Google Fiber "isn't just an experiment, it's a real business and we're trying to decide where to...

Google Fiber "isn't just an experiment, it's a real business and we're trying to decide where to expand next," says Eric Schmidt. Google's (GOOG) $70/month, 1Gbps, Kansas City service has won plenty of fans, and seems to have tapped a groundswell of frustration towards the offerings of phone/cable duopolies. But the costs of any large-scale launch would be enormous. Schmidt also declares Android is winning the smartphone wars. From a unit share standpoint, he's right, though profit share is a different matter.

From other sites
Comments (7)
  • wigit5
    , contributor
    Comments (4365) | Send Message
    Tri-cities TN area please...
    12 Dec 2012, 02:10 PM Reply Like
  • kmi
    , contributor
    Comments (4600) | Send Message
    I wonder if the report on the enormous expense of building out nationwide service takes into any account at all the vast amounts of dark fiber Google has been quietly accumulating since the early part of the century? That's very likely a significant portion of the cost, and Google already owns it.


    I wouldn't bet against google on this one.
    12 Dec 2012, 02:57 PM Reply Like
  • Trader's Profit Compass
    , contributor
    Comments (2072) | Send Message
    agree kmi; miles and miles of unused fiber capacity is out there and GOOG has been getting it on the cheap. The big cost is getting it the last 200 feet to the house. and agree on this: wouldnt bet against em on this will take a while to get it done, but Rome wasnt built in a day
    12 Dec 2012, 05:11 PM Reply Like
  • BrownSwiss
    , contributor
    Comments (35) | Send Message
    Nationwide will never happen, costs are far to large and the moment they start to make planning any significant growth, you will see competition from incumbents. No way they are making money at their current pricing levels. It's certainly possible to see them expand into another larger metro area.
    13 Dec 2012, 01:42 AM Reply Like
  • danbanerjee
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
    Dark fiber is primarily inter-city and not FTTH fiber which needs to be laid in neighborhoods to pass homes. Dark fiber assets would help Google in their metro and longhaul, not reduce costs per home passed for FTTH
    13 Dec 2012, 08:02 AM Reply Like
  • kmi
    , contributor
    Comments (4600) | Send Message


    However, I would wonder if this doesn't make up a large part of the initial cost of creating a nationwide network. The link claiming the cost would 'be enormous' doesn't tell us to what extent is has accounted for this dark fiber, or for that matter, just how much Google has.


    It could, for example, be argued, that Google, having already purchased the longhaul/metro line assets, could bypass wireline to-the-home with wireless, at least at the outset, and develop its FTTH product as a follow-on.


    Does that make sense?
    13 Dec 2012, 10:07 AM Reply Like
  • skibimamex
    , contributor
    Comments (541) | Send Message
    FTTH costs is entirely related to population density and cost to dig up streets (and being branted ROW's) and has ZERO to do with inter-city "dark fiber". GOOG's advantage vs. other MVPD's is its ability to monetize viewership for alternative content such as its YouTube. They wont roll out nationally but will pick-off the affluent areas of major metro communitites.


    In any case, TWC's 100K households in KC probably will see some shrinkage.
    16 Dec 2012, 10:38 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs