I know of two state-wide head ends and one of them has the agreements in place for all their channels. So a new telco coming on needs only to some documents, to be sure, but there's not much (if anything) they need to negotiate directly with a content owner. Frank From: Scott Helms [mailto:khelms@zcorum.com] Sent: Monday, February 04, 2013 2:50 PM To: Frank Bulk Cc: Brandon Ross; NANOG Subject: Re: Will wholesale-only muni actually bring the boys to your yard? Frank, One thing to keep in mind is that I don't believe its possible to get a contract with the bulk of the content owners in a wholesale scenario. This would be a different kind of situation than I've seen attempted in the past but in general the content guys get very picky about how video delivery is done. I'd certainly not claim to be authoritative on this, but I've never seen it done and I have seen the content guys strike down shared head end systems in almost all cases. Also, apologies for the rash of emails since this is the first time I've been able to get back to this thread. On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 11:43 PM, Frank Bulk <frnkblk@iname.com <mailto:frnkblk@iname.com> > wrote: Brandon: My apologies, I didn't mean to suggest that providers would be unable to provide video services across the muni fiber infrastructure. I was just pointing out that many customers want a triple play, so that should be a factor that Jay considers when considering a GPON-only or ActiveE design, as an RF-overlay on a GPON network is likely more profitable than an IP TV service on top of GPON or ActiveE. And Jay wants to attract multiple providers, so he wants a fiber design that's as attractive to as many parties as reasonably possible. Frank -----Original Message----- From: Brandon Ross [mailto:bross@pobox.com <mailto:bross@pobox.com> ] Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2013 9:56 AM To: Frank Bulk Cc: NANOG; Jay Ashworth Subject: RE: Will wholesale-only muni actually bring the boys to your yard? On Sat, 2 Feb 2013, Frank Bulk wrote:
Yes, but IP TV is not profitable on stand-alone basis -- it's just a necessary part of the triple play. A lot of the discussion has been about Internet and network design, but not much about the other two "plays".
I don't know if that's true or not, but so what? The concern was that providers would be unable to provide television services across this muni fiber infrastructure and that customers would demand triple play. I showed that they absolutely can provide this service by doing it across IP. If a provider can't make money at it, then they don't have to provide it. This whole exercise, I thought, was about removing the tyranny of the monopoly of the last mine so that these other innovations could take place in an open market. And as far as the "other" triple play, it's even more well established that delivery of voice over IP can be done economically. Or do you need me to send you URLs of companies that do it to prove it?
-----Original Message----- From: Brandon Ross [mailto:bross@pobox.com <mailto:bross@pobox.com> ] Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2013 3:53 PM To: Jay Ashworth Cc: NANOG Subject: Re: Will wholesale-only muni actually bring the boys to your yard?
On Sat, 2 Feb 2013, Jay Ashworth wrote:
Perhaps I live in a different world, but just about all of the small to midsize service providers I work with offer triple play today, and nearly all of them are migrating their triple play services to IP.
Really. Citations? I'd love to see it play that way, myself.
Okay:
South Central Rural Telephone Glasgow, KY http://www.scrtc.com/ Left side of page, "Digital TV service". See this news article:
http://www.wcluradio.com/index.php?option=com_content <http://www.wcluradio.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=15567
&view=article&id=15567: capacity-crowd-hears-good-report-at-scrtc-annuan-mee
"He also reported that SCRTC is continuing to upgrade our services, converting customers to the new IPTV service and trying to get as much fiber optic cable built as possible."
Camellia Communications Greenville, AL http://camelliacom.com/services/ctv-dvr.html Note the models of set-top boxes they are using are IP based
Griswold Cooperative Telephone Griswold, IA http://www.griswoldtelco.com/griswold-coop-iptv-video
Farmer's Mutual Coopeative Telephone Moulton, IA http://farmersmutualcoop.com/
Citizens Floyd, VA http://www.citizens.coop/
How about a Canadian example you say?
CoopTel Valcourt, QB http://www.cooptel.qc.ca/en-residentiel-tele-guidesusager.php Check out the models of set-top boxes here too.
Oh, also, have you heard of ATT U-Verse?
http://www.att.com/gen/press-room?pid=4800 <http://www.att.com/gen/press-room?pid=4800&cdvn=news&newsarticleid=26580> &cdvn=news&newsarticleid=26580
"AT&T U-verse TV is the only 100 percent Internet Protocol-based television (IPTV) service offered by a national service provider"
So even the likes of AT&T, in this scheme, could buy fiber paths to their subs and provide TV service. I'm pretty sure AT&T knows how to deliver voice services over IP as well.
Do you want more examples? I bet I can come up with 50 small/regional telecom companies that are providing TV services over IP in North America if I put my mind to it.
-- Brandon Ross Yahoo & AIM: BrandonNRoss +1-404-635-6667 <tel:%2B1-404-635-6667> ICQ: 2269442 Schedule a meeting: https://doodle.com/bross Skype: brandonross -- Scott Helms Vice President of Technology ZCorum (678) 507-5000 -------------------------------- http://twitter.com/kscotthelms --------------------------------