[1st-mile-nm] FCC approves CenturyLink, Qwest merger with conditions

peter baston pete at ideapete.com
Thu Mar 24 14:05:30 PDT 2011


Then its interesting to look at the basis of how DT arrived at the
conclusion that US West would be a good fit and how they would make money
where no one else saw it. Regarding the local connection (pun ) the project
moto was American Einfallsreichtum und deutscher Präzision which basically
means American ingenuity and German Precision and they meant it and
naturally AIGP T shirts are still around. They also figured with regulatory
hurdles they faced in their other markets it was a top growth priority,
little did they understand the local pols

What was so different about the business model, well the understanding of a
node value for one thing

The model layout classified operational nodes in a network of a - b - c with
a = Value x 5 b = Value x 3 and c = Value x 1

Value was the economic return of the type of servicers the node used to the
customer of the node.

Now here is where it gets interesting , Metcalf's law ML ( *the network
value grows exponentially as the network accumulates more users. *) whose
inventor Bob M developed the Ethernet and its protocols is often attributed
to device compatibility in groupnets but the true engineering data behind ML
was node value exponential value and how Ethernet mutipoint networking did
it better.

Most telecoms companies ( and Cable )  utilize today from their basic design
a backbone , hub and spoke design ( HS ) for short which is very similar to
the Token ring development of early IBM networks which Ethernet in the end
outperformed and drove to extinction ( Except in the UN and IAEA which
should say something ) .  What DT found is that true ML also applies to the
value of the services the node is using and that type of value has a
distinct relationship to the expansion value and that value is far higher
with true Ethernet ( 5 squared ) . Also the creation of a basic type (a)
node is approx 1000 times less that the service value and any additional
node that the type ( a ) breeds diminishes by a further factor of 5

ie: Node Type ( a ) grow 5 times faster than Node type ( c )  and the value
of the services grows and expands accordingly.

Its interesting to note who understands this model very well today , Google
and Apple.

I wouldn't be to worried about where cable ends up as they just had
different cash cows ( Movies ) to support expansion where as most telcoms
had dial tone which is now a dying species.  Cable does not understand
network design or best practices and I can tell you from interaction  they
barely grasp the true meaning of functional efficient management with IPV4
and the un-managed tunnels in IPV6 will be way beyond their grasp. Simple
logic is that cash cows make a company inherently lazy, nothing wrong with
that but !

Most of our conversation at all levels today is about the basic right to
type ( c) connection speed or less and I doubt ( chime in please telcos /
cables if I am wrong ) that most companies in this industry cannot define
and understand the true value of Node Type (a) ( b ) ( c)  . FYI a standard
Voip / Video / IP user is a type (c) customer not a type ( a )  Goverment
should understand that type (a) nodes provide 5 times the total economic
return of lesser nodes and that again increase exponentially.

DTs model was all about understanding and developing the node types , and
converting users up the scale accordingly.

To understand types you have to understand the service value not only to the
node user but the business and services that that node deals with.

ie, environmental risk and insurance risk profile analysis using parametric
design and interaction is a trillion dollar business poorly served, there
are many many more. ( we are working on a project Nimrod for a major
re-insurer with some phenomenal potential )

At a recent conference in Boulder another fascinating topic arose ( This was
from worldwide participation all the top telcos etc ) in that the conclusion
was that most large telcos and cable cos had missed the boat by not
providing services that the customer wanted and as a result a whole new
generation of devices had sprouted up allowing the customer to carry his
complete service device anywhere and to any connection he / she  wanted. The
topic was smart radio but what they meant was smart device period. url here
if you want to dig further -
http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/isart/art10/slides_and_videos10/ Another
interesting fact came outa that conference is that of total worldwide
spectrum the average usage is around 2% of capacity at peak.

The devices that are blowing the windows of most connectivity plans are of
course from Apple with the Ipad and Iphone and Goggle with Android devices
and it layered services. Go look at what it forced ATT to do with true
network expansion ( both fiber and wireless ) and who now controls the
industry and service model. Its also worth noting that the upper limits of
the speed and service types are as yet unknown and you will find that at
every tech conference no mater how sophisticated the layout of the services
installed, demand is always two to three times ahead and that at any cost.

I think this can be attributed to Steve Jobs when he asked his team how do
we create type ( a ) users really fast and they replied " Give them
affordable type ( a) service capable devices and like the famous star-trek
responses the boss said " make it so " and they did , the nimble team at
Goggle are following much the same path

Lots more here but for those of you who want to follow the DT story more
http://www.ideapete.com/leapfrog.html ( forgive the Patrick Henry pun I
could not resist ) and if anyone at Qwest has the full DT - US West merger
plan please post it on line, some great stuff in it.

Declaration statement : I was involved with the AIGP project at many levels
mostly with regard to systems engineering QA due diligence.

