Didn't the previous email say there were only 3 money makers? Android, search engine, and Youtube?
$555 billion isn't bad for three money makers. LOL ----- Original Message ----- From: Josh Reynolds To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 7:30 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave? http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/10/investing/google-alphabet-all-time-high/ "Shares of Google parent company Alphabet (GOOGL, Tech30) hit an all-time high Tuesday of more than $813 a share. The company is now worth $555 billion." "The company is still growing at a rate that would make most companies envious. Analysts are forecasting that profits will increase more than 15% this year and that sales will be up 20%. That's truly remarkable when you consider just how colossal Google is. Sales are expected to top $88.5 billion this year and exceed $100 billion in 2017." So, that may take awhile there Robert. On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 7:26 PM, Robert Andrews <[email protected]> wrote: > Sorry to sound like not a google fanboy but it's a typical phd company.. > They look at the paper pile before the experience pile... & yes they will > eventually go down because of it... > > On 08/11/2016 03:24 PM, Brian Webster wrote: >> >> Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can tell you >> there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the >> deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole owners (read >> competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more of the >> project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and San >> Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than Google >> budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that cities would >> remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much existing >> broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think Google >> thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had with the >> first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities (Like Kansas >> City did). >> >> Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit their >> networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on pre-sign ups >> (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic problem in >> planning construction especially with underground deployment. This also >> drove up costs. >> >> Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will see from >> them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark fiber, >> capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems where they can. >> They may use microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high construction >> cost areas such as railroad crossings. They are looking at wireless to >> basically go more from the curb to the customer, especially in MDU cases. >> Existing competition and/or existing contracts within an MDU makes it risky >> to do a wired play if they cannot assure themselves of a huge take rate >> within the MDU. I see their wireless play as more of a high capacity short >> hop last mile, but even then they will have challenges with spectrum, >> interference and capacity. >> >> While we all would think Google is a great company with resources to do >> whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot from the >> inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty somethings with ADD and >> too much money. They also seem to have the attitude that older folks are too >> far behind the times to possibly know what they are talking about. Google is >> certainly not a utility infrastructure company and lack the people, tools >> and skill sets to be one. They are their own best cheerleaders and they have >> a dangerous habit of believing their own hype internally and are not real >> good at listening to fresh viewpoints and outside input. >> >> Thank You, >> Brian Webster >> www.wirelessmapping.com >> www.Broadband-Mapping.com >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown >> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 1:29 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave? >> >> They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a camel through >> the eye of a needle. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Josh Reynolds >> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:04 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave? >> >> So, I get it. You guys are sitting around feeling so smug with your WISP. >> >> We're talking about one of the largest and most powerful companies in the >> world though. Do you really think they don't have some of the best RF >> engineering talent in the world on their payroll? >> >> They're not doing anything different than many of us have done, which is >> evaluate the business case for each technology and pick the most appropriate >> one for the application. If it was going to cost you a couple hundred >> thousand just to cross an intersection, you'd be doing the same thing too. >> It's the smart play. >> >> At least they're not doing this in LEC style, which would mean "saying >> they can't do it unless they receive federal subsidies". >> >> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:59 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Wait until they experience ducting ;) >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: Bill Prince >>> To: [email protected] >>> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:48 AM >>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave? >>> >>> It's apparently "too expensive" to do underground fiber. At least in >>> San Jose. >>> >>> Anyone know anything about Webpass? >>> >>> >>> bp >>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> >>> >>> On 8/10/2016 9:44 AM, Gino Villarini wrote: >>> >>> Google Fiber considering fixed microwave technology as alternative to >>> fiber. >>> Interesting times! >>> >>> http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/08/google-fiber-del >>> ays-san-jose-project-may-switch-to-wireless-instead/?comments=1 >>> >>> >> >> >> >
