As the long running battle between public and private capital continues in the advanced telecommunications space amid what have described as a private capital “gold rush” to capture and own customers, here are the relative advantages and disadvantages of each.
PUBLIC CAPITAL ADVANTAGES |
PUBLIC CAPITAL DISADVANTAGES |
Access to lower cost, more patient capital in public bond markets. |
Lack of coherent, committed public policy and strategy for getting FTTP to most all doorsteps. |
No need to earn profit or pay shareholder dividends.
|
Goal dilution; focus on ancillary benefits vs. universal FTTP connectivity. |
Longer term commitment. |
Slower capital allocation due to political decision-making process and tax & fee resistance/exhaustion. Private capital deals can be made within months vs. years. |
Accountable to public interest and not just investor shareholders. |
Subject to disinformation campaigns by private
capital owners exercising First Amendment rights. |
PRIVATE CAPITAL ADVANTAGES |
PRIVATE CAPITAL DISADVANTAGES |
Current dominance as legacy (telephone and cable company) providers. First mover advantage in natural (utility) monopoly that can slow end user acceptance of public owned open access FTTP. |
Business model constraints that limit capex for deployment, misalignment between capex and ROI needs. |
Unregulated “wild west” spawns “gold rush” for cherry picked FTTP archipelagos offering relative rapid ROI; no universal service mandate, rate regulation. |
Negative public perception due to deployment of FTTP only in select neighborhoods and not most; poor customer support. |
Established control of public narrative based on “broadband” as market commodity vs. FTTP as utility infrastructure. |
High debt and shareholder dividend obligations.
|
Public policy path dependency recognizing private sector dominance of policymaking process. |
|
Relatively rapid access to private capital markets, private equity. |
|
No comments:
Post a Comment