Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due

[Jack Unger]

Thanks

David E. Smith wrote:
> Jack Unger wrote:
>   
>> delete
>> 
>
> That only works if you do it silently. By publicly posting that you're 
> deleting an email, you in fact draw more attention to it.
>
> David Smith
> MVN.net
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   

-- 
Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
Cisco Press Author - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
Vendor-Neutral Wireless Design-Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting
FCC License # PG-12-25133 Profile 
Phone 818-227-4220  Email <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due

[Brad Belton]

Agreed...



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David E. Smith
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 11:18 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due

Jack Unger wrote:
> delete

That only works if you do it silently. By publicly posting that you're 
deleting an email, you in fact draw more attention to it.

David Smith
MVN.net




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due

[David E. Smith]

Jack Unger wrote:
> delete

That only works if you do it silently. By publicly posting that you're 
deleting an email, you in fact draw more attention to it.

David Smith
MVN.net



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due

[Jack Unger]

delete

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Sure I'm trolling, Ryan.
>
> Just name for me the last ten successful small electric utility startups.
>
> See if you can find for me the last ten ILEC's to start up as a "small 
> business".
>
> And name for me the last 10 cities you know of with competitive water or 
> sewage companies.
>
> And then remind me again why it's "good" that we become a "regulated public 
> utility"?
>
>
>
>
> 
> 
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "D. Ryan Spott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 10:40 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due
>
>
>   
>> On Jul 15, 2008, at 8:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> 
>>> Why on earth would you want to be a "public utility"?
>>>   
>> Because I serve the public? Because that is how I was able to get my
>> franchise with the gov't for right of way access.
>> 
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   

-- 
Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
Cisco Press Author - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
Vendor-Neutral Wireless Design-Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting
FCC License # PG-12-25133 Profile <http://www.linkedin.com/in/jackunger>
Phone 818-227-4220  Email <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due

[reader]

Sure I'm trolling, Ryan.

Just name for me the last ten successful small electric utility startups.

See if you can find for me the last ten ILEC's to start up as a "small 
business".

And name for me the last 10 cities you know of with competitive water or 
sewage companies.

And then remind me again why it's "good" that we become a "regulated public 
utility"?







- Original Message - 
From: "D. Ryan Spott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 10:40 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due


>
> On Jul 15, 2008, at 8:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Why on earth would you want to be a "public utility"?
> Because I serve the public? Because that is how I was able to get my
> franchise with the gov't for right of way access.




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due

[D. Ryan Spott]

On Jul 15, 2008, at 8:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Why on earth would you want to be a "public utility"?
Because I serve the public? Because that is how I was able to get my  
franchise with the gov't for right of way access.
>
>
> There are no small businesses in the public utility sector.
I am in the public utility sector, am I too big?
>
> There are no small business entries into the public utility sector.
My business is a small business.
>
>
> There is no innovation in the public utility sector.
I think I am pretty innovative.
>
>
> Public utilities are the least competitive and efficient businesses  
> and
> means of service delivery.
What?
>
>
> Why do you want to be put out of business?
I don't at this point, but maybe sometime in the future.
>
>
> If you become a "regulated public utility", 99% of all WISP's will  
> be GONE.
I don't think I represent 99% of all WISPs.
>
>

At this point I think we all need to just stop feeding the troll.  
FWIW, I am pretty much done responding to this troll.

ryan



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due

[Jack Unger]

delete

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Now I see the motivation.   Money.  Fast, easy, unearned, grant money from 
> the taxpayers.
>
> I am disgusted to my core.
>
>
>
> 
> 
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 2:54 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due
>
>
>   
>> This should be the mechanism to inform competition. And use the 
>> information
>> to establish Grant programs for small Providers.
>> 
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   

-- 
Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
Cisco Press Author - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
Vendor-Neutral Wireless Design-Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting
FCC License # PG-12-25133 Profile <http://www.linkedin.com/in/jackunger>
Phone 818-227-4220  Email <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due

[Chuck McCown - 3]

You are sooo mis informed.  There are thousands of small businesses, mom and 
pop telcos in this nation.  Best business in the world.  We do FTTH in the 
most rural areas of the nation.  No innovation?  You are an ignorant person.
- Original Message - 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 9:57 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due


> Why on earth would you want to be a "public utility"?
>
> There are no small businesses in the public utility sector.
>
> There are no small business entries into the public utility sector.
>
> There is no innovation in the public utility sector.
>
> Public utilities are the least competitive and efficient businesses and
> means of service delivery.
>
> Why do you want to be put out of business?
>
> If you become a "regulated public utility", 99% of all WISP's will be 
> GONE.
>
> What a way to promote industry health and speak for WISP's
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> 
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 7:08 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due
>
>
>> Then I guess you do not want to evolve into a public utility.
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due

[reader]

Now I see the motivation.   Money.  Fast, easy, unearned, grant money from 
the taxpayers.

