Webpass? that¹s the reason they bought it! Proven business model operating in top cities
On 10/27/16, 12:27 PM, "Af on behalf of Ken Hohhof" <af-boun...@afmug.com Gino Villarini President Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968 [cid:aeronet-logo_310cfc3e-6691-4f69-bd49-b37b834b9238.png] on behalf of af...@kwisp.com> wrote: >Microwave to MTU/MDU rooftop. Proven business model. Ask Teligent, >Winstar, Nextlink. In fairness, now almost 20 years later, there is more >demand for what they are selling. But also more competition. > >And it's not like nobody is doing this already. Like in Chicago SilverIP >comes to mind. > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown >Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 11:05 AM >To: af@afmug.com >Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google Fiber is no more > >I predict the PhD syndrome is going to also affect the wireless end. >Vivant >tried and failed. > >30 somethings that slept through physics are going to run up against the >hard limits of trees, hills and rain. > >Doesn't matter how crazy the radio is, they will learn as everyone that >tries RF distribution learns. > >5 years they will be back to fiber. Or deciding not to be part of the >transport solution. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Robert >Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 7:49 AM >To: af@afmug.com >Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google Fiber is no more > >Phd syndrome... Getting an advanced degree at a big Uni gives you >almost zero experience in the trenches... The move to wireless means >that they can buy their way into the FCC and move down from there... > >On 10/27/16 6:40 AM, Brian Webster wrote: >> I worked directly on the San Jose and Sand Diego projects. I was >> brought in by one of the main contractors to help reduce costs and >> increase efficiency. Google had way too many ï¿1Ž230 somethingsï¿1Ž2 who >> failed to listen to experienced telecom professionals. That was one of >> their biggest faults. It was insane to try and build a network in San >> Jose that was going to have to be built mostly underground. That >> market already had new AT&T U-verse fiber and Time Warner with a very >> strong network. Heck I could get 100 meg speeds on Wi-Fi at the hotel >> I stayed in. Their Ego to build in their own backyard was pushing the >> build more than anything. >> >> >> >> The concept of cherry picking neighborhoods actually drove costs up. >> When they wanted a citywide network design, that is what they were >> delivered, but then try and build out only neighborhoods they wanted >> while still trying to figure out how much of their backbones, huts and >> neighborhood distribution system needed to be put in place to service >> the piecemeal buildout approach, when you were already having to open >> ditches, while having to be a mostly underground build? Yea that was a >> nightmare too! Then letï¿1Ž2s talk about how they had no clue how hard >> the MDU market is to secure. They gave no real consideration to >> existing deals in the buildings, or the cost of having to wire on >> their own because the building owner did not actually own the existing >> cable plant and such. These projects were not just a simple math problem >to solve. >> >> >> >> They naively thought every city was going to welcome them with open >> arms like Kansas City did. They believed the political hype the >> politicians told them to lure them to their cities, then when actual >> laws both of physics and real came in to play, the numbers looked a >>whole >lot uglier. >> Underground building in established cities is a nightmare in both >> costs, regulations, logistics and amount of work required. Just simple >> things like trying to gather data on all the existing underground >> infrastructure (that has no central source of documentation) was >> painful and costly. You canï¿1Ž2t get drawings approved without first >> showing you will not be interfering with existing utilities already >> underground. In many cases you have to manually locate this stuff and >> then map it and then do your design around that information. Other >> issues to overhead builds were poles that would not pass loading >> calculations, pole owners who were less than cooperative or that >> pulled out new loading rules that they themselves donï¿1Ž2t follow and >> you can see where it was not a simple process. The employee count to >> deal with all of this on a large scale at the pace they wanted to move >>was >not small by any stretch. >> >> >> >> This was not new news. They pulled the plug on all of this stuff back >> at the beginning of July. >> >> >> >> Thank You, >> >> Brian Webster >> >> www.wirelessmapping.com<http://www.wirelessmapping.com> >> <http://www.wirelessmapping.com> >> >> www.Broadband-Mapping.com<http://www.Broadband-Mapping.com> >> >> >> >> *From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett >> *Sent:* Thursday, October 27, 2016 7:32 AM >> *To:* af@afmug.com >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google Fiber is no more >> >> >> >> As they should. Don't build where people who can't pay or don't want >> your service. >> >> >> >> ----- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> >> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL><https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentC >> omputingSolutionsDeKalb><https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent- >> computing-solutions><https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> >> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix><https://www.linkedin.com/company/m >> idwest-internet-exchange><https://twitter.com/mdwestix> >> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> >> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> >> >> >> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> -- >> >> *From: *"Rory Conaway" <r...@triadwireless.net >> <mailto:r...@triadwireless.net>> >> *To: *af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> >> *Sent: *Wednesday, October 26, 2016 11:28:52 PM >> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Google Fiber is no more >> >> In other cities, they cherry picked. >> >> >> >> Rory >> >> >> >> *From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Sterling >> Jacobson >> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 26, 2016 7:00 PM >> *To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google Fiber is no more >> >> >> >> From the director of one of the Google Fiber builds (in Provo) that is >> not the case. >> >> >> >> He said they overspent on contractors MAJORLY. >> >> And that was just to expand the existing network to all homes in that >> area. >> >> >> >> He argued with his bosses about he extravagant added fees on >> construction but they just said to pay them, no questions asked. >> >> >> >> I had some of those figures from him at that conversation and some >> costs were over 80x what it should have been. >> >> >> >> My best guess is that all the fiber build in certain areas increased >> the contract cost of build into the stratosphere. >> >> >> >> And now they are reigning it in and going wireless to attempt to >> defray the costs. >> >> >> >> At least with Provo they were not allowed to cherry pick, it was build >> everyone. >> >> And it seems like they picked up a large portion of the communities, >> but I didnï¿1Ž2t get overall take rate. >> >> >> >> *From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Rory Conaway >> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:56 AM >> *To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google Fiber is no more >> >> >> >> Absolutely they cherry picked. Then they went into MDUï¿1Ž2s for >> pennies and lost their shirts. >> >> >> >> Rory >> >> >> >> *From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Reynolds >> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 25, 2016 9:34 PM >> *To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google Fiber is no more >> >> >> >> I'd love to see their overall take rates. I have heard numbers of >> 75-85% in more affluent areas. They cherry picked neighborhoods for sure >though. >> >> >> >> On Oct 25, 2016 10:15 PM, "Rory Conaway" <r...@triadwireless.net >> <mailto:r...@triadwireless.net>> wrote: >> >> Big surprise there. They built it and no one came. >> >> >> >> Rory >> >> >> >> *From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com <mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] >> *On Behalf Of *Tushar Patel >> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 25, 2016 7:14 PM >> *To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google Fiber is no more >> >> >> >> Their contractor are still hiring installer in Austin. >> >> >> >> Need to probably understand why those cities not others? >> >> Tushar >> >> >> >> >> On Oct 25, 2016, at 9:06 PM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com >> <mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com>> wrote: >> >> New ones. They're still deploying existing networks. They just >> opened up a few new areas in Kansas City recently. >> >> >> >> On Oct 25, 2016 9:03 PM, "Jaime Solorza" <losguyswirel...@gmail.com >> <mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Moving folks to wireless.... Aye Dios >> >> >> >> On Oct 25, 2016 7:56 PM, "Gino Villarini" <ginovi...@gmail.com >> <mailto:ginovi...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> >> https://gizmodo.com/google-fiber-halts-operations-in-ten-cities-178821 >> 4992?rev=1477443092657&utm_campaign=socialflow_gizmodo_facebook&utm_so >> urce=gizmodo_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow >> >> >> >> > > >
