It's happening for two basic reasons, reports one real estate exec who wishes to remain anonymous. "People are building businesses in different regions," he says. "And they've discovered that it's easier to buy an operation that already has that infrastructure in place. Second, the broadbands are running out of money, just like the dot-coms did, and they have to keep running back to the trough for more. If they merge, it's easier to get that capital because they can argue economies of scale and greater firepower. Ultimately, it'll be better for owners simply because so many broadbands are duplicating efforts, and I don't think they're all that efficient." He sites Everest Broadband's recent acquisition of Metrocom as the opening bell for the trend.

Daren Hornig, EVP of locally based OnSite Access, disagrees with his analysis. "The magnitude of the consolidations and bankruptcies will have a huge impact on real estate," he says, pointing out that many owners are attracted to broadbands for the warrants they offer. "Those warrants may not have any value. The shakeout can also have a damaging effect on buildings, since owners are giving away access and precious riser space to companies that may not exist shortly."

And yet, in another way, it might be good in that it will free up the market, Hornig adds. "There must be some 50 competitors out there," he says. "The market can't withstand that many companies. A lot of buildings have multiple on-site service providers, and that dilutes the financial revenue capabilities. The market can't support that."