Policy debate -- not market competition -- predominates in U.S. premises Internet infrastructure

In the United States, the major competition in last mile wired premise Internet infrastructure is playing out in the public policy arena more than in the marketplace. In order to have market competition, there has to be a market. In many areas, there isn’t one. Those looking to purchase wired premise Internet service cannot do so because no providers want to sell it to them. The basic definition of a functional market is willing buyers and willing sellers. Others want better value service and more options. Here again, the market fails. No providers are willing to make the necessary investment in order to sell better value services to them – the impetus behind many municipal Internet infrastructure projects.

Second, telecommunications infrastructure due to its high construction and operating costs excludes many potential providers. It’s what known as a natural monopoly or at best, a duopoly. Roads and highways are tremendously expensive and thus tend to be operated by one provider that can bear the large cost burden: the government. In a limited number of cases, a duopoly exists where motorists have the option of taking the public highway or a private toll road. By definition, there cannot be a competitive market, which is one made up of many sellers and many buyers.

Which brings us to the major ideological battleground over last mile wired premise Internet service: Whether it should be operated like a closed, private toll road or an open access public thoroughfare. Big money has joined the fight to bolster the latter position. Macquarie Capital Group, an Australian firm that invests in multi-billion dollar infrastructure projects around the world, is considering investing in UTOPIA, an open access fiber to the premise (FTTP) network serving 11 Utah municipalities. (See item here).

On the other side of the debate are the legacy incumbent telephone and cable companies that want to preserve their closed network models. As Community Broadband Networks reports, they are sponsoring bills in both chambers of the Utah legislature opponents say are intended to scotch a potential Macquarie investment in UTOPIA. In Kansas, the cable company lobby is seeking legislation that would add Kansas to the roster of 20 states that bar local governments from building Internet infrastructure projects to serve their citizenry.

Possible alternative to capitalize U.S. FTTP build out emerges in Utah

Building infrastructure of any kind is a costly undertaking, including fiber optic to the premise (FTTP) telecommunications networks. Those high capital costs have crimped FTTP build out in the United States, challenging existing telephone and cable companies as well as newcomers like Google Fiber.

In Utah, a new strategy is emerging involving a global firm that with patient capital that specializes in big dollar infrastructure projects. The Salt Lake City Tribune reports Macquarie Capital Group, an Australian firm that advises and invests in public projects around the world, will launch an engineering and feasibility study to operate Utah's 11-city UTOPIA FTTP network in a public-private partnership: 

Macquarie’s investors — including pension funds, large insurance firms and private endowments — were seeking to develop stable, long-term investment opportunities and were drawn to technology-based projects, Hann said. 

If the feasibility study proves fruitful and Macquarie agrees to take over the network, it likely will entail a deal in which the firm would assume management of the network for 30 years and invest in building out and upgrading the rest of the lines to neighborhood homes, Hann said. 

The network would remain an open-access network and Macquarie would partner with third-party Internet service providers, he said.

Telecom infrastructure demands competing business models

The Salt Lake Tribune has published a set of articles on UTOPIA, a public open access fiber network.  For other publicly owned and operated telecommunications infrastructure, the take away is they are like building and financing toll highway systems over a period of many years.  A prudent, long term financial plan is essential and their success can't be measured in isolation over the short term.

That's why investor owned incumbent telco and cable providers haven't built out fiber to the premise infrastructure. Their shareholders expect a certain return on investment within five years or less as well as hefty dividends.  Infrastructure projects have long term time horizons that aren't compatible with their business models.

Some of those interviewed in the articles assert that UTOPIA and other publicly operated telecommunications networks shouldn't be competing with incumbent, investor owned telcos and cablecos.  I disagree.  The challenges of constructing and operating telecommunications infrastructure demand competition to produce the best business models demonstrating the greatest potential for long term viability.  It's not an easy task.  The incumbent providers been unable to produce one.  That has led to extensive market failure in wireline telecommunications services, leaving millions of Americans without premises Internet access.  UTOPIA and other non-incumbent operators despite their shortcomings are to be commended for making the effort to develop alternatives to build and construct this essential infrastructure for the 21st Century.

WSJ: About 60 municipal fiber projects deployed in last decade

According to The Wall Street Journal, about 60 U.S. towns and small cities including Bristol, Va.; Barnsville, Minn.; and Sallisaw, Okla., have built state-of-the-art fiber networks and an additional two dozen municipalities, including Chattanooga and Clarksville, Tenn., have launched or are considering similar initiatives.

The newspaper notes the projects have revived policy debates similar to those of more than seven decades ago when local governments opted to build out their own electrical distribution infrastructures to serve areas large private sector providers neglected.

The Nashville Tennessean, which carried and supplemented the WSJ story, reports Clarksville's Department of Electricity is building some 860 miles of fiber cable to offer TV service, broadband Internet and phone, and will start to sign up customers this year. Meanwhile, Columbia Power & Water Systems offers from 1Mbs to 7Mbs of broadband Internet speeds for residential customers at prices ranging from $29.95 to $52.95 per month.

The public providers complain the private providers are moving too slowly. They're willing to take on more risk than the private sector, and that risk is real for poorly planned and executed government run fiber systems as recent events with Utah's UTOPIA and IProvo systems illustrate. IProvo's financial problems have prompted the Provo City Council to consider selling off that city's system; a vote on the transaction is set for this week.

Muni fiber growth pains: Utah's UTOPIA, iProvo reconnoiter

Here's a comprehensive account by the Provo, Utah Daily Herald of the challenges that can arise in public-private fiber optic projects designed to bring state of the art telecommunications services to residents and businesses.

Both the Utah Telecommunication Open Infrastructure Agency (UTOPIA), a fiber venture begun in 2003 underwritten by 18 Utah municipalities and iProvo, Provo's muni fiber project, are experiencing cash flow problems due to take rates falling short of projections and a low cost federal loan coming in later and with far less money than requested. The finances of both projects are under review as are a number of options to improve the numbers.

The lessons that can be drawn here for such ventures are 1) Making sure there is a committed base of business and institutional subscribers who are hungry for "big pipe" data-intensive services and making connections affordable for small businesses and 2) Getting good estimates of projected demand in residential areas to help prioritize build out to those where demand is highest.

"The initial model was build it and they will come," Paul Recanzone, UTOPIA's project manager, told the newspaper. "The new model is to let the market tell you where the demand is before building out."