<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Broadband Growth Falls Sharply in the U.S.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/2009/08/17/q2-2009-broadband/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/08/17/q2-2009-broadband/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 06:17:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Seriously, FCC, Get a Move On &#171;</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/08/17/q2-2009-broadband/#comment-268463</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Seriously, FCC, Get a Move On &#171;]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2010 23:01:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/?p=64189#comment-268463</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] If FCC wants to build a case for better broadband, I personally feel that they should try to collect data faster and deliver it faster than any research firm. Otherwise, they should outsource to commercial research companies that can do the job faster. Why not use that information? Unless I&#8217;m missing a big point, it seems there isn’t that much of a variation: The FCC says at the end of the second quarter of 2009 there were 71 million broadband subscribers. Research from Leichtman Research Group, which doesn’t include satellite, Internet connections puts.... [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] If FCC wants to build a case for better broadband, I personally feel that they should try to collect data faster and deliver it faster than any research firm. Otherwise, they should outsource to commercial research companies that can do the job faster. Why not use that information? Unless I&#8217;m missing a big point, it seems there isn’t that much of a variation: The FCC says at the end of the second quarter of 2009 there were 71 million broadband subscribers. Research from Leichtman Research Group, which doesn’t include satellite, Internet connections puts&#8230;. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Broadband Growth Will Come From New Tech, Not New Adds</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/08/17/q2-2009-broadband/#comment-221360</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Broadband Growth Will Come From New Tech, Not New Adds]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 15:19:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/?p=64189#comment-221360</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] &#124; 7:19 AM PT &#124; 0 comments &#124;  0 tweets retweet &#187;     Broadband growth in the U.S. has slowed considerably in the last two years and future growth for online access technologies will come less from people adopting broadband for [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] | 7:19 AM PT | 0 comments |  0 tweets retweet &#187;     Broadband growth in the U.S. has slowed considerably in the last two years and future growth for online access technologies will come less from people adopting broadband for [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: With Broadband, Quality Should Trump Penetration</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/08/17/q2-2009-broadband/#comment-221359</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[With Broadband, Quality Should Trump Penetration]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Sep 2009 18:01:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/?p=64189#comment-221359</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] indicator that we’re approaching this point is the tapering growth in broadband connections. As Om recently pointed out, broadband growth slowed sharply in the second quarter. Although economic factors are at play, this [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] indicator that we’re approaching this point is the tapering growth in broadband connections. As Om recently pointed out, broadband growth slowed sharply in the second quarter. Although economic factors are at play, this [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: U.S. Broadband Growth Continues to Slow</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/08/17/q2-2009-broadband/#comment-221358</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[U.S. Broadband Growth Continues to Slow]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2009 22:02:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/?p=64189#comment-221358</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] As we&#8217;ve previously noted, the number of net new broadband subscribers during the first half of 2009 was down 27 percent from the first half of 2008, to about 2.1 million. UBS Research expects this downward trajectory to continue.  We expect continued declines in the remainder of 2009 and 2010, with total broadband subscriber growth of just 5.4% in 2009 and 3.6% in 2010, vs. 8.4% in 2008. We expect broadband subscriber growth to slow to 3.5% in 2010, down from an estimated 5.4% in 2009. This will drive consumer broadband revenue growth of just 2.6%, down from 6.9% expected in 2009. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] As we&#8217;ve previously noted, the number of net new broadband subscribers during the first half of 2009 was down 27 percent from the first half of 2008, to about 2.1 million. UBS Research expects this downward trajectory to continue.  We expect continued declines in the remainder of 2009 and 2010, with total broadband subscriber growth of just 5.4% in 2009 and 3.6% in 2010, vs. 8.4% in 2008. We expect broadband subscriber growth to slow to 3.5% in 2010, down from an estimated 5.4% in 2009. This will drive consumer broadband revenue growth of just 2.6%, down from 6.9% expected in 2009. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: renaissance chambara alias Ged Carroll - Links of the day</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/08/17/q2-2009-broadband/#comment-221357</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[renaissance chambara alias Ged Carroll - Links of the day]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 00:02:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/?p=64189#comment-221357</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Broadband Growth Falls Sharply in the U.S. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Broadband Growth Falls Sharply in the U.S. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JfStX</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/08/17/q2-2009-broadband/#comment-221356</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[JfStX]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2009 00:49:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/?p=64189#comment-221356</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Well..you may be right in metro areas....
but if they plan to grow in numbers, they will need to expand in rural areas. Rural areas are where the potential is.  Wireless carriers are rapidly adding/upgrading those areas to take advantage of the growth/revenue.  I know....I&#039;m rural and my sprint 3g  has gotten faster in the last 2 weeks.  I&#039;m hitting consistent 2megs down now]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well..you may be right in metro areas&#8230;.<br />
but if they plan to grow in numbers, they will need to expand in rural areas. Rural areas are where the potential is.  Wireless carriers are rapidly adding/upgrading those areas to take advantage of the growth/revenue.  I know&#8230;.I&#8217;m rural and my sprint 3g  has gotten faster in the last 2 weeks.  I&#8217;m hitting consistent 2megs down now</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: richwklein.com &#187; State of Broadband in Rural Iowa</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/08/17/q2-2009-broadband/#comment-221355</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[richwklein.com &#187; State of Broadband in Rural Iowa]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2009 18:04:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/?p=64189#comment-221355</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Broadband Growth Falls Sharply in the U.S. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Broadband Growth Falls Sharply in the U.S. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin Walsh</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/08/17/q2-2009-broadband/#comment-221354</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kevin Walsh]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2009 17:34:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/?p=64189#comment-221354</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It seems that since the macro economic picture remains dire, politicians are increasingly enamored with second order derivatives. Yes, the economy is still shrinking but it’s shrinking more slowly than in the past. Yes, people are still losing jobs but they’re losing them at a slower rate than they did last quarter. Yes, the patient is still bleeding but…, well, point made.

