The History, Development, and Future of Fiber to the Home

Welcome to Wavelengths, a podcast with Amphenol Broadband Solutions. Hello, everyone. Welcome to another episode of Wavelengths, an Amphenol Broadband Solutions podcast. I'm your host Daniel Litwin, the voice of B2B. And folks, thanks so much for joining us on another episode of the show. We appreciate you listening along to some quality ABS thought leadership. As you're listening to the podcast today, make sure that you're heading to our website, amphenol broadband dot com. Again, amphenol broadband dot com for more information on some of the technologies and thought leadership you're gonna hear today, and also for just more podcasts, articles, and more. You can also subscribe to wavelengths on Apple Podcasts and Spotify, so make sure you're hitting that subscribe button for a full catalog of previous episodes as well as notifications when we drop new ones. So on today's episode of the podcast, we're exploring the history, the development, and the future of fiber to the premise and more specifically, fiber to the home. As we prepare for massive infrastructure investment from the current Biden administration, the conversation around universal broadband access surges back into focus. And our country, despite its economic and general wealth, has yet to prioritize the rollout of broadband to underserved markets, specifically tier two and tier three markets in the industry. No longer a luxury, constant and reliable internet is truly a needed utility for our modern society. So as we look back to the growth of fiber to the home, we're looking to ask the questions, how does this shape the rollout of fiber today? And how can businesses, state, local, and federal governments all support their communities to finally get Internet access at scale for some of these underserved markets? So for insights today, we're joined by Rick Schiavinato, senior director of national sales for ABS, and joining us for the first time, Jeff Reiman, president of the Broadband Group. Rick, great to have you on. How are you doing? Doing great. Thank you, for hosting. Absolutely. Real pleasure again to source your insights. And Jeff, welcome to you and the Broadband Group. How are you doing today? Doing very well. Thank you. Really appreciate the opportunity to participate. Absolutely. There's a lot to unpack here, a lot of history to lay out, a lot of impacts, and then peering into the crystal ball a little bit as well. So let's go ahead and jump in. I'm curious how we all maneuver these various topics. I wanna start with the early days of fiber to the premise and track the timeline there a bit. What were the motivating market factors that pushed the development of these fiber networks during their early days? Go ahead and lay out that context for us. Well, Rick, I'll jump in here if you don't mind and give a little bit of a context by way of Tom Reimann, the founder of the broadband group, who was actually a part of the what was the industry's first fiber to the home project. And believe it or not, that was in nineteen eighty six. And it's pretty incredible to think here we are in twenty twenty one talking about the importance of getting fiber out to communities that remain unserved or underserved. And it was actually in the mid 80s when the first fiber to home deployment was actually pursued. And believe it or not, the thesis for that initiative was centered on one of the main objectives of getting fiber out to these areas where they're currently underserved, and that is economic development. It was a land developer, a gentleman named Gino Palucci, who, you know, from a historical context, some might recall Chungking Chicken, Gino's Pizza Rolls, which then became Totino's Pizza Roll when Gino sold the brand to Pillsbury. Well, Gino had a landholding there in Central Florida. He was actually the second largest landholder, private landholder in the state of Florida behind the Walt Disney Company and wanted to create a new community, convert that agricultural land into a new what is essentially a new city. Thousands of new homes, new enterprise, new businesses to be located there in Central Florida, just outside Orlando. But the only problem is in that region, no one lived there. No one had reason to live there. So Gino knew that in order to attract a population base, new businesses, new families, new residents who wanted to be and had reason to be in that region, he had to find a catalyst for the growth. And he, Gina was famous of saying, I don't know the first thing about fiber optics, but I know what people need. And I know the most important thing we do is communicate. And so therefore, they went and championed a platform that would allow for high performance connectivity, high performance communication. And this is obviously the days before the Internet. This was simply quality, reliable voice communication with Southern Bell, Bell South and many others, led by a young man named Tom Reiman, my father, part of that team. They went out and deployed the fiber network and then went and tested the model, went to achieve a corporate relocation, showcasing the level of connectivity that was in place. AAA, American Automobile Association at that time announced that they were moving out of Falls Church, Virginia, and we're exploring the relocation to Florida or to Texas. Well, the planning team got ahold of the leadership of AAA, talked to them about the numerous reasons to move to that market, but also highlighted the connectivity. Jeff, I always loved that story. It's a great story. Reminds me of your father telling it. So it's really, thank you for sharing that with everyone, because I think it really puts a lot of glue together about where we're headed and what we're doing. And I think it's an incredible piece of history that is that very few people know. So if we roll forward fifteen years, somewhere around two thousand, two thousand and one, there were some other motivators there, you know, broadband was becoming more and more relevant, and the quality of the connectivity and the speed was really in demand. And copper plants copper plants were designed for voice and HFC was designed for video. So I think that was kind of the driver for a new conduit, a new vision, a new protocol, and