Network infrastructure takes a bit much capital for VC, even if done cheaply.

Fiber is more limited by the stuff at either end allowing bandwidth to be upgraded by changing the endpoints. Makes for a more sensible investment for heavy duty broadband than using wireless.

On similar note, I can see a private equity/venture investment in a wholesale fiber company that focused on using the cheapest methods to deliver fiber to as many homes as possible and rent out the fiber to all comers. I realise a bit pie in the sky but I expect that a small company that coordinates construction contractors and telco infrastructure contractors would be cheaper than having a telco with its massive overhead and revenue streams to protect do it.

Yes and I think Amazon is well positioned for this, perhaps more-so that Apple. Amazon has the infrastructure to delivery cheaply (something I'm not sure Apple can easily replicated with partnerships or otherwise) which is going to be a big bonus (and shows the non-revenue benefits of AWS to Amazon as well).

I think it would be in the interests of Amazon, Google, Microsoft et al to look at directly funding the roll-out of 100mb+ broadband through an investment vehicle. All three have enough fiber of their own to provide the backbone – it is the last mile where it falls down & I wouldn't be surprised if they can deliver it at lower cost and faster than the incumbents or telcos generally.

You are right about the pre-requisites for video streaming going mainstream, but I expect that the winners and losers in this space will largely be determined before then serving early adopter customers and pockets of the population with great broadband.

I think that a big determinate on shift to streamed content is going to remain broadband links. I've shifted lots of my TV/video viewing to my laptop but problems remain and they are mostly around the last mile. Even with 8mb BT the viewing quality isn't great and badly effected by network load.

Come the point of 20+ mb (or more likely 50+ mb) with a contention ratio of 20:1 rather than 50:1 or 100:1 we see today, then shift to streaming will take off.

Network infrastructure takes a bit much capital for VC, even if done cheaply.

Fiber is more limited by the stuff at either end allowing bandwidth to be upgraded by changing the endpoints. Makes for a more sensible investment for heavy duty broadband than using wireless.

On similar note, I can see a private equity/venture investment in a wholesale fiber company that focused on using the cheapest methods to deliver fiber to as many homes as possible and rent out the fiber to all comers. I realise a bit pie in the sky but I expect that a small company that coordinates construction contractors and telco infrastructure contractors would be cheaper than having a telco with its massive overhead and revenue streams to protect do it.

Yes and I think Amazon is well positioned for this, perhaps more-so that Apple. Amazon has the infrastructure to delivery cheaply (something I'm not sure Apple can easily replicated with partnerships or otherwise) which is going to be a big bonus (and shows the non-revenue benefits of AWS to Amazon as well).

I think it would be in the interests of Amazon, Google, Microsoft et al to look at directly funding the roll-out of 100mb+ broadband through an investment vehicle. All three have enough fiber of their own to provide the backbone – it is the last mile where it falls down & I wouldn't be surprised if they can deliver it at lower cost and faster than the incumbents or telcos generally.