Yes, most markets I have the 450i equipment in there is a lot of competition from DSL and TW Cable. some people I have heard getting DSL in the range of $30-50/monthly (at least for first 12 months) and cable is around $50 for new signups, they are giving away 60mbps cable here as their entry level package now for new signups.
On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Lewis Bergman <[email protected]> wrote: > Sounds like a missed opportunity. Are you leaving the price the same due > to competitive pressure? > > On Feb 4, 2017 8:02 AM, "Kurt Fankhauser" <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I am about to roll out some faster packages in select areas. Calling them >> 5G speeds... They are same price as the legacy packages just has more >> speed. Other stipulation to be eleigble for "5G" speeds you need to have >> LOS to tower and requires a 1 time activation fee (cost of PMP450 license >> key upgrade on SM) >> >> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 11:42 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> i would venture a guess wendys back end system isnt nearly as simplified >>> as its front end system >>> "up to" is not conducive to network preservation at all >>> having a 25mb plan on epmp with mcs 11 isnt going to give you much >>> aggregate capacity at the AP when that user is on, so you go from 1 pissed >>> off customer to 15 and an investment in another access point >>> Id rather the headache of maintenance occur from the comfort of my couch >>> than on top of a grain elevator in the winter >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 10:25 AM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Sounds way too complicated. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> This should be like going to Wendy’s. Single, double, triple. Small >>>> fries, large fries. Pull forward to the first window. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> If that’s still too complicated, do like Frontier, everything’s “up to >>>> 6 Mbps”. In other words, best effort, it is what it is. If you as the >>>> customer choose to ignore the “up to”, too bad for you. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *That One Guy >>>> /sarcasm >>>> *Sent:* Friday, February 3, 2017 10:16 AM >>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Providing Service at Different Rates / in >>>> Different Markets >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> once we edit out the multiples of 1024 to be multiples of 1000 to >>>> appease fcc they accept them without issue, whether the data is copacetic >>>> isnt a big concern to me as we way underreport what we actually deliver and >>>> advertise >>>> >>>> I guess alot of it depends on your company mission with FCC. If its >>>> funding based, or competitor lockout based, then better looking numbers is >>>> probably more important. Our pprimary purpose is just to get it accepted so >>>> theyll quit bothering us, so we do accuracy and under reporting. Compared >>>> to the numbers alot of folks present to the fcc, if there were somebody >>>> looking at it, they would be like "how the hell are these guys even >>>> competing" >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> these arent our rates, but this is an example: >>>> >>>> Tier 1 tier 2 tier 3 >>>> >>>> Tiers are the speeds, the customers arent sold a tier >>>> >>>> rate 1 (10gb) rate 2 (20gb) rate 3 (30gb/overage) >>>> >>>> rates are what the customers are sold (our actual capacities are much >>>> much higher) the top rate has the overage, and there is an un advertised >>>> rate we put heavy users on if theyre continually generating high overages >>>> to bring their costs down if they pay promptly on a historical basis >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> so we create >>>> >>>> t01-r01 >>>> >>>> t02-r01 >>>> >>>> t03-r01 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> t01-r02 >>>> >>>> t02-r02 >>>> >>>> t03-r02 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> t01-r03 >>>> >>>> t02-r03 >>>> >>>> t03-r03 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 9 plans on the back end >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> the customers are place into groups in powercode based on their tier, >>>> so customer service can only select the rate correlated to the tier, in >>>> this example there are only three options >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> we have more than 3 tiers, more than 3 rates, and because powercode is >>>> awful, we have to duplicate everything for our annual discount. Our back >>>> end, needless to say has a huge number of plans, very few of which are >>>> selectable on any given account >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> the tier (speed) is easy and has a set of criteria based on the site >>>> installed to and its capabilities, the access point installed to and its >>>> capabilities, and the final factor being actual performance. >>>> >>>> so if we have a 12mb tier and a 6mb tier, if the customer can only >>>> achieve 10mb, they go on the 6 mb tier. aside from the fsk 900, nobody goes >>>> on a tier they cant fully achieve consistently, and we can drop tiers if >>>> there is degradation. Network preservation takes priority over end user >>>> preference.....so much less headaches. and all our reporting is accurate, >>>> if we had an fcc audit, we wouldnt get nailed for overreporting like many >>>> others would >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 9:12 AM, Kurt Fankhauser < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> I thought Powercode FCC 477 export was broken and full of erros as >>>> another recent thread indicated? Also Powercode needs to have two sets of >>>> speeds in each plan, one being FCC export reported speed, and the other >>>> being the actual rate limited speed. Then I wouldn't have to tweak the >>>> export since I like to rate limit at 110% of their plan speed. