NTCA 2007 Broadband/Internet Availability Survey Report
The views and opinions expressed in this submission are solely those of the authors and do not represent the views of the Department of Justice.
NTCA 2007 BROADBAND/INTERNET AVAILABILITY SURVEY REPORT
September 2007
DISCLAIMER: Data from the survey has been presented as reported.
To get more information on this report please contact Rick Schadelbauer at NTCA (703-351-2019, richards@ntca.org) or Scott Reiter at NTCA (703-351-2015, sreiter@ntca.org).
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FIGURES
Figure 1. Technologies Used to Provide Broadband
Figure 2. Availability of Dial-up and Broadband Service
Figure 3. Residential Dial-up and Broadband Take Rates
Figure 4. Broadband Marketing Promotions
Figure 5. Barriers to Broadband Deployment
Figure 6. Offering Video Service?
For the last nine years, the National Telecommunications Cooperative Association (NTCA) has conducted its annual Broadband/Internet Availability Survey to gauge the deployment rates of advanced services by its member companies.(1) In the late spring and early summer of 2007, NTCA sent an electronic survey form to each of the companies in NTCA's membership database; 175 members (31%) responded.
Ninety-nine percent of the 2007 survey respondents offer broadband to some part of their customer base, approximately equal to the 2006 rate and a dramatic increase from the 58% of the 2000 survey respondents who offered broadband. Respondents indicated that they use a variety of technologies to provide broadband to their customers: 99% of those who offer broadband utilize digital subscriber line (DSL), 32% fiber to the home (FTTH) or fiber to the curb (FTTC), 20% unlicensed wireless, 16% licensed wireless, 14% satellite and 12% cable modem. Only 29% of 1999 survey respondents offered DSL service, and none offered wireless broadband.
Dial-up connection to the Internet at 56 kilobits per second (kbps) is available to 91% of respondents' customers. Seventy percent can receive 200 to 500 kbps service, 80% 1 megabit per second (Mbps; down from 88% a year ago) and 48% 3 Mbps (up from 39%). On average, 15% of respondents' customers subscribe to 56 kbps service (down from 19% last year), 15% subscribe to 200 kbps to 500 kbps service (unchanged), 9% to 1 Mbps (up from 6%), 6% to 3 Mbps offerings (up from 4%), and 4% to greater than 3 Mbps service (up from 1%). Overall, dial-up take rates declined and broadband take rates rose slightly in the past year.
The typical respondent is 91 miles from their primary Internet connection. Seventy-three percent of those who recently changed backbone providers did so for price reasons. Eighty percent of respondents indicated they are generally satisfied with their current backbone access provider, while 6% are generally dissatisfied.
Eighty-seven percent of survey respondents indicated they face competition in the provision of advanced services from at least one other service provider, virtually unchanged from 86% a year ago. By comparison, only 66% of respondents to the 2003 survey indicated they faced competition and only 43% in the 1999 survey. Current competitors include national Internet service providers (ISPs), satellite broadband providers, cable companies and wireless Internet service providers (WISPs). Respondents are taking numerous marketing steps to increase broadband take rates, including free customer premise equipment installation, price promotions, bundling of services, free hardware and free software. Just over one-half of respondents find it difficult to compete with price promotions offered by competitors. Overall, 40% of survey respondents consider their company's marketing efforts to be "very successful."
Forty-seven percent of those respondents with a short-term fiber deployment strategy plan to offer fiber to the node to more than 75% of their customers by year-end 2007, while 12% plan to offer fiber to the home to at least 25% of their customers over the same time frame. Deployment cost remains the most significant barrier to wide deployment of fiber, followed by regulatory uncertainty, long loops, obtaining cost-effective equipment and low customer demand. Throughout the history of the survey, deployment cost has been respondents' most significant concern.
Seven percent of respondents currently offer voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) service, up from 3% last year. Fifty-four percent of respondents have plans to offer VoIP in the foreseeable future. Seven percent have providers offering, or planning to offer broadband over power lines (BPL) within their service area. Sixty-three percent of respondents offer video service to their customers, up from 58% last year. Seventy-two percent of those respondents offering video offer cable TV, 37% Internet protocol television (IPTV) and 4% direct broadcast satellite (DBS).
This latest broadband survey is a follow-up to similar surveys conducted in recent years by NTCA, and seeks to build upon the results of those surveys.(2) This year's survey asked about technologies used to provide broadband service, broadband availability and subscription rates, prices charged, quantity and type of competition, broadband marketing efforts, fiber deployment, emerging technologies, Internet backbone connections, finance and availability of capital, and also provided an opportunity for respondents to provide any specific comments they wished to share.