the new direction on connecting or delivering broadband. Yeah, I love that story. Thank you for sharing that. It's pretty incredible. How much of a broad industry impact only a handful of individuals can really have. But I think that lays out the flow here for how the market has sort of shaped the initial rollout of fiber networks. So, if we, you know, move the needle forward now, and as fiber to the premise became a national endeavor, how did this impact telecom companies as well as their competitive edges in those early days and their investments then into fresh technologies? Did it drive out any players in the industry? Was it seen solely as an opportunity for growth? What was the effect there on telecom companies? There's, you know, there's a lot of buzz, you know, in rural America about the underserved areas, you know, the, you know, the key players were really not focused anywhere outside the key metropolitan markets, you the NFL markets were really kind of the sole purpose of the telcos. And so this is where a lot of the, what we refer to the unit market, the utility, municipal and independent telco market started taking control of their own destiny and driving their networks. There's no secret, know, there were almost six hundred fiber to the home deployments before Verizon connected its first Fios customer. So it's really critical to understand that this started way beyond, you know, way early, you know, somewhere in the early 2000s, you're already having fiber to the home deployments and, you know, Verizon and the U verse initiative was not until, you know, two thousand and five, two thousand and six. So I think the driver here was really kind of the munis and the Umit market taking control of their own networks and taking control of their customers and making sure that they were well served. I think that's right. I mean, the driving motivation for many regions outside the top twenty markets, which you might refer to as a tier two, tier three city, which of course we mean by population, they were in a hard position and they were waiting in line and they're going to continue to be waiting in line for quite a long time. Consolidation of the industry was very good for the large service providers, but it was not very good for the end users. And the service providers, of course, act rationally and make investments that best meet their operational needs. And it's not to say that they don't make good investments and that they have not been making important investments throughout the United States. But there are still too many that remain underserved. And it was in those smaller markets, where it was either competitive providers, or cities or utilities who recognizes they needed to take control of their connectivity future, and not wait for it to meet the investment thesis of the large service providers to get the infrastructure that they had to get in the ground and the ones that pursued it. There are many examples of success. Now there are examples of challenges as well. And it's important that while we are promoting these type of investments, we are aware of the challenges that exist in these type of complementary investments. I mean, we saw a lot of projects that were challenged in the early days. And, you know, another important factor is that the key manufacturers, right, Jeff, at the time, didn't really look at this market as an opportunity for revenue, you know, they were really focused on servicing the tier one operators. So that opened up a lot of doors for startups and new technologies and new players, you know, that were small and the rural market really didn't have much of a chance of talking to the top manufacturers at the time, so this opened up the market for the startups to go in and start selling and promoting new technologies. So it's an interesting time in the history of the fiber to the home space, you had players like Wave seven Optics and All Optic, Calyxt, which is still around and Paycion, which was a Mitsubishi investment, Hitachi, you had a lot of companies that were really driving that tier two, tier three market with the fiber to the home technology, where the main areas, the main operators were still very much focused on legacy technologies and protocols. One of the early day, I guess, developments or organizations that helped push the rollout of fiber was the Fiber to the Home Council, and this was led by Al Catell. It was established in July of two thousand and one, and it attempted to bridge various business communities around the utility and, you know, assisting in the process of rolling out and investing in fiber mass deployment. This included companies in telecom and computing and networking, system integration, but also content provider businesses and traditional telecom service providers, utilities, real estate developers. I mean, was a wide council. So, can you give us some context on some of those mass business initiatives during the early days of fiber to the premise and fiber to the home? And what effects did this business initiative or broader business initiatives have on its development? You know, I'll tell you the fiber broadband association as now referred to as it evolved from being the fiber to the home council. And you're correct, was Alcatel who was a champion of it. I'd be remiss in not acknowledging a gentleman named Jim Farmer, who was our CTO at Wave seven Optics. And, you know, we missed it in the introduction. Rick and I actually had the opportunity to work together at Wave seven Optics there in Alpharetta, just north of Atlanta. And Rick, I gotta say I'm unclear when we became qualified to talk about the historical context of the industry. But here we are. The fiber broadband association now plays an important role and it's evolved has been really exciting to watch with Heather Burnett Gold, who did an excellent job in bringing structure, then Lisa Youngers and now under the leadership of Gary Bolton. The Fiber Broadband Association is really helping the awareness of the benefits of the all fiber infrastructure. It's a challenging vertical to understand as a consumer, someone who doesn't live and breathe it the way Rick and I do and others in our industry. So the Fiber Broadband Association helping to make clear how the quality of the symmetric