Will Google Fiber Kill Cable?

While Google's (NASDAQ: GOOGL  ) solution to cable has been a huge success in the limited markets in which it has been introduced, questions remain as to whether it can compete with the major cable companies like Comcast (NASDAQ: CMCSA  ) and Time Warner (NYSE: TWX  ) . Where Google Fiber may represent what cable should be, there is a significant barrier that may prevent it from breaking through and becoming dominant.

In the video below, Fool.com contributor Doug Ehrman discusses two major reasons why Google Fiber should kill cable and one vital reason why this may never come to pass.

Ina addition to its role in content delivery, Google has made a habit of driving strong returns for its shareholders. However, like many other web companies, it's also struggling to adapt to an increasingly mobile world. Despite gaining an enviable lead with its Android operating system, the market isn't sold. That's why it's more important than ever to understand each piece of Google's sprawling empire. In The Motley Fool's new premium research report on Google, we break down the risks and potential rewards for Google investors. Simply click here now to unlock your copy of this invaluable resource.


Read/Post Comments (2) | Recommend This Article (1)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On June 01, 2013, at 10:28 AM, wh32 wrote:

    What I don't get is why they didn't use the latest high speed 802.11ac as a 100-200 mini cell WiFi distribution to about 30-50 homes each with roof top directional antenna to allow low cost multiplexing to each user. It looks like an 802.11ac node is realistically capable of up to 2Gbps aggregate (at 5GHz) with spatial streams and beaming and each home could get peaks of over 100Mbps and averages of 30Mbps. Fiber drives each node avoiding dedicated cabling to each home which is a dominate cost whether fiber or copper. All told, this might cut the cost in half.

    It looks like the real reason for the 1Gbps is to support TV service which apparently you can only get as a combo 1Gbps + TV at $120/month due to the need of supporting many simultaneous channels since the settop box can record up to 8 channels simultaneously (it is not clear what the channel limit is for the whole home or what the bps coding per channel is). One would think that if they had a virtual set top box (also cheaper), they would only need to stream (VP9, etc.) at 5-10Mbps per TV to get high quality HD, needing only 10-30Mbps WiFi to each home.

    But Google apparently lost interest in WiFi since they gave up on their experiment in their home town of Mountain View, CA where their own WiFi (older and slower 802.11b) is now useless due to equipment failures and lack of maintenance and not due to excess loading (see Google's own Mountain View WiFi forum).

  • Report this Comment On June 01, 2013, at 10:29 AM, wh32 wrote:

    100-200 meters

Add your comment.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 2464024, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 12/17/2014 9:36:25 PM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...


Advertisement