August 6, 2001
Commentary
Wall
Street Journal 08.06.01
Tumbling Into the Telechasm
By George Gilder. Mr. Gilder, editor of the Gilder Technology
Report, is author of "Telecosm: How Infinite Bandwidth Will Change
Our World" (Free Press, 2000). He may own stock in the companies mentioned
in this article.
When Bill Clinton assumed office nine
years ago, I predicted he would enjoy one of the greatest economic
booms in the history of the world. Impelled by the spread of the Internet,
the onset of fiber optics, and a tenfold increase in venture capital
-- unleashed by the lower tax rates and deregulation of the Reagan
administration -- the Clinton economy had it made. Moreover, until
the election year of 2000, Mr. Clinton actually pushed the economy
along with beneficent trade policy, an astonishing opposition to Internet
taxes and restrictions, and a 30% capital-gains tax cut that yielded
hugely more revenues than projected by demand-side models.
Devastating Crunch
The Bush economy, unfortunately, not only possesses no such immunity
to bad policy, but also is gravely vulnerable to policy mistakes accumulating
by the end of the Clinton term. A high-tech depression is under way,
driven by a long siege of deflationary monetary policy and obtuse
regulation that has shriveled hundreds of debt-laden telecom companies
and brought Internet expansion to a halt.
The entire telecom sector -- what I term the telecosm -- is engaged
in a heroic capital-intensive buildout of a communications infrastructure
thousands of times more cost-effective than today's. Promising to
make interactive video as pervasive as voice telephony today, such
infrastructure projects create demands for funds that outreach the
resources of venture capital. Just as some $200 billion of junk bonds
from Drexel Burnham and others sustained the previous hybrid build-out
of optics, cable and cellular, similar debt issues are crucial to
the new infrastructure of all-optical networking. But there ends the
similarity with the previous build-out, which emerged during a time
of real supply-side tax cuts, OPEC tax collapse, deregulation, and
general monetary stability, and was vindicated by soaring cash flows
and equity valuations. By contrast, the far more promising new infrastructure
is withering in the face of monetary, tax and regulatory blunders.
For debt-burdened companies, nothing is so oppressive as deflation
-- a dearth of money -- which inflicts soaring real interest burdens,
sinking asset values, and collapsing growth. The leaders of the telecosm
have to pay off debt in appreciating dollars while cash flow and collateral
declines, and banks deny the kinds of rollovers that saved the likes
of MCI in the 1980s. Real interest rates are now drifting upward faster
than the Federal Reserve can reduce them. Monetary economists prattle
about too many dollars while the dollar soars against deflated currencies,
such as the yen, with its interest rate near zero. From industrial
staples such as steel (down 42% in four years) to the monetary tocsin
of gold (down 40% in four years), commodity prices lie in a deep trough.
Meanwhile, the Bush "tax cut" degenerates into a ten-year gantlet
of meaningless shifts and shuffles, the OPEC tax hike persists in
its wanton gouge, and regulations strangle the broadband Internet.
Essential to the Internet economy is the expectation of a steady
increase in the speed and capacity of connections. Nearly every dot-com
was betting on it. The glitches and delays of dial-up modems abort
70% of all intended Internet transactions and bar the business plans
of thousands of dot-coms and Internet service providers, not to mention
vendors of streaming video, distance learning, video telecommunications
and Internet malls.
The only reason for the so-called "fiber optics glut" is the near
deliberate starvation of connections to homes and small businesses.
It is a classic socialist famine, where the warehouses are full but
the people are starving for lack of market distribution systems. Part
of this is because of a few poor business decisions in the industry,
but most of it comes down to intrusive regulatory policy in an era
of deflation.
Typical of bad regulation is a Federal Communications Commission
policy called Total Element Long Run Incremental Costs, or Telric,
summed up simply as a price cap on what telephone companies can charge
for links to homes and businesses. Designed in the late 1990s to prevent
"monopoly rents," the cap is based on an estimate of costs that would
apply in a fully competitive environment when bandwidth is a commodity.
But in dynamic technology markets such as Internet broadband, monopolies
are inevitable, virtuous and fleeting. Every innovation creates a
monopoly at the outset, and monopoly rents pay for financial risks
and costs entailed in bringing innovation to market. Like any price-control
scheme, Telric choked off supply, taking the profits out of the multibillion-dollar
venture of deploying new broadband pipes.
Compounding Telric were "open access" and "unbundling" rules that
require companies installing advanced Internet gear to share pipes
with others. The goal was to stop monopolies, but what regulators
did was to bar Internet investment by privatizing the risks and socializing
the rewards. No entrepreneurs will invest in risky, technically exacting
new infrastructure when they must share it with rivals. At first restricted
to telcos, the open-access rules have since been extended to cable,
where they balked Michael Armstrong's bold AT&T plan to compete
with the Bell companies using cable TV plant.
The absence of broadband local loops also withers the optical Internet.
The $44.8 billion write-off and $8 billion loss announced last week
by JDS Uniphase signals the devastation of the most promising communications
technology in the history of the planet. Treating JDS Uniphase as
a budding monopoly, the Federal Trade Commission permitted its merger
with SDL only on condition that it sell its Rushlikon pump laser facility
to Nortel.
Some monopoly. Uniphase last week devalued its SDL pump laser acquisition
by some $35 billion. The write-off -- the largest in business history
-- was partly because of the collapse of last-mile traffic growth.
But it was also because an efflorescence of new laser and amplifier
technologies -- from such companies as NP Photonics and Princeton
Optronics -- are already making conventional pump lasers obsolete.
Regulators can't keep up.
Before the FTC attack on Uniphase, regulators casually destroyed
the Internet strategy of WorldCom. Under Bernie Ebbers, Worldcom planned
an attack on the real telopolies around the globe through the use
of Internet for both data and voice. Suffering from mazes of conflicting
connections, with each data packet making some 17 hops between routers
before reaching its destination, today's Internet competes only fitfully
with the telecom establishment. But by purchasing and upgrading the
Internet facilities of MCI and Sprint, WorldCom planned to transform
its portions of the Internet into a coherent broadband system.
Instead, upholding the fantastical view that WorldCom was becoming
an Internet monopolist, U.S. regulators defended the existing monopolists
against the WorldCom challenge, forcing the sale of MCI's Internet
facility to Cable & Wireless in Britain and barring the acquisition
of the Sprint network. By upholding a false notion of competition
-- one in which no one can win or make any money -- the FTC largely
wrecked WorldCom, the most aggressive monopoly buster on the planet.
Internet Sclerosis
As difficult as it may be for Republicans to acknowledge, they have
become part of the Internet sclerosis. Led in Congress by regulation
lovers such as Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska, pressed by Republican governors
such as Nevada's David Levitt to impose Internet taxes, and beset
by conservatives who blame the Internet for pornography (rather than
prosecuting pornographers), the party is imperiling the crucial expansion
of the Internet economy.
Meanwhile, the president is preening for pollsters and junk science
greens while hundreds of telecommunications companies tumble into
the telechasm, choking on debt easily sustainable under favorable
tax and regulatory conditions, but now rendered devastating by a global
deflation.