connectivity enabled by fiber helps businesses, helps residents, helps cities, helps education, helps hospitals in a way that no other medium really can. You know, how critical the Fiber to the Home Council was and now continues to be under a new leadership and, you know, having that vision to keep some structure around a new business model. What's also I think interesting is the, you know, the protocols that were, you know, two thousand and one, the protocols were not well defined and I think that was really hard for the Fiber to the Home Council to manage and they did an outstanding job. So I do think, know, in general, you know, when you look at the feasibility portion of the, what they guided the members through and things of that nature, it was really critical. We wouldn't have what we have today if it wasn't the Fiber to the Home Council, and for Alcatel, you know, stepping up and sponsoring and championing that initiative. So now let's start to analyze some of those early day impacts of fiber deployment. Where did we see the first at scale fiber to the home deployment? And more importantly, how was it received by end users as well as those various business interests and industries that we just mentioned? I think that, you know, it's really hard to say where the the first scaled fiber to the home deployment took place. The reason being that it was still being measured in different ways, you know, it was homes passed, homes connected, so we were still playing around with that back in the early days, but I would venture to say that the first mass deployment was probably, you know, later in the curve of the deployment, which was probably Verizon and AT and T where we saw a mass rollout when the protocols were defined, GPON was defined and you still had to do the triple play and have all the legacy services, but if you look at the tier two, I would say the most successful and probably the best deployment was in my mind, Jeff, and you can, you know, chime in, you probably have more examples than I do. I would say EPB in Chattanooga really did a phenomenal job and the vision they had from the beginning was really incredible. They do and EPB is in many ways the gold standard of a I would say non traditional fiber deployment there in Chattanooga. But, you know, again, going back to our days at Wave seven Optics, Energy Authority, JEA, they're in Jackson, Tennessee. That was I believe the single largest fiber deployment in that time that was around two thousand and five. And they were deploying triple play services to the residents and businesses to the previously underserved market. It was Kim Percy, who was a part of that team and Ben Levens continues as Senior Vice President there at Jackson Energy Authority. And then it was when Verizon announced Fios in Keller, Texas, that I think really transformed the industry. Right. Because that really was the acceptance by many of the larger providers, they were able to deploy at scale, being able to drive down costs, and allowing for the economics to pencil out more for those providers, like the utilities, co ops, some cities, and smaller competitive providers. Oh, can you expand a little bit on the Keller example there? That's right in our backyard here where I'm recording from Dallas, Texas, and I'm curious why that market was where Fios decided to deploy first, and what about, I guess, the specifics of that project, deployment or broader economic impact, how that shaped the future of fiber? Well, I can tell you Verizon's first fiber to home deployment was actually a master plan community in Northern Virginia Gotcha. Called Bramilton. And that's for the first time they essentially tested out deploying all fiber infrastructure. Tom Reiman, the broadband group helped us structure that arrangement with Verizon. They then launched their Fios branded there in Keller, Texas. And I think it was probably a matter of convenience based on a general location to some of the corporate locations there. But I think what you'll find there and what you found in many markets was, first of all, a great deal of attention and excitement around that deployment of the capabilities that were now enabled for businesses for residents to communicate the uptick in production, the uptick in desirability of living. I don't have those statistics in front of me related to Keller, Texas. Exactly. But generally, that's what you see when these markets, especially when they first were able to achieve the level of connectivity that fiber enabled. The other side of it all, and the reason I know early we talked about, you know, what is the right terminology, you know, we refer to it as FTTx back then and the reason being the x stood for different delivery, you know, the last meter, let's call it. So Verizon with the files, they opted to go fiber all the way to the prem and AT and T with U verse, they went fiber to the node and that's where the X came in, was the node and they were continuing to capitalize on the twisted pair to the home or the drop to the home with the copper piece. So what's, you know, to Jeff's point, I mean, what Files did or Verizon or the TriBach RFP from the two thousand and five that drove the industry is it made, you know, the FTTx technology or way of delivering service mainstream, you know, it became part of Wall Street, there was a lot of talk around it. So it really took this thing from a incubator in rural America to a mainstream America. You already mentioned this a little bit, but I wanna highlight it more specifically. What was the initial relationship like between the fiber deployment players and the ISPs, and how has that relationship evolved over the years? I'll take a first stab at this. I think the relationship was there wasn't a differentiation. The ISPs were the infrastructure providers. Right. And they would deploy infrastructure for their own needs. What has evolved now in the market is a separation and understanding for the value of a separation between infrastructure providers, and ISPs utilizing that infrastructure to provide the level of services to the residents and businesses. And those level of services are both direct fiber, and it could also be utilizing that fiber to provide wireless services. So I think the evolution we have seen is something that