( : ( : pete




On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 11:31 AM, John Badal <jbadal at sacred-wind.com> wrote:

>  Thanks, Peter. You’re right on so many fronts.  I was not around, though,
> when Deutsche Telekom bid on US West – fortunately, for I’ve always been a
> fan of local ownership and local self determination.
>
>
>
> John
>
>
>
> *From:* peter baston [mailto:pete at ideapete.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 24, 2011 10:09 AM
> *To:* John Badal
> *Cc:* David Breecker; Richard Lowenberg; 1st-mile-nm at mailman.dcn.org
>
> *Subject:* Re: [1st-mile-nm] FCC approves CenturyLink, Qwest merger with
> conditions
>
>
>
> John
>
> The most important part of your email is the last piece " since economics
> often play a minor role in such decisions " this is were the whole view on
> broadband and connectivity is wrong. ( Yes i know you mean cost to service
> but it goes deeper )
>
> Ill use the Kazak example. I was sent this by a friend of mine at NOAA who
> are major funders in many of these initiatives as environmental data
> collection is a billion dollar market and accuracy and dependability of data
> is a major issue and that why huge investment is being made in systems like
> this ( yes US tax dollars )   Gotta have the big backbone and then plug in
> the sites by any means necessary.   To them the real economic model is right
> up front especially with ferengi experts writing checks and showing them how
>
> We always talk about the speed of the system and its size but pay little
> attention to the return value of what it can really do and what that means
> in economic returns current and in the future.
>
> You were probably present when *Deutsche Telekom* made a bid for US West
> and that was the model they were using which has now been picked up by other
> European Telcoms like Alcatel. Probably in your filing system its still
> around , go look at the return layer value and how they wanted to go about
> it. Sadly they have now been sunk in the US by smart devices like Iphones
> and Ipods , talking of which there was a great conference up here on smart
> radio which you would have loved, If you want a link let me know
>
> Metcalf's law still applies especially to the ultimate $$$$$ value of what
> systems can do.
>
> To understand that you have to put on your bit hat and learn what network
> design best practices 101, how they are designed and and how they GROW are,
> which I doubt many today do, certainly at the telcoms and cable companies I
> deal with.
>
> You are totally correct in the middle mile and the "latest rush to dooooooo
> something "  but this again is politics with getting the money out there
> before you have developed a standard and practice of how to use the money
> and what the end result needs to be.  Getting a local electrical utility to
> commit to 30% of its value in debt to build something they do not know how
> to is insanity but I am sure that problem will breed a bunch of experts
> which I suppose is some form of job creation.
>
> So John next time you are up on the hill ( The pajarito one ) go ask them
> how much they spend on environmental data collection and utilization ( and
> how they do it )  and what that costs them to get it right and wrong ?  Then
> dig deeper for other uses,  will not even mention parametric modeling but
> that again is huge $$$ return.
>
> Then think about what the transmission of this and similar data is worth.
>
> Love the Sacred Wind metaphor,
>
> Be well
>
> ( : ( : pete
>
> --
> --------------------------------------
> Pete Baston
> IDEAS  "I"  Quality Assurance - Due Diligence
> www.ideapete.com
> Cell: 303-579-6531
> Mailto:pete at ideapete.com
>
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 9:48 AM, John Badal <jbadal at sacred-wind.com>
> wrote:
>
> Peter,
>
>
>
> Correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t WDM enable each strand of a fiber
> route to carry an OC192, which operates at a capacity of nearly 10 Gigs?  If
> that’s the case, the backhaul capacity (which is what Kazakh’s system is) of
> only one of our national carriers can ramp up to 1,440 Gigs.  Multiply that
> by the number of national and regional fiber routes commonly possessing 96
> fiber strands or 144 fiber strands,  and we get a big number.  The issue
> really is for us, and certainly will be for the Kazakhs (except those
> pillaging on horseback), how much of it will be lit and driven to the
> neighborhood node to be made locally available.  I think we’re witnessing
> the local telcos now making a mad rush to the node in urban areas as a pure
> defensive move against the Cable TV companies.
>
> As for rural areas, the Broadband Stimulus program largely backed the
> middle mile and, I bet, a good chunk of that goes to rights of way payments.
>  Do we need fiber to every node in rural areas?  My take is no, but I’ll let
> the policymakers make that decision since economics often play a minor role
> in such decisions.
>
>
>
> John
>
>
>
> *From:* 1st-mile-nm-bounces at mailman.dcn.org [mailto:
> 1st-mile-nm-bounces at mailman.dcn.org] *On Behalf Of *peter baston
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 23, 2011 3:35 PM
> *To:* David Breecker
