What are their alternatives Bill?

On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:32 AM, Matt Jenkins via Af <[email protected]> wrote:

> I am using an RB2011 as a VPLS NID to provide 100meg DIA to a customer. It
> works great.
>
> Matthew Jenkins
> SmarterBroadband
> [email protected]
> 530.272.4000
>
> On 10/29/2014 05:56 PM, David Milholen via Af wrote:
>
>> We do similar and if the customer doesnt have these things at the
>> termination point we offer a lease or purchase for the extended equipment.
>> I still cant get away from Mikrotiks CCR routers instead of the latter.
>>
>> On 10/29/2014 7:29 PM, Paul Stewart via Af wrote:
>>
>>> That pricing is similar to what we charge when using PTP600 directly
>>> back to a fiber fed "hub site".  At the customer site, we install an APC
>>> 1500 UPS (with SNMP management) and a Juniper SRX router - fully managed
>>> and monitored from NOC.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Matt Jenkins via Af
>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 5:00 PM
>>> To:[email protected]
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] price range for a dedicated 100x100 service.
>>>
>>> Base Price:
>>> 1yr Contract: $1980/mo
>>> 2yr Contract: $1870/mo
>>> 3yr Contract: $1760/mo
>>>
>>> We negotiate discounts from those prices. Usually end up giving
>>> customers 20-30% off to "make a deal". DIA services are always negotiable.
>>> Sometimes we have to add to them to deal with all the upgrades necessary to
>>> get to the customer.
>>>
>>> Install depends on required equipment. Airfiber is usually not a big
>>> deal. Licensed link could be the cost of the link spread over term of
>>> contract.
>>>
>>> You also have to consider what it takes from your backbone to deliver
>>> that. How many sites from your upstream is it? Do you need to charge enough
>>> to cover future upgrades to your backhauls, routers, etc? What about
>>> upgrades to UPSes in the path?
>>>
>>> Just some things to consider.
>>>
>>> Matthew Jenkins
>>> SmarterBroadband
>>> [email protected]
>>> 530.272.4000
>>>
>>> On 10/29/2014 01:25 PM, Bill Prince via Af wrote:
>>>
>>>> No Comcast here.  No AT&T here. Others as well.
>>>>
>>>> Only real competition at this site would be bonded T1 lines. Qty 1 T1
>>>> in this location would be ~~ $500 per month.
>>>>
>>>> There might be another Wireless provider that could get through the
>>>> hole in the trees, but the number would be very, very limited.
>>>>
>>>> bp
>>>> On 10/29/2014 1:22 PM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What are Comcast\TW\AT&T\Zayo\etc. selling 100 megs for? That's where
>>>>> you want to sell your 100 megs, assuming you're not losing your ass
>>>>> at that rate.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----
>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL><https://plus.google.com/+Intelligent
>>>>> ComputingSolutionsDeKalb><https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligen
>>>>> t-computing-solutions><https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> ---
>>>>> *From: *"Bill Prince via Af"<[email protected]>
>>>>> *To: *"Motorola III"<[email protected]>
>>>>> *Sent: *Wednesday, October 29, 2014 1:57:39 PM
>>>>> *Subject: *[AFMUG] price range for a dedicated 100x100 service.
>>>>>
>>>>> We have a new subscriber we're providing dedicated 24x24 service
>>>>> right now.
>>>>>
>>>>> He's asked for a quote for dedicated 100x100 service.  The link is ~~
>>>>> 8.5 miles.  Right now, I'm thinking we need to put in a licensed link.
>>>>> The site is active with 2 PMP450 APs, and I do not want to interfere
>>>>> on a site with relatively tight spectrum demands, so anything in 5.8
>>>>> is out of the question.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't really need technical advice, but I'm looking for advice on
>>>>> how to price this.  Typically, we charge 30-50 % of the equipment
>>>>> cost and then price the monthly recurring to recover the remaining
>>>>> equipment cost over 12 months.  However, I would like to entertain
>>>>> alternatives.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> bp
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>> --
>>
>
>

Reply via email to