wasn't even considered in the early days of fiber. If you were delivering services, you're building fiber networks for your own purposes, and delivering services on that infrastructure. Today, we are starting to see opportunities for third party infrastructure providers to lay out the capital, and then find qualified anchor tenants or service providers to utilize that infrastructure to provide those services, it opens up levels of competition, and it can remove the traditional barrier of entry, which is high capital costs, by having a third party take on that investment who might have longer term investment return thesis than a traditional ISP might have. Not to generalize, but just to put a stake in the ground, you know, with the GPON technology where the ITU stepped in and defined a protocol that was going to be used. Fiber, the traditional operators still had to provide legacy services, the ISPs were data only, but what was great about the fiber to the home or the whole technology of GPON was it equalized the playing field, the investment was not as significant, anybody could be an operator where before you couldn't really move around, it required a lot of money for you to say, I'm going to go provide broadband, I'm going to provide video. The ISPs traditionally only provided data and the fiber, original fiber players, early adopters were all triple play and legacy based services. So there's still a lot of, there's a gap there in the way they were servicing the market and the ISPs were building for their own networks at the time for their own use or for business to business. So ISPs were really driven by a B2B model, where the fiber side or the fiber operators were still on the residential model. Jeff, you brought this up at the beginning of the conversation, but, you know, the fact that your father was involved in the deployment of fiber in the early days and, you know, the incredulousness of now we're at today, and we're still sort of talking about how can we get fiber deployed at scale, you know, kind of, it highlights just how large that challenge still is. And I wanna look at the state of internet access today with some recent research from the Pew Research Center. It shows that around seven percent of Americans still don't use the internet at all. So zero internet usage, that doesn't necessarily always correlate to access, but it does have some underlying connections with access. And then back in twenty eighteen, during the FCC's December twenty eighteen Internet Access Services Report, it was shown that forty four million households still didn't have standard broadband connection, which is more than ten percent of the population. So that doesn't mean that they have zero connection, but that it's a mix of probably zero to poor connection. So, can you give us some more information on the communities that are being talked about here? Which communities are most hurt by this lack of access, and who are the tier twos and the tier threes? Well, there is a lot of attention currently at the federal, state and local level on the deployment of rural broadband and it is important and not to discount that at all, but it's also important we understand the digital divide that still exists in urban markets. And that's tier one, tier two, tier three, every city across the country, and it's a matter of economics. But there are so many industries and services that depend on or many ways rely on access to high quality connectivity, that having that gap, those numbers that you just outlined there, of so many who remain unconnected, and it might be infrastructure access, it might be cost, it might be education as to why it's unacceptable. It is amazing. The amount of attention that the broadband is getting in today's environment, you turn on the Sunday shows, meet the press, face the nation, all we're talking about is broadband, you turn on CNBC every discussion, whatever business vertical talking about the importance of broadband, and those markets that are underserved. Well, where are they? It was on Face the Nation two Sundays ago, Democratic Congressman Richie Torres, who represents actually the poorest district in the country. That's in the South Bronx, New York. He was talking about how his constituency have a large number of unvaccinated population. What was the reason he cited? A lack of access to connectivity, a lack of access to education to understand the vaccine, to understand where they could get access to it, to understand whether or not there were costs involved in it. The importance of connectivity has never been more clear. And those markets, those areas that are underserved, it's simply unacceptable. It's very exciting to see the attention that is now being achieved. What's important is that we find actionable solutions that actually meet the connectivity needs of both from an access, as well as a cost, as well as simply an education perspective. In response to that, why do we still see so many tier two and tier three markets and just why are these markets being underserved still? What motivating factors are at play here and why does that matter? It's a matter of competition. It's a matter of economics. Blair Levin, former Chief of Staff of the FCC, now with the Brookings Institute, a few years ago put out the thesis that in order to meet the connectivity needs of the underserved markets, we have to find a way to change the math on typical network deployment economics. And he presented an equation that talked about the capital costs, the operating costs, the competitive nature of these markets that are underserved, and how there could be opportunities to lower capital, lower operating costs and increase the visible revenues. And until we are able to accomplish that, markets are going to remain underserved. And it's not only about federal grants that check the box of covering capital, there are significant operating costs involved in the deployment of these networks as well. So it's very important to understand those challenges. So those challenges can be addressed and controlled, and then allowing for the model, which effectively changes the math on traditional network build economics to get the level of connectivity in the markets that it simply doesn't pencil out. And it doesn't pencil out in many ways