I posted this on the Gerson Lehrman site in January 2008.  I decided to repost this blog on my own site because I believe it is as true today as it was last year.

Rural broadband deployment is necessary if we expect to see ubiquitous nationwide broadband. Is it all talk or is it politics? Is it a matter of ROI?

The rural sector is always overlooked in favor of dense urban markets.

For investment bankers, it is easier to calculate returns on investment for markets that have tens of thousands of people per square mile than it is for dozens of people residing in a square mile.

In other words, dial-up Internet is alive and well in the rural markets. However, without access to broadband technologies, the rural markets cannot grow. Rural broadband is not being embraced by the investment community because there is a fear that adequate returns cannot be generated for investors.

We need to understand what broadband is for the rural market and what it will require to make rural broadband a reality.

As the article implies, cost is probably the single biggest reason why certain technologies are deployed and why some are not in a rural market.

How do you convince the investment community that broadband technologies ought to be deployed in the rural market? What comprises the business case for rural broadband?

At the end of the day all rural telcos need to consider the factors Governing Rural Deployments:

- Type of service provider (carrier)
- Type of data/content/service
- Destination of data – aka topographical challenges
- Traffic volume
- Subscriber density per square mile
- Cost components associated with providing and supporting transmission facilities and equipment
- Overall cost of technologies
- Projected revenue of the service

Advances in technology aside and cost reductions aside. The business case for deploying broadband in a rural market requires a high degree of thoughtfulness, care, and little room for error.