I found this article interesting, and seems to be about this topic.
The DOCSIS Dilemma in the Fiber Age. https://broadbandlibrary.com/the-docsis-dilemma-in-the-fiber-age/
The regional calculation: Where geography meets finance
The DOCSIS-versus-fiber decision isn’t uniform across cable footprints. In dense urban markets with high ARPU and aggressive fiber competition, the MVT dominates. Delaying upgrades means watching premium subscribers defect to fiber competitors, with revenue losses quickly exceeding upgrade costs.
In lower-density suburban or rural markets, the TVM gains weight. If fiber deployment economics don’t work and competitive pressure remains modest, cable operators can rationally delay major investments. The capital saved compounds over years while competitive threats remain theoretical.
This geographic segmentation creates strategic complexity. Cable operators must simultaneously upgrade high-value urban nodes while milking legacy infrastructure in less competitive markets, a resource allocation challenge that tests management sophistication and financial discipline.
The strategic verdict: No good options, only least-bad choices
The harsh reality facing cable operators is that both frameworks, TVM and MVT, point toward uncomfortable conclusions. Massive DOCSIS investments offer uncertain returns and potential technological obsolescence. Yet competitive inaction guarantees market share erosion and strategic decline.
Some operators are making the hard choice: abandoning incremental DOCSIS upgrades in favor of their own fiber deployments. Some operators have announced significant fiber builds, effectively conceding that cable’s technology treadmill has limits. This approach acknowledges that the MVT, the cost of losing competitive position, exceeds the TVM saved by delaying fiber investment.
For cable operators still betting on DOCSIS evolution, success requires near-perfect execution: upgrading infrastructure faster than competitors deploy fiber, at costs that preserve acceptable returns, while maintaining service quality throughout the transition. It’s a narrow path with little margin for error.
The fundamental lesson transcends cable technology. In competitive markets facing technological disruption, strategic position once lost proves extraordinarily expensive to reclaim. Sometimes the rational choice isn’t to optimize financial returns on a spreadsheet, but to invest aggressively to defend competitive ground, even at seemingly unfavorable returns.
For cable operators, this means the time for hedging may be past. The MVT demands action, even if the TVM counsels patience. In the broadband wars, delay is simply defeat in slow motion.
The DOCSIS dilemma is that cable is using the time value of money to justify staying the course, while the market is increasingly prioritizing the money value of time.
Eventually, the cost of waiting will outweigh the savings of not digging. When the speed of light becomes a utility requirement rather than a luxury, the TVM argument falls apart because you can’t save money if you have few customers left.