because of industry consolidation, but also because of the way of deploying networks has in many ways not evolved for the last one hundred years. How can we change the math on the way in which infrastructure is deployed to meet the need that is so clear in the underserved markets in rural and in urban? Yeah, and I think Jeff also what we're seeing is a, you know, to your point, first of all, the competition that sits in the tier one, you know, never really, you know, it's an ongoing competition between the telcos and the cable companies and now the wireless providers, right, Jeff, as we kind of see more and more of the wireless presence, but that focus is really traditionally in the tier one markets. But then the tier two, that tier two cities, cities like Chattanooga, Huntsville, they're growing, they're having, they're experiencing hyper growth and because a lot of the inner city population is moving out to some of the smaller tier two cities, you know, secondary cities in the US and these cities were never really, didn't have the infrastructure to support the growth that they're seeing. So you have the population growth, you have, you know, the competition staying in the tier one, so there are fewer motivators in the tier two and the investment is non existent, you know, it's, pretty much, you know, the tier two and tier three traditionally have been cash cow markets for tier one operators. So as we look to how various different fiber deployers are now trying to break into those underserved markets and potentially stake their claim there. How are the largest fiber players differentiating their services to underserved markets? And what effect is that having on their competitive edge, but more importantly on the communities themselves? Break that down for us. I mean, I think that, you know, one thing we joked about, you know, fifteen, twenty years ago was the, how relevant was broadband going to be or the connect, you know, the connection to the internet And it's, you know, to Jeff, you know, Jeff outlined the whole dependency on connectivity in order to live and COVID accelerated that and I think he really highlighted the deficiencies of the broadband network in the US. So I think that we continue to see a heavy investment by all key operators in the fiber to DX, fiber to the prem model, but we're still struggling to drive to, you you look at everybody streaming video that consumes a ton of bandwidth, the drivers that are out there is really broadband has become the killer app that everybody was searching for fifteen, twenty years ago, what's the killer app going to be? You know, we thought it was going be video, but in reality, it's OTT and OTT is anything that's unmanaged that is over the top, whether it's voice, whether it's video, whether it's storage, anything that is coming across the network. So, me that there's the differentiator really is the quality of the connection and, you know, fiber is not the only, it's really important for people to understand that fiber is not the miracle conduit, the protocol drives, fiber is an enabler of the protocol that drives the speed, right? Protocol determines the speed, not the fiber. So I see a lot of things around that and when I guess what I'm getting at is that the differentiating here is really people want symmetry, people want fast internet and they want quality. So that the experience that they have in their home running and most people have become their own content aggregator. They go out and they get their own content and they want to stream it across their network. So the driver really is the quality of the bandwidth. That's my view and I think that's where we're at. It's the quality of the bandwidth and how is it a differentiator for the regions that are fortunate to have a provider who deploys that level of fiber infrastructure. And again, when we talk about fiber infrastructure, I think of wireless as an application enabled by fiber infrastructure. So it's high quality cellular, it's high quality Wi Fi. And how do those markets benefit? How are they differentiated? Because their residents, their citizens have equitable access to the services, which are now critical distance education, telehealth services, being able to work from home and remain as a high productive employee, the markets that don't have it are left being left behind. And that's why we're seeing so much attention in terms of identifying addressing the digital divide, identifying which is now commonly referred to as the homework gap. And that's why it's no longer just a nice to have. It's no longer well, they have some level of connectivity, isn't it good enough? It's not good enough. The fiber infrastructure was symmetric as fast speeds downloaded, as they are uploaded, enabling high quality video consultation, distance education programs is needed nationwide. And you know, and I think, know, Jeff, you know, going back and circling back to EPB in Chattanooga, right, you look at the impact that they had in the community as a tier two market, you know, when EPB got in, they've been, you know, they've been delivering service for ten years. I mean, I saw something that came out, a study show that the valuation or the benefit to the community of two point seven billion dollars that they brought almost ten thousand jobs, so that is the impact, know, there's that retention, that lack of erosion, people moving in into markets that are well served, so the driver really is, you know, the investment that you make upfront. I mean, EPB was the first one gig operator in the US to provide one gig back, you know, ten, eleven years ago, way before Google Fiber got all the publicity. So, but most importantly, EPB did something for the community and not only did they did they service the community, they also created a value for the community way beyond what that intended initial service was gonna be. So I I think EPB is really an incredible story all around. And I don't think any of these fiber deployers are going to slow down, their deployment initiatives, especially if the funding comes down from a federal level and they get that kind of federal support to deploy at scale. But regardless, I think, you know, as the conversation increases and this is made more of a priority by businesses and state and