money is gone. No sustaining
economic increase in the industry will be established. The TelCos
have not fully recovered from the last government intervention and
large swaths of industrial complex floor space still remains empty
from when the .com bubble burst. This initiative will only push
money on an economy that cannot support it.
As Andy points out, the
federal agencies tasked with spending this money do not have the
ability to do so. The federal government has increased its rolls by
1.2 million people and, just to be able to spend this stimulus
money, many more will have to be added. The
government's ability to screw things up because of a lack of
knowledge and expertise is increasing exponentially. Highly paid
bureaucrats often forget that things are not free. As often turns
out, the visions of a new administration that are based on
imagination as opposed to knowledge will end up being someone elses
nightmare.