Story

Verizon has had issues for a number of years now. There are simply not enough people that WANT copper to support the weight of their infrastructure. Yes, I know it is subsidized, but Verizon is a BIIIIG company, and there is a reason they qualified for those subsidies. (Yes, they actually do qualify, it's not simply a case of "senator so-and-so in my back pocket" though I'm sure that helps)

Before Fios came out, there was talk about further separating their successful wireless business from their failing (yup) landline business. Fios being part of landline, many in the company have looked to it as their Savior. Not surprising that they want people to switch. Fios is profitable, copper is not. If they can get enough people to switch, they can try to make the case that there isn't enough customer demand for the aging technology, and maybe, MAYBE they won't have to keep supporting it. Dumping that piece of the business would probably even give them the leverage over the unions they'd need to scale back the northern workforce (In the south, it's all contractors) It's a big deal for them.

Without copper they would likely lose their government subsidies, so is there a reason to INSIST that they support a part of their business that they no longer want to support? Yes, there are some people that want to keep copper wires because they can be more reliable.. but I've known people in my life that wanted to keep their outhouses because the new-fangled replacements weren't appealing to them, weren't as simple, relied on running water (which like HSI might not be available in a disaster/storm/lapse in payments) and yet most would agree that the advances outweigh the potential pitfalls. I haven't heard anyone in the last few years advocating outhouses.

Will cellular/digital phones vs copper be all that different in 10-20 years?