Despite growth of Internet telecommunications, majority of employers don't allow telework

We may be living in the era of Internet telecommunications where most any generation, analysis and manipulation of words and numbers can be done from most anywhere having adequate telecom infrastructure.

But for most American businesses, that fact hasn't yet fully registered. Most still believe this type of work can only be done in office buildings and cubicles, which in turn reinforces that time sucking activity known as commuting. At a time when people are strapped for time and want to reduce their carbon footprints. And exercise more and perhaps lower their employers' soaring health care costs in the process.

The results of a random telephone survey of nearly 10,000 businesses in a dozen states last year found only 23 percent allow telework. The results are reported in a white paper issued today by Connected Nation, Leveraging Technology to Stimulate Economic Growth.

AT&T exec suggests wireless will save its residential market segment

AT&T may be the nation's largest telecommunications company. But its size hasn't helped it meet the challenge of upgrading its cable plant to transport Internet protocol-based services. AT&T provided wireline Internet connectivity first through dial up and ISDN connections in the early 1990s, and then DSL as the 1990s turned into the 2000s. Starting in 2006, AT&T brought fiber closer to customer premises -- but not to them -- with its FTTN (Fiber to the Node) U-Verse service utilizing VDSL. Some new, dense greenfield developments received U-Verse service via direct fiber to the premises connections.

New home construction cratered shortly after U-Verse rolled out, leaving only more challenging FTTN brownfield opportunities. They are more challenging because the old cooper cable plant designed for POTS (Plain Old Telephone Service) is used to carry high compressed VDSL signals that quickly degrade with distance, limiting the size of the potential U-Verse customer base.

Faced with these challenges to reach customer premises and seeing strong growth on the wireless side of its business, AT&T not surprisingly sees its future in the wireless space. "The future is wireless broadband and we must keep that in front of us at all times," Tim Ray, executive director for AT&T External Affairs in Northern California, said at a recent roundtable discussion hosted by Sacramento-based Valley Vision.

In 2010, Valley Vision formed the Connected Capital Area Broadband Consortium (CCABC), a coalition "which seeks to identify and coordinate strategic broadband investments in the six-county Sacramento region aimed at improving broadband infrastructure, access and adoption." Ray, who sits on Valley Vision's board of directors, appeared to suggest wireless Internet connectivity will be able to substitute for wireline connectivity, noting "27 percent of homes no longer have wire line and this trend will continue to grow."

Ray's wrong and engaged in wishful thinking. There's currently nothing indicating wireless Internet service -- which is aimed at mobile devices with a low bandwidth allocation per customer  -- can provide sufficient capacity to handle burgeoning bandwidth consumption and be able to reliably deliver to customer premises high definition video content and applications like video conferencing and telemedicine. Indeed, AT&T's wireless infrastructure is already choked with far lower bandwidth traffic from devices such as the iPhone.

AT&T is in conflict with its own business model. It's in the telecommunications business which by its nature requires lots of CAPEX and OPEX. But it expects to get a full ROI within 5 years on its CAPEX. That's not going happen in most places except perhaps in new dense greenfield developments, which as previously mentioned also aren't happening.

More patient capital the key advantage of community telecom infrastrucuture

Craig Settles explains the advantages of community fiber telecom infrastructure in this Government Technology piece.  The key advantage over investor-owed infrastructure can be summed up in three words: more patient capital.  Telecom infrastructure built by local governments and cooperatives doesn't need a return on investment in just 3-5 years -- an inherent flaw of the investor-owed business model given the high capital cost of constructing and operating it. 

Settles correctly notes there is money to be made for private players -- if they are willing to partner with communities in open access fiber projects and abandon the outdated business model of 100 percent ownership and monopolistic control.

Communities must build fiber telecom infrastructure where incumbents cannot

As bandwidth demand grows exponentially for Internet protocol-based telecommunications, Geoff Daily aptly notes the debate over what infrastructure can best deliver it to customers is over. Only fiber can do the job, he writes on his blog App-Rising. The task, therefore, is to bring it to their doorsteps. "With this context we can now define fiber-to-the-home as bringing the full power of the Internet to your front door," Daily writes.

Indeed. Daily adds to get there, public policymakers and consumers must be educated on the significance of fiber telecom infrastructure. And we must end the useless demonizing of for-profit providers whose business models don't allow them to both bring fiber to consumers' premises and make money for their investors. Don't expect them to do something they can't.

Instead, I would add, consumers must find alternative business models to build vital fiber-based telecommunications infrastructure in their communities not served by investor-owned providers. I'm not just talking the talk here. I'm walking the walk in my own community. I encourage other communities to do so as well.

Obama administration should focus on community-run open access fiber, not 4G wireless

The Obama administration's recent announcement of its National Wireless Initiative to subsidize the build out of 4th generation (4G) wireless Internet to make it available to least 98 percent of Americans appears based on the assumption that cutting edge wireless telecommunications technology can play a central role in the nation's telecom infrastructure.

