After spending part of the week at Supercomm and then jetting off to Europe for a client meeting, I found myself confronted by the confusion that all prospective broadband customers might face--confusion in choosing a type of broadband service, as well as trying to use broadband while traveling both domestically and abroad. The confusion arises from the overabundance of choice, information and marketing by the plethora of broadband players and options. These broadband options also provide confusion for those of us--investors, financial and industry analysts, and consultants--who analyze the moves of the broadband service providers in our businesses and who should find it easier to deal with broadband choices as a user (although we never do).

Over the past two weeks I’ve observed and used what may be the left and right brain of broadband provider moves. First, just before Supercomm, SBC launched a rock-bottom promotional price of $15 per month for new subscribers who order their DSL service over the Web. At first, I didn’t understand why SBC is being this aggressive? Is it to gain market share or customers, or could it possibly begin to use its now large DSL-base, more than 5 million subscribers, to grow profits? Back when SBC was introducing DSL (under the Pronto moniker), I recall the same 5 million customer figure highlighted as the number that was needed to break even on the investment. Now, if that breakeven point still holds, adding more subscribers becomes gravy, as long as it is priced above marginal variable costs. So, SBC’s price promotion, while increasing acquisition costs, makes sense.

Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg used part of his talk at Supercomm to respond to SBC’s Web-ordered DSL promotion by saying Verizon will not lower DSL prices to match SBC’s move and that Verizon’s broadband service is already priced below its cable competitors. Now, the RBOCs do not directly compete with each other for residential broadband, and their current major broadband competitors--the cable companies--do typically price their cable modem broadband services at a higher price point, claiming they deliver higher value because of the higher speeds typically available. A few days later Verizon launched its own Web-ordered DSL promotion at $20 per month. I don’t get this one--I’m confused. Can somebody help me here?

While in Chicago I was able to use broadband in my hotel room. In-room broadband access is now table stakes and almost ubiquitous for the business traveler. I was charged nothing for broadband service by the hotel I stayed in. I don’t know how it provided the service (probably via cable), but it was free. Wi-Fi, however, wasn’t available in the guest rooms, as it frequently isn’t--I guess I’ll have to get one of those mini Wi-Fi routers to travel with or spend more time at a local Wi-Fi equipped cafe. Providing free broadband may be a competitive move for a hotel seeking to capture guests from other hotels that frequently charge for in-room broadband services, as much as $15 to $20 per day. I guess the properties that charge for the service are trying to make up for some of the revenues they’ve lost since nobody uses the hotel’s room phones anymore, given the surcharges applied and the ubiquity of mobile phones--but that’s another topic for another article. I did have one issue, and this is a frequent problem: I was unable to use my office Exchange-based e-mail to send messages; I could receive, but not send. Instead, I used my home office e-mail ID to send e-mail, which confused some of the people I communicate with. (Maybe that’s why a client said he didn’t receive the report I sent?)

I jetted off to Europe for the second part of my tale. When I arrived at my hotel, I was told they had broadband Internet service using power line technology to distribute the connection to guest rooms--something not broadly available in the U.S. I went to my room with the power line adapter and three electric current converters in hand, hoping I could get everything connected and not blow out any of my expensive personal electronics (mobile phone, PC, PDA, iPod, razor--the shaving tool, not the cellular phone). After I managed to get the current converters into the weirdly configured electric outlets and connect the power line adapter to the Ethernet port on my laptop, I was connected almost instantly--and it was fast. And, unlike my Chicago experience, my Exchange-based e-mail wasn’t blocked, so there was no need for my alternate e-mail and no SPAM-blocked rejections of important documents. Surprisingly, when I checked out of the hotel, I was charged only $8 for the use of the broadband connection--I don’t know if it was for the connection or the adapter--I assumed the latter as it wasn’t a daily charge.

Is the power line option going to become viable in the U.S. as another wired alternative, or will Wi-Fi/WiMAX become the third major alternative for consumer/road-warrior broadband? From my current experience, the ease of making power line work, the apparent high speed (I did not try to measure it officially) and the wide availability of electric outlets could make this a seductive alternative.

So, am I right to be confused? Certainly broadband Internet is becoming ever-present for the public--at home or when traveling. But broadband is not always easy to use, provider transparent, or available at the expected pricing (even if free isn’t the expectation). It is a global broadband world, but with lots to be resolved: wireline or wireless, free or not.

I didn’t even get to raise the issue of IPTV--another hot topic at Supercomm. And did I mention my European trip was to Zurich, where IPTV is being tested by Swisscom’s Bluewin, with a delay in deployment announced while I was there?

David H. Yedwab is the Executive Vice President of The Eastern Management Group and can be reached at dyedwab@easternmanagement.com.