federal governments, fiber deployers have many incentives to get into these underserved markets quickly and at scale. So, if you had to summarize, what are some of the strategies and best practices that you'd advise these deployers on for future fiber implementations to underserved markets? What works? What works well at a cost point? What works well in terms of providing something actually sustainable for those communities? Break that down for us. I'll lead with the fact that while there is incredible demand, undeniable demand for connectivity, as Tom Reiman, the founder of the Broadband Group would always say, the opportunity for challenges is far greater than the opportunities for success when getting into this industry. Now, that's not to say it should be avoided. It's to that it should be respected and understood. All the challenges that need to be addressed in these type of deployments. There's a lot of entrepreneurial excitement around getting networks extended. And that's good. That's positive, a lot of good ideas. And it's important that we explore new opportunities. But we also want to avoid those networks which are not going to be sustainable, which run the risk of having a chilling effect across the industry. The approaches that we believe are the most successful, we look at Huntsville, Alabama, Springfield, Missouri, two markets where the happened to be the city owned electric utility deployed fiber infrastructure for their own internal operational needs. They had to get this communication infrastructure in their networks. They provided excess capacity, which they made available to qualified anchor tenants, who then leased access on that fiber turning the cost center into a revenue generating asset for the utility, and removing the traditional barrier of entry for them to enter that market by having the utility take on the capital costs, because the utility has a much longer term investment return thesis in Huntsville, Alabama, the anchor tenant is Google Fiber that network is now complete one thousand miles of fiber passing every single home in the city of Huntsville, Springfield, Missouri, the anchor tenant is CenturyLink, They are approaching the halfway point of their network build. The takeaway or the only thing that I would caution anyone is that there is no perfect network and it's gonna be a combination of different models and different network types that you're, know, HFC is not gonna go away and it shouldn't go away because it has a ton of value. Fiber to the home has its purpose and, you know, now you've have fixed wireless, you have wireless. So we have a lot of different, there is no perfect network, there is no one network that is gonna solve or bridge all of the gaps. So I think, you know, understanding the market you're servicing, understanding the demand from the, your subscribers, understanding the subscriber, build, they'll come, but understanding what is the experience you want to drive to your market and it's starting it backwards from the marketing and not from the head and out or the central office out. So I think it's really critical that we kind of put ourselves in the other side as a customer when we're planning the network. And like anything else, don't build up the network you wish we had, build something that is truly future proof. Sometimes we get caught up in because of our knowledge and we want to build the network we wish we had and it's probably a big mistake opposed to just looking at and building a network that is sustainable, and then there's a payback. And it sounds like it's gonna take a major mobilization beyond just any one company starting a project for deployment. I mean, it takes coordination with municipalities, with utility companies, with state and federal governments sometimes. It takes coordination with other B2B partners to assist in deployment. So, with all of those moving pieces in mind, how should the industry approach promoting an equitable distribution of this cable that really puts the communities first that are underserved? And what kind of mobilization is that really gonna take to, finally put an end to the Internet access gap that we see today. That was a long list and that was a loaded list Yeah, truly. Of the amount of areas that need to be addressed. And one component that wasn't mentioned, but I think implied, is time. It takes a lot of time to get these type of networks planned, funded, and deployed and successfully operating. It takes a lot of time. Blair Levin, who I referenced earlier, is well known of saying, Do you have the level of connectivity that you're going to need ten years from today? If not, the time to plan is now, because that's how long it takes to get these foundational levels of infrastructure investment in place. And I'm not talking about just the band aids, which we're seeing so much of right now, which are providing important levels of connectivity with the Wi Fi hotspots on the school buses and providing access to the underserved markets. But if we're talking about infrastructure, that's going to be there for the long term, And it's not just a band aid racing for a quick fix. It takes time because it's complicated. It's competitive. And it's technically, and operationally and politically challenging. You know, that's why I look at, you know, the experience of that Rick I know brings to the table of understanding the challenges and not getting excited about the opportunities blindly, because there will be challenges that are faced. And that's at the broadband group we always try to emphasize. Because, again, great benefit, great benefit. But there's a reason why there's so many underserved markets, the economics are tough to achieve. And with the experience that I understand Amphenol brings and with Rick's involvement, those are the type of partners that you want to make sure you have at the table. You know, and absolutely, you know, Jeff, when we used to work with the broadband group, and doing joint presentations in our previous life, we always presented a six to eight year bell curve to our customers, right? And people said, it's gonna take that long, yeah, maybe longer, but we're just being optimistic and giving them a six to eight year bell curve. To your point, there's a huge investment, a huge commitment