These are, of course, efforts to seek out positive data points (green shoots) among a sea of negative indicators.

In some ways the inverse is happening with regard to broadband growth. This market sector is actually growing yet since it’s not growing as fast as it once did we take that as a negative (Government Motors should be so lucky).

I would argue that broadband growth is being tempered the fact that, as Om points out, broadband penetration already exceeds two-thirds. Further growth will inevitably decline as penetration approaches the level at which PCs have penetrated US households. In fact, it can be mathematically proven that broadband growth will, at some point, bottom out at just a little less than population growth.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It seems that since the macro economic picture remains dire, politicians are increasingly enamored with second order derivatives. Yes, the economy is still shrinking but it’s shrinking more slowly than in the past. Yes, people are still losing jobs but they’re losing them at a slower rate than they did last quarter. Yes, the patient is still bleeding but…, well, point made.</p>
<p>These are, of course, efforts to seek out positive data points (green shoots) among a sea of negative indicators.</p>
<p>In some ways the inverse is happening with regard to broadband growth. This market sector is actually growing yet since it’s not growing as fast as it once did we take that as a negative (Government Motors should be so lucky).</p>
<p>I would argue that broadband growth is being tempered the fact that, as Om points out, broadband penetration already exceeds two-thirds. Further growth will inevitably decline as penetration approaches the level at which PCs have penetrated US households. In fact, it can be mathematically proven that broadband growth will, at some point, bottom out at just a little less than population growth.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Om Malik</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/08/17/q2-2009-broadband/#comment-221353</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Om Malik]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:53:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/?p=64189#comment-221353</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I explained this in my post: it is not just the slowdown. I think the market penetration is a much bigger problem right now. The number of people with computers and the number of people with internet access (high speed) is pretty much in sync now. So that is a big big problem.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I explained this in my post: it is not just the slowdown. I think the market penetration is a much bigger problem right now. The number of people with computers and the number of people with internet access (high speed) is pretty much in sync now. So that is a big big problem.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Om Malik</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/08/17/q2-2009-broadband/#comment-221352</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Om Malik]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:50:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/?p=64189#comment-221352</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think the mobile broadband is pretty interesting right now -- it is taking the really low end users, people who are doing basic Internet tasks such as email, surfing, Facebook etc and giving them an option.

However, the way I see it, today&#039;s mobile broadband packages fail to thrill because of the bandwidth constraints and the data transfer limits. However going forward it should become part of people&#039;s broadband package. I think we are seeing signs that carriers are experimenting along those lines/]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the mobile broadband is pretty interesting right now &#8212; it is taking the really low end users, people who are doing basic Internet tasks such as email, surfing, Facebook etc and giving them an option.</p>
<p>However, the way I see it, today&#8217;s mobile broadband packages fail to thrill because of the bandwidth constraints and the data transfer limits. However going forward it should become part of people&#8217;s broadband package. I think we are seeing signs that carriers are experimenting along those lines/</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
