The few, the proud

Those guarantees of high-speed access for all have been nothing but marketing ploys and broken promises.

Bandwidth. We hear about it all the time, and as bandwidth-hungry end users, we want lots of it. Some of the lucky few may even dream about it in their sleep.

No one doubts that having high-speed access is great. The ability to soar from one graphic-laden site to the next makes you feel like a gibbon swinging from tree to tree.

The problem is, once we become accustomed to that breakneck speed, we don't want to give it up at any cost, and we certainly don't want to be forced back into the past's painfully slow dial-up connections. However, we do have to go home at night, and the drop in speed usually follows a slope similar to a steep cliff. And for telecommuters, the plight is even worse. All that remains for most of us are distant memories of a T-1 connection that is revived every time we go into the office.

While megabits of capacity per second sounds mouthwatering, the idea of a connection at 14.4, 28.8 or even 56.6 kb/s is about as appealing as stepping in melted ice while wearing socks. Most of our old 14.4 and 28.8 kb/s modems have likely been recycled into formica countertops by now, but while those modems are gone and many of us quickly upgraded to 56.6 kb/s modems, our connections didn't necessarily upgrade along with our modems.

Once options such as DSL and cable access started to make their way into some parts of the country a few years ago, most of us thought our low-bandwidth miseries would be over. But ironically, in this the year 2001, those guarantees of high-speed access for all have been nothing but marketing ploys and broken promises.

The data CLECs may have tried desperately to make a strong business out of reselling DSL service, but that plan has obviously proved to be flawed. On top of the fact that reselling service wouldn't ever provide the needed margins, dependence upon several different parties to complete one order is a logistical nightmare. Their efforts clearly opened the eyes of incumbent telephone companies, but incumbents' efforts have been far from superior.

SBC touted its multibillion-dollar Project Pronto initiative to upgrade its network and deliver DSL to 70% of homes in its territory. But since the dust has settled on that announcement and perhaps now that the competition is failing quickly SBC has said it will raise the cost of DSL service by $10 and will not complete Project Pronto on schedule. If the margins aren't that great and incumbents haven't worked out the services to layer on top of DSL, will the incumbents really work that hard to equip their territories much further?

Herein lies the problem. The demise of the data CLECs has played out perfectly for the incumbents. Their competition for high-speed access is slim to none. Now, they can feel confident about raising the rates for service where they already offer it. And in areas where they have yet to turn up service, customers will not likely be aware of the rate increases. Bottom line: Demand is high and customers are primed and ready for the incumbents to go in for the kill.

But for small and medium-sized businesses that may have been relying on symmetrical DSL for access, incumbents will likely look to migrate them to slightly more expensive T-1 service. After all, why bother with troublesome DSL rollouts if more money can be had from convincing customers they need a T-1?

The increased speed is always great, but when will we be able to get it at home in more than just selected areas? RHK predicts that residential DSL service will grow from 2.2 million users in 2000 to 18.6 million users by 2004. And while that figure of 2.2 million users seems great on paper, it sure doesn't feel great if you're not one of them. Once again, we are at the mercy of the incumbents' plans, pricing and strategies.

Contact Liane LaBarba at labarba@airmail.net