> *Cc:* Richard Lowenberg; 1st-mile-nm at mailman.dcn.org
> *Subject:* Re: [1st-mile-nm] FCC approves CenturyLink, Qwest merger with
> conditions
>
>
>
> Shucks even the Kiwis are talking 100 Gig
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/17/alcatel_bids_110g_kiwi_fibre/ by
> the french no less and look whats happening in the fourth world
>
>  " Valsecchi says. Elsewhere, Kazakhstan telco Kazakhtelecom recently put a
> 100Gbps link in the backbone network between Alma-Aty and Taldy-Kurgan."
>
> Yikes where does that leave the USA ?
>
> Nice one for Jason " Kazakhtelecom  is XXXXXXXX faster than our system "
>
> ( : ( : pete
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 4:14 PM, peter baston <pete at ideapete.com> wrote:
>
> Its here from the " National "sic plan although its a future goal so dvide
> by year and political willpower
>
> http://newamerica.net/publications/policy/broadband_speeds_in_perspective
>
> http://www.broadband.gov/
>
> *The U.S. National Broadband Plan sets a goal of 4 Mbps downloads (1Mbps
> upload) by 2020, which, by comparison is a minimum of a half-decade later
> and often substantially slower than other countries. The concomitant goal of
> 100 Mbps access for 100 million households by 2020 would cover an estimated
> 74-76% of the population.[25]<http://newamerica.net/publications/policy/broadband_speeds_in_perspective#_ftn25> 10
> years ago, the United States was a leader in broadband penetration; however,
> the latest OECD ranks the U.S. 15th, behind France, Sweden, Canada, and a
> dozen other countries.[26]<http://newamerica.net/publications/policy/broadband_speeds_in_perspective#_ftn26>As our research clearly documents, even if the U.S. achieves its current
> broadband speed targets by 2020, unless it substantially raises its
> broadband goals, the country will remain substantially behind many other
> countries. *
>
> Why is this a too low Junk speed,   simple speeds are measured in megabits
> and storage in Megabytes ( 8 bits in a byte ) so the true target for 9 years
> out is .5 megabyte per second down and .125 megabyte up which I am sure is
> what the target in the FCC and agreement plan defines although today who
> knows, cocombinet goal is per price fluctuaion so they wil not be giving you
> 100 mps / 12.5 megabytes per second at $10 a month in the future or today.
>
> The Jetsons must be laughing their heads of and thank goodness for smart
> wireless and Steve Jobs
>
> For those of you who are interested this is what we missed 10 years ago
> http://www.ideapete.com/leapfrog.html and why the smoke and mirrors with
> speeds http://www.ideapete.com/megaBS.html
>
>
>
> ( : ( : pete
>
> --------------------------------------
> Pete Baston
> IDEAS  "I"  Quality Assurance - Due Diligence
> www.ideapete.com
> Cell: 303-579-6531
> Mailto:pete at ideapete.com
>
>    On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 3:24 PM, David Breecker <
> david at breeckerassociates.com> wrote:
>
> Does this rely on a standard FCC definition of what constitutes
> "broadband"?  And would someone please remind me of what that too-low figure
> is?
>
>
>
> dba | David Breecker Associates, Inc.
>
> Santa Fe: 505-690-2335
>
> Abiquiu:   505-685-4891
>
> www.BreeckerAssociates.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 23, 2011, at 1:23 PM, Richard Lowenberg wrote:
>
>
>
> *FCC approves CenturyLink, Qwest merger with conditions*
>
> Mar 23, 2011 12:02 PM
>
>
> http://broadcastengineering.com/news/fcc-approves-centurylink-qwest-merger-with-conditions-20110323/
>
>
>
>
> The FCC <http://www.fcc.gov/> approved the merger March 18 of CenturyLink<http://www.centurylink.com/>and Qwest
> Communications International <http://www.qwest.com/>.
>
> As a condition of the approval, the FCC imposed protections against the
> risk of harm to competition and ensured the merged entity will live up to
> its commitments to expand its network and launch a major broadband adoption
> program for low-income consumers, an FCC statement said.
>
> Based on the companies’ agreement to certain conditions, the FCC found that
> the potential public interest benefits of the merger are likely to outweigh
> the potential harms.
>
> Among the conditions for approval were steps to improve broadband adoption
> for low-income households. Specifically, the conditions include requiring
> the launch of a major broadband adoption program focused on connecting the
> millions of low-income consumers in the combined company’s 37-state
> territory.
>
> The company also must offer qualifying households broadband starting at
> less than $10 per month and a computer for less than $150 and keep the
> window open for five years for qualifying consumers to sign up. And, the
> company must make a significant annual commitment to marketing, outreach and
> digital literacy training and include detailed reporting on outcomes and an
> independent analysis of the program’s effectiveness.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Richard Lowenberg
> P. O. Box 8001,  Santa Fe, NM  87504
> 505-989-9110 off.; 505-603-5200 cell
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/1st-mile-nm/attachments/20110324/9505c54a/attachment.html>


More information about the 1st-mile-nm mailing list