The survey URL for each part of the survey was distributed via e-mail and fax to all member companies in NTCA's database. The message contained instructions for online access to the survey. Responses were received from 175 member companies, a 31% response rate.(3)
The average survey respondent serves 5,326 residential and 1,691 business lines; a few large companies skew these numbers upward, hence the median respondent serves 2,859 residential and 633 business lines. Ninety-nine percent of survey respondents offer broadband(4) service to some part of their customer base. Respondents indicated that they use a variety of technologies to serve their customers: 99% utilize DSL, 32% FTTH or FTTC, 20% unlicensed wireless, 16% licensed wireless, 14% satellite, and 12% cable modem.(5) (See Figure 1.)
A vast majority (84%) of survey respondents are utilizing fiber fed nodes to extend the reach of DSL. Thirty-two percent indicated that the average distance from the digital loop carrier (DLC) to the end user was between 15 and 18 thousand feet (kft), 29% between 9 and 15 kft, 20% greater than 18 kft and 20% 9 kft or less.
Dial-up connection to the Internet at fifty-six kbps is available to 91% of respondents' customers. Seventy percent can subscribe to 200 kbps to 500 kbps service, 80% to 1 megabit per second (Mbps), 48% to 3 Mbps and 40% to greater than 3 Mbps service. (See Figure 2.)
On average, 15% of respondents' residential customers subscribe to their 56 kbps service, 15% subscribes to 200 kbps to 500 kbps service, 9% subscribes to 1 Mbps service, 6% to 3 Mbps service and approximately 4% to greater than 3 Mbps service.(6) (See Figure 3.) Typical prices charged range from $17.95 to $19.95 per month for unlimited dial-up service, to $34.95 to $49.95 for cable modem service, $34.95 to $44.95 per month for DSL service, and $39.95 to $54.95 for wireless broadband service.
Forty-one percent of survey respondents indicated they offer their customers so-called "naked DSL"--DSL service without a voice component. Take rates for naked DSL service are extremely low.
Survey respondents have come to view the provision of broadband as a crucial part of their operations. Eighty-nine percent consider broadband deployment very important for their company's bottom line, while 6% consider it somewhat important. With respect to respondents' standing in the community as the telecommunications provider of choice, 97% consider broadband deployment very important.
Internet Backbone
The typical respondent is 91 miles from their primary Internet connection. Seventy-three percent of those respondents who have recently switched Internet backbone access providers did so for price reasons, 37% due to quality of service concerns and 27% switched for other reasons, such as avoiding transport costs or obtaining diverse routing.(7) Eighty percent of respondents indicated they are generally satisfied with their current backbone access provider, while 6% are generally dissatisfied.
Competition/Marketing
Competition in broadband is becoming more prevalent and more varied: 87% of survey respondents indicated that they face competition from at least one other service provider for at least some of their customers. The typical respondent competes with one national ISPs, two satellite broadband providers, two wireless Internet service providers (WISPs) and one cable company. Other competitors mentioned include electric utilities, local ISPs and neighboring cooperatives. Fifty-three percent of those respondents facing competition indicated that their competitors were serving only the cities and towns in their service areas, while 47% said that competitors were serving customers throughout their service area.
The prospect of cable companies developing the capability to offer voice service is causing respondents some discomfort. Forty-five percent of respondents are very concerned, while 9% are somewhat concerned.
Rural ILECs are taking numerous steps in the marketing arena to increase broadband take rates. Eighty-five percent are offering free customer premises equipment (CPE) installation, 78% of survey respondents' companies are offering price promotions, 59% are bundling services, 53% are offering free hardware, 23% offer free software and 8% are offering other promotions, such as a free month of service.(8) (See Figure 4.) Fifty-two percent of respondents find it difficult to compete with price promotions offered by competitors, while 36% struggle to match competitors' service bundling. Overall, 40% rate their company's marketing efforts as very successful, while 39% rate them as moderately successful.
Fiber Deployment
Survey respondents indicated that their companies have some plans to deploy fiber to the curb (FTTC) and fiber to the home (FTTH) to their customers. Forty-seven percent of survey respondents with a short-term fiber deployment strategy expect to offer fiber to the node to more than 75% of their customers by the end of 2007, 9% plan to provide FTTC and 12% plan to offer FTTH to at least 25% of their customers. Fifty-two percent of respondents plan to offer fiber to the node to more than 75% of their customers by year-end 2009; 6% and 9%, respectively; plan to offer FTTC and FTTH to that same percentage of their customers.
Eighty-two percent of survey respondents identified the cost of fiber deployment as a significant barrier to widespread deployment. Regulatory uncertainty was the number two barrier (44%), followed by long loops (42%); obtaining cost-effective equipment (33%) and low customer demand (31%).(9) (See Figure 5.)
Seventy-seven percent of survey respondents see modest to significant benefits to fiber deployment versus the current cost of deployment; 90% expect to see modest to significant benefits versus the cost of deployment three years from now.