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Cameron Crum <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Christopher, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> FCC basically wants advertised plan rates which makes the whole thing >>>> BS, but what else are you going to do? I guess they assume you aren't >>>> advertising more than you can actually deliver. Taking the speed at each >>>> customer location is somewhat impractical for such purposes unless you just >>>> do a one time test and call it that forever. The FCC doesn't really have a >>>> way to report a "variable" rate plan. I have a customer who goes through >>>> this every year. He runs everything wide open and has data caps. So he lets >>>> you get as much "speed" as your radio can handle but bills for overages >>>> every month. He ends up doing a speed test on install and putting that into >>>> the "baseline" info for the customer and we use those numbers for the 477 >>>> grouping them together into as few "buckets" as possible. So it can be >>>> done, but it takes more effort and is certainly not "traditional". >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Cameron >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 7:01 PM, Christopher Gray < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> An exported form is only as good as the data entered. I export from >>>> Sonar with no problem, but I go through a decent amount of effort to define >>>> a long list of services to match each speed available, and it is getting a >>>> little out of hand. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> When selling capacity, not speed, how do you rate your speed for your >>>> 477? The max it could be? The lowest you'd ever expect? How do you define a >>>> speed in your billing system for the 477 if the speed is variable? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I see now that my biggest problem seems to be having 2 variables with >>>> each product (price and speed... my "standard" product has speeds ranging >>>> from 1.5 to 10 and prices ranging from $50 to $73). I think I just need to >>>> simplify the product offering by fixing one of the variables, and possibly >>>> have a zip code entry to view the available products. Half of my network is >>>> 50% more expensive to operate than the other half, so there are significant >>>> price differences between some areas. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 7:36 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> EXPORT-FORM 477 >>>> >>>> LITERALLY THAT SIMPLE >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 5:33 PM, Christopher Gray < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> How do you keep track of speeds for your 477? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 5:50 PM, Mathew Howard <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> We just have the same set of plans (with names, rather than speeds) >>>> with the same prices everywhere, and the speeds set differently depending >>>> on the area - so if you're in an area where we can cover you with ePMP 5ghz >>>> half a mile from our office, you'll get a vastly different speed than if >>>> you're out in the middle of nowhere where we can only cover you with 900mhz >>>> FSK from a tower with a grand total of 5 customers on it, but for billing >>>> purposes the plan is the same. The only way to find out what the actual >>>> speed is going to be in any given area is to ask us. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 12:47 PM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> The other way is to define different service options and say that not >>>> all options are available in all areas. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> If there's an option that's more money for less speed nobody will >>>> intentionally choose it, but you can tell them that's the option available >>>> in their area. This way happens to also work seamlessly with billing >>>> systems since you have to differentiate the rate options in the system that >>>> way anyhow. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> One problem you will not avoid no matter how you spell it out is that >>>> some people will draw their own conclusions about why you're charging them >>>> more than people in another area. I.E.: They'll say you're a greedy, evil >>>> person with selfish and petty reasons for discriminating against them. I >>>> don't have any faith in my fellow humans, so take that with a grain of >>>> salt. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------ Original Message ------ >>>> >>>> From: "Sterling Jacobson" <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> Sent: 2/1/2017 1:37:38 PM >>>> >>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Providing Service at Different Rates / in >>>> Different Markets >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Ugh, that is difficult. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> If it were me, at the very least I would just make a pricing page >>>> online and spell it all out for each ‘area’. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> If you want to be more discreet you could just advertise the lowest >>>> priced rate/plan and say there are higher speed options to contact you. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The fancy way would be for them to fill out a form and get an immediate >>>> response via email or online as to their rate plans per the area. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Christopher >>>> Gray >>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 1, 2017 11:28 AM >>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Providing Service at Different Rates / in Different >>>> Markets >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> How do others handle providing service in different markets at >>>> different rates? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> As I've expanded into different areas, I've found I need to charge >>>> significantly different rates and have to provide different speeds. I >>>> adjusted my website to say things like: "...up to" and "...starting at >>>> $...". It feels a bit misleading. I want to be clear without publishing >>>> every single service option. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I'd like some suggestions for more appropriately treating the different >>>> areas. Perhaps entering a zipcode or town to see price options? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thank you - Chris >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your >>>> team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your >>>> team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team >>> as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >>> >> >>