I'm not convinced. 4G wireless is only just emerging and remains unproven in terms of whether it can deliver sufficient bandwidth at the same time bandwidth demand is increasing exponentially. It's primarily designed for mobile use and portable devices such as smart phones and IPads that are gobbling bandwidth at such a prodigious rate that providers have a difficult time meeting the demand. That's why they ration bandwidth and penalize wireless customers who use more than 5 GB per month. The rationing is due to a more basic telecom infrastructure problem: the lack of adequate wire line infrastructure to "backhaul" or feed the distribution system that supports that huge and growing universe of wireless devices.

The administration's wireless initiative seems to suggest that people can "cut the cord" for Internet access just as they have done for wire line voice service, which requires far less bandwidth. 4G wireless, the administration apparently believes, can provide access to medical tests, online courses and applications that have not yet been invented.

That remains to be seen. What is certain now is wire line fiber optic connections to American households and businesses can deliver more than enough bandwidth for today's needs without the need for rationing plus plenty of additional capacity for those yet to be invented applications. The administration's telecom infrastructure efforts should focus on bringing it to the 24 million Americans that Federal Communications Chairman Julius Genachowski said remain disconnected from the Internet. "The infrastructure simply isn’t there," Genachowski explained.

The reason: It's simply not sufficiently profitable for investor owned providers to build it. Alternative, lower cost methods are urgently needed. The best and most rapid way to bring about these alternatives is to focus at the local level and provide local governments and consumer telecom cooperatives technical assistance grants and low cost loans to build open access fiber networks to serve their communities.

The administration's health care reform legislation allocates $5 billion in technical assistance grants to for new health insurance cooperatives to pool risk and purchase health coverage for their members. The administration should provide a similar amount of technical assistance funding for local governments and telecom cooperatives to help them plan and design open access fiber optic telecom networks.

Virtual workforce requires robust telecom infrastructure

While a recent survey found that less than 4 percent of U.S. private sector workers actually work from home, that figure could reach as high as 30 percent by 2019, according to TechCast, a George Washington University–based virtual think tank.

What's behind this coming workplace revolution? Quite simply, "work" no longer needs to be defined as a place you go. We're witnessing the emergence of a next generation workforce that is always-on and hyper-connected via broadband, with a proliferation of connected devices and access to on-the-go Internet-based applications and cloud-based services that make working from anywhere possible.

The above excerpt from a Reuters article goes on to point out various pluses of telework including reduced carbon emissions from less commuting and mutual benefits for employers (better productivity, lower office costs) and employees (greater work/life balance and job satisfaction). While not mentioned specifically, improved work/life balance could also yield big benefits in lower health care costs by freeing up time for exercise that would otherwise be spent commuting to and from the office.

In order for the virtual workforce to become a reality, workers will need advanced telecommunications infrastructure at their doorsteps that can support videoconferencing and other interactive applications. That means fiber optic connections offering symmetric upload and download speeds and scalability for future growth that is generally not offered by incumbent telco and cable companies.

Satellite Internet provider targets U.S. exurbs as growth market

The notion that being disconnected from the Internet is a problem largely confined to rural areas isn't true. The latest evidence comes courtesy of Arunas Slekys, vice president of corporate marketing for satellite Internet provider Hughes Network Systems.

Slekys told The Washington Post that Hughes' best growth prospects aren't necessarily deep rural America but the outer rings of metro areas where telcos and cable companies haven't built out their wireline infrastructures to provide premises Internet connections. "These aren't people sitting on a mountainside in Idaho," Slekys told The Post. "They're actually exurban. You can go 20 or 30 miles outside of D.C. and there are a lot of areas where you can't get terrestrial broadband."

Indeed. Ditto for other metro regions of the United States. Living in the exurbs often means no Internet, which won't help property values recover in despite their typically upmarket homes.

Slekys makes a excellent point about the extent of the problem in the U.S. But his company's solution is, frankly, not a solution. Even on an interim basis until terrestrial infrastructure is constructed to serve these offline areas. Satellite Internet connections are notoriously sluggish due to the high signal latency caused by the 46,000 mile round trip to the satellite and back to the Earth's surface and are prone to frequent drop outs. Then there are the dreaded FAPs, aka Fair Access Policies. This fine print in satellite providers' contracts allows them to slow your connection to dial up speed -- often for days on end -- if the connection is used too much or for applications that use a lot of bandwidth such as video.

So those of you in the offline exurbs, forget about streaming Netflix films on a satellite connection unless you want to spend some time in FAP jail with your Internet connection slowed to a crawl. And if you're an executive who lives in an upscale exurban property or a small business owner/consultant, forget about using your satellite connection to videoconference with your offices or to exchange large files. The connection isn't sufficiently robust and stable to support it.