VoIP
Seven percent of survey respondents currently offer voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) service to their customers, up from 3% one year ago. Fifty-four percent of respondents have plans to offer VoIP service in the foreseeable future, down from 71%. Twenty-eight percent of respondents perceive VoIP to pose a significant threat to their current operations, while 27% perceive VoIP as a moderate threat, down substantially from 37% and 50% last year, respectively.
BPL
Seven percent of survey respondents have providers offering, or planning to offer, BPL service within their service area, up from 5% last year. Four percent perceive BPL to pose a serious threat to their operations (down from 5% last year and 10% two years ago), while 10% perceive BPL as a moderate threat (down from 38% last year).
Video
Sixty-three percent of survey respondents offer video service to their customers. Ninety-five percent of those offer video under a cable franchise, while 2% offer video as an Open Video System (OVS) pursuant to Part 76, Subpart S of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Seventy-two percent of those respondents offering video offer cable TV, 37% IPTV and 4% direct broadcast satellite (DBS).(10)
Of those respondents not currently offering video, 17% (6% of all respondents) plan to do so by year-end 2007, 31% (12% of all respondents) expect to do so by year-end 2008, and 6% (2% of all respondents) expect to do so by year-end 2009. The remaining 45% (17% of all respondents) currently have no plans to offer video service. (See Figure 6.)
Miscellaneous
Survey respondents were asked what specific actions--on the part of the FCC, state regulators, etc.--would enable an accelerated pace of broadband deployment in the respondents service area. Their responses are presented in Appendix A of this report.
Regulatory stability to insure cost recovery
Allowing video investments to be used in settlements
Guaranteed rate of recovery. Take the uncertainty out of it.
Firming up USF. Equal access to video content.
Being free from burdensome regulations
Embrace the concept and make the USF funding predictable and sufficient over the life of the fiber
Passage of continued HCL USF support
Revised depreciation rate for fiber distribution
To know we can continue to get USF.
Can they cut the red tape that makes getting permission to cross federal lands take so long?
I think there is no real answer to this.
Continuation of existing USF and settlement rules
Include broadband in universal service.
Establish a firm policy regarding USF funding for broadband fiber.
We can offer 256 [kbps] or more to all customers. Tax credits?
Help us get more video content for an IP based network and get reasonably priced content for VOD.
Finish the intercarrier compensation & USF proceedings so we have some stability.
Cost recovery issues including the ability to earn a reasonable rate of return.
We have been and will continue to deploy broadband.
Continued USF support is essential.
We are already 100% without the help of the government.
FCC needs to remove uncertainty and finalize intercarrier compensation issues and USF issues
Additional funding, help with financing, etc.
USF applied to broadband deployment
Stable USF & regulatory certainty
Already able to reach every subscriber in our exchanges with broadband.
We need to have a reasonable return for the investment we are making
Support for broadband, resolve USF issues
Increase USF support in high cost areas to deploy FTTH.
Allowing a power collar to be installed on the customers meter base to power the UPS.
Certain cost recovery through access rates or USF
Regulatory certainty of cost recovery methodology
Analog video rules change at NECA and FCC
Definitive policies from Federal USF. Stability of the USF plans from FCC and Congress
Am already providing to all of my exchange
Stabilize USF funding. Make broadband available for USF funding.
Continue subsidy support for high cost areas
Stabilty in our industry from less regulation
Incentives from the federal and state agencies.
USF & access reform. No net neutrality rules
Give us some assurance that USF funds will be stable at some level
Cost support or broadband loans to ILECs for IPTV.
Without USF support it will not happen.
Regulatory certainty and stability
Guaranteed recovery--USF, KUSF, etc.
Regulatory certainty and/or applying USF to support the network.
1. Following the completion of the 2001 survey in December 2001, it was decided that subsequent Broadband/Internet Availability Surveys would be conducted in the first half of the year in order to capture year-end data. Consequently, no survey was conducted and no survey report published in calendar year 2002.
2. Copies of this and previous NTCA survey reports may be downloaded from the NTCA Web site, www.ntca.org.
3. Based on the sample size, results of this survey can be assumed to be accurate to within ± 6% at the 95% confidence level.
4. For the purpose of this survey, broadband is defined as throughput of 200 kbps in one direction.
5. Percentages sum to greater than 100% as some respondents utilize more than one technology to serve their customers.
6. Actual rural broadband subscription rates are likely significantly higher than the numbers shown here, as survey respondents are joined by a wide variety of competitors in the provision of broadband services within their service area.
7. Totals exceed 100% as respondents were allowed to select more than one reason for switching providers.
8. Totals exceed 100% as respondents' companies may be offering more than one marketing promotion.
9. Totals exceed 100% as respondents were allowed to select more than one barrier.
10. Totals exceed 100% as respondents may provide more than one type of video service.