So why don't US citizens get this?

Jean-François Mezei jfmezei at
Sun Jul 27 08:34:38 UTC 2008

Dave Crocker wrote:

> I have always understood the issue to be the presence or absence of unfettered 
> competition.  Competition is good.  It's lack is bad.

The problem is that it is rather hard to enable full competitive
environment in the last mile. No city, no citizen wants to have 300
wires running along the poles on streets.

In fact, a properly managed monopoly (with rules to grant access to the
last mile) can probably financially justify deploying fibre to the home
far more easily than in a competitive environment.

The big problem in north america is whoever decided to make ADSL work on
old copper.  Had ADSL never materialised, the telcos would have been
forced to put fibre to the homes. But now that they have invested in the
ADSL quagmire, it becomes much harder for them to justify fibre to the

But a CEO with vision would get the telco to stop deploying remotes
everywhere and leverage the fibre's ability to reach longer distances
and cover neighbourhoods with far fewer remote/nodes.

The problem is that CEOs are not hired for their vision, they are hired
for their ability to please wall street casino analysts (who in term
please shareholders with their articles in the various wall street
casino newspapers/magazines).

Competition only works when the goal is to please customers. It does not
work when the goal is to screw customers as much as they will tolerate.
(Consider mobile telephony in north america, especially
Rogers/Bell/Telus in canada).

More information about the NANOG mailing list