and bringing the right players and being aware and knowing what you don't know to bring the right players in, it's really critical and we've seen a lot of projects that have been challenged over the last fifteen years because of that expediting or pushing things through and then unfortunately the payback was never there. So really, the planning stage is the most critical part of this process. We've brought up that government support a lot in our conversation today, but we haven't really defined the different roles each institution might play. So can you differentiate for us how local versus state versus federal governments need to differentiate their action to be most effective in supporting these underserved fiber communities as more fiber is rolled out? I mentioned the attention that is being achieved at the federal level, and that's so important. But it is going to be the state and local entities that really are going to have to lead as they will understand their local markets the best. You hear so much about the challenges of the federal level of understand mapping, understanding where the underserved markets really exist, and how to best allocate those funding. When we represent cities, they know where their gaps are, they know how they can best align with either their incumbents to create platforms for investment by increasing visible revenue, potentially lowering their costs, or if the incumbents aren't able to meet their needs, how they might find a qualified competitive provider or how they might themselves make the necessary investments, and then hopefully find a qualified operator to deliver those services. Obviously, the federal level is so important. And again, it is so great to see that there's so much attention at that level, but the local level and even the state level needs to have a proactive plan. They have to lead in terms of defining where their needs are and how the monies can best be allocated. Otherwise, it's just too challenging for at a federal level to get the targeted monies in the way in which they can most effectively be deployed. Yeah, I agree. I think that the federal government definitely has the key, you know, or the funding needs to come at from the federal level, but when you look at the the responsibility at the state level is much greater. And and I, you know, I look, I live in Georgia and Georgia has done an incredible job. Jeff, if you recall taking, we used to take customers down to downtown Atlanta to go to the, to visit the investment office of the state of Georgia and this was, you know, dates back what, fifteen, at least fifteen years, and they already had all the entire fiber plants of the state of Georgia mapped out and they could show that to a company that was potentially looking to invest in the state of Georgia. And if you look at the growth of the state of Georgia along those those fiber plants, right? So the telecom infrastructure and the state involvement in documenting and promoting that growth, it's really, they're the drivers, they're in the driver's seat, the funding and the commitment from the federal government is critical, but the state, it's on the state level, at the state level that needs to really drive it into the communities. All right, only a few more questions for y'all. I want to intersect the deployment of fiber moving forward in a few different ways. First, I want to see your thoughts on its impact to other industry players. So, as more fiber is rolled out to tier two and tier three markets, what impact do you imagine this is going to have on utilities, which in many cases are also underfunded or perhaps stretching existing old infrastructure to cover, you know, generally decaying communities? You know, it's often a domino effect, right? If one thing is underfunded, often several other things are as well. So, how are utilities in those markets going to be impacted for better or for worse, and what are some strategies to increase intelligence of the communities as well as the technology that utilities often use to support potentially this higher increase of energy flow? The United States electric grid is in desperate need of an upgrade. True. And call it the smart grid, call it grid modernization, call it grid of the future. New technologies need to be implemented onto the grid to allow for the implementation of distributed energy resources. These grids are no longer just pushing energy, they're having to manage the flow of energy as they travel in different directions, and originate in different locations via wind, solar, or other alternative energy resources. But the problem with the smart grid is that it's expensive. And you hit that same challenge of the economics are prohibiting the investment in the smart grid by way of the deployment of fiber infrastructure. And that is the beauty of the utility lease model that's being achieved in Huntsville, Alabama, and Springfield, Missouri. These utilities are able to deploy the fiber networks they need for the communication operation requirements, and then monetize it by providing access to qualified anchor tenants, whether that be providers to the homes, the businesses or wireless backhaul to improve wireless connectivity, it's the sharing of costs that can be achieved through that approach. You're also seeing electric utilities go all in, and becoming the provider of broadband services to residents and businesses. That's obviously a higher profile on higher up on the risk profile, because they're suddenly entering into a new vertical competing with legacy service providers. The model in Huntsville, Alabama, and Springfield, Missouri, the utilities are not getting into the business of being providers, they're simply enabling it through the investment in infrastructure. And I think that's that's exactly it, Jeff. I mean, if you recall, you know, when we were talking about smart grid and doing way back when, and that the broadband portion was going to be a byproduct in order for the, you the utility companies to monetize on the network, you know, that was always a very hard sell because how do you get that started, right? So I got to build this, lose money, so I can monetize it later and it's been, you know, a challenge, I mean, because that has been something we've been aware for a long