One thing that I never see discussed whenever this type of topic comes up is how badly managed the traditional telecoms have been. My first job out of college back in the 80&#x27;s was with Bell Labs and I worked on a task force to look at how to replace all the old electro-mechanical switching offices. The team I was on came up with the idea to use fiber optics to centralize to one or two main CO&#x27;s for each state. Traditionally, the way the telecoms set up their networks is they have a CO (Central Office) in each neighborhood, the reason was because of the old analog technology from the early 1900&#x27;s, the signal simply could not travel very far so there needed to be a station within 5 to 10 miles from the customer. Of course there is no need for that with fiber. Our plan would have saved billions, but they instead decided to just over lash the fiber to existing copper runs and replace the electro-mechanical switch with a digital office. It was a huge blunder in my view. If you look at which companies make money and which loose money in telecom, you can easily see the relationship, cable co&#x27;s, CLEC&#x27;s, mobile operators all use the centralized approach, one or two main offices per state and fiber to backhaul to those offices, the losers, the legacy telco&#x27;s have 100&#x27;s of CO&#x27;s for each offices of the profitable companies. It is obvious to see in operational costs but they are completely blind to it. I would put this into the category of &quot;Inventor&#x27;s dilemma&quot; type of problem.