time, but that upgrade is in dire needs, I mean, we need to get it done, you know, and the good news is that we are seeing more and more funding going into that broadband perspective, Some of the, you know, the RDOF investments are going in that direction. So we see a lot of utility companies involved in the RDOF round. So I think it would certainly help and it's creating a lot of visibility and hopefully they'll learn how to monetize this with the same model that you have in Huntsville and you have in Springfield, Missouri, you know. So I think that itself is definitely the direction, something that we didn't have way back when, you know, now you have a lot more services that you can capitalize across the network. And finally, just to intersect some more digital transformation technologies and, innovations that are intersecting with fiber, we've gotta talk next gen WiFi and five g. So as we see connectivity technologies like WiFi six, WiFi 6E, and five gs expand their footprints, how much will they rely on fiber infrastructure and how will this impact fiber to the prem deployment moving forward, as well as how industry players plan on their mass rollouts of all of this technology in a unified plan? I I'm not qualified to talk about five gs, you know, I'm a wireline type of an individual, certainly, the way I see it is fiber is everywhere and it's not, you know, it's going to continue to be everywhere and everything starts and ends with fiber. So the, as you push, you know, bandwidth, you're going to push fiber closer and closer to the customer, whether it's the home. So I think it will continue to coexist, I don't see that as a threat. People are going to be connected. Most people don't care if it's two cans and a string as long as they have connectivity and it's fast and it's reliable. So I don't see service, you know, all I see is the improvement of service levels but fiber is definitely the best conduit, the most economical conduit to deliver broadband and to deliver services. So it will always, whether it's a five gs, whether it's a small cell, everything coming into the closer you get to the user, the more fiber you're going to have in the network. Telehealth, distance education, opportunities to work remote, five gs, high quality Wi Fi. What do these all have in common? These are applications enabled by fiber. You know, when we speak, and I'm sure when Rick experiences that as well, and we talk about the importance of fiber to an audience that's this is outside their area of expertise, they'll raise their hand and say, Gee whiz, Jeff, you know, we're living in an increasingly wireless world. And here you are talking about all these wires. You sound like a dinosaur, what gives? And it's important to understand that all of the promises of five gs of high quality Wi Fi starts with the deployment of fiber infrastructure. It's like in your home, having high quality Wi Fi starts with that blue ethernet cord plugging into the router to then deploy the Wi Fi signal throughout your home. It's the same with cellular, it's the same with Wi Fi. That fiber optic infrastructure is an enabler of all the applications that will lead to an improvement in the way in which people can live, that will drive economic development, and it will allow for equitable access to the services that are so critical. There's roughly what, four hundred thousand cell towers in the US and you know, the last summer I saw somewhere around four hundred. Ninety percent of those cell towers are within a mile of a fiber plant, so that tells you how critical that infrastructure is in order to deliver the quality of service, the quality of experience that everybody needs on the everyday, on our everyday's life. So it's really critical that we understand that we may not see fiber, we may be connected to a five gs, but somewhere behind that connectivity, there is a fiber connection leading back to know where the service is going to be generated. Well, Jeff, thank you so much for your time, Jeff. This is incredible. Thank you for all the knowledge and sharing everything you did with us. Thank you. I enjoyed it, Rick. What a pleasure. So fun reconnecting with you and Yeah. All these years to see all the progress in our industry. It's pretty incredible. We weren't we weren't as crazy as we thought we were back then. Yeah. Hindsight is twenty twenty. That's something I've learned in, you know, my limited years here as well. But folks, thank you to both of you. And I think on that note, we're gonna go ahead and wrap up our conversation. So thanks again to our two guests, Rick Schiavinato, senior director of national sales for ABS, and Jeff Reiman, president of the Broadband Group. It's really been a pleasure chatting to both of you and sourcing your insights. And real quick before we close, Rick, if folks wanna find out more about how ABS is supporting the deployment of fiber to the prem, especially to underserved markets, how can they get in touch or how can they learn more? Yeah, please please go to our our website, amphenol broadband dot com and all the information is there, and feel free to contact us for support. And same question to you, Jeff, if folks want to find out more about the Broadband Group, some of your history in deploying fiber across the US, and if they just wanna get in touch, how can they do so? Please visit the broadband group dot com. We are, of course, headquartered here in fabulous Las Vegas, Nevada. So when the trade shows open back up again, please don't hesitate to reach out. We'd love to have anybody come visit our offices, have a chat down by the convention center or whatever might be convenient. Just I want to thank again Amphenol, Rick Scabinato for the opportunity to participate. What a treat. Thank you, Jeff. Thank you very much for everything. And thank you everyone for listening to today's episode of wavelengths on Amphenol Broadband Solutions Podcast. If you like what you heard and want to listen to previous episodes, make sure that you're heading to our website, amphenol broadband dot com. Again, amphenol broadband dot com for more information, and make sure you're also subscribing to Wavelengths on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. I'm your host, Daniel Litwin, the voice of B2B. Till next time.