I am disgusted to my core.






- Original Message - 
From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 2:54 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due


>
> This should be the mechanism to inform competition. And use the 
> information
> to establish Grant programs for small Providers.




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due

[reader]

Why on earth would you want to be a "public utility"?

There are no small businesses in the public utility sector.

There are no small business entries into the public utility sector.

There is no innovation in the public utility sector.

Public utilities are the least competitive and efficient businesses and 
means of service delivery.

Why do you want to be put out of business?

If you become a "regulated public utility", 99% of all WISP's will be GONE.

What a way to promote industry health and speak for WISP's








- Original Message - 
From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 7:08 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due


> Then I guess you do not want to evolve into a public utility. 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due

[Scottie Arnett]

Tom,

I agree with all your comments but this one: 
>They should be tracking, anywhere (ZIP CODE), that there is recorded >to be 
>an underserved person, the area should be considered underserved.

It needs to go beyond the zipcode(I understand the FCC wants this now, and will 
be heck for all of us)!

In my area, I am seeing the local incumbent rural telco serve two or three 
people to satisfy a ZIPCODE is offered broadband service. AlthoughI know 
the new reporting requirements the FCC wants can be a PITA to me, it might 
actually help in my situation.

Scott

-- Original Message --
From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: WISPA General List 
Date:  Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:54:04 -0500

>What Ironic about the State rep's comments was
>
>If they got the availabilty information from providers,  why would it be 
>invaluable, if the intent to use the data was to let providers know where 
>areas are under served?
>THEY ALREADY HAVE  THE DATA YOU COLLECTED IT FROM THEM!!! DUH!!!
>
>There is a flip side though.
>
>One of the most common occurances is, LECs and Cable Cos selectively picking 
>when and where to serve someone or not, regardless of whether they could.
>If the LECs and CableCos, were required to report who they said "qualified" 
>it is a mechanism to hold them accountable for when they do not. Whether 
>from the perspective of False advertising, or not honoring their 
>monopoly/franchise obligations to serve.
>
>The missing point is, SMALL PROVIDERS DON"T HAVE THE INFORMATION.  The 
>prupose should be to gather the information from incumbents, and given to 
>competitor providers so that they can go after these less advantageous areas 
>that nobody else wants.
>
>What should be provided is that everytime a cable co or LECs gets a lead 
>they can't serve, they should be required to report that they have declined 
>to serve, and anytime a subscriber gets a response that they can't get 
>served, there needs to be a place to record this information and make it 
>known they desire to be served.
>
>This should be the mechanism to inform competition. And use the information 
>to establish Grant programs for small Providers.
>
>The big mistake the government is making is they are trying to track where 
>there "IS" broadband.  What they should be trying to track is where there is 
>"NOT" broadband.
>
>They should be tracking, anywhere (ZIP CODE), that there is recorded to be 
>an underserved person, the area should be considered underserved.
>
>Tom DeReggi
>RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
>IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
>
>- Original Message - 
>From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "WISPA General List" 
>Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 12:20 AM
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due
>
>
>> This is an excerpt from a comment filed by a state representative from
>> Kansas:
>>
>> "As a state policy-maker attempting to develop incentives that will induce
>> broadband
>> providers (particularly the larger DSL and cable companies) to use 
>> multiple
>> technologies
>> to reach beyond city limits, FCC data providing greater specificity about
>> which potential
>> customers are adversely impacted by the digital divide and left without a
>> viable option
>> for service would be invaluable."
>>
>> That ought to turn your stomach into knots.
>>
>> Let me interpret it...
>>
>> "We want detailed data, so we can help,cajole, coerce, or bribe the big 
>> guys
>> into universal coverage".
>>
>> This is not a question of the FCC determining how broadband is being
>> deployed.
>>
>> This is a matter of us being required to provide the data so that public
>> money can be used to benefit the politically connected.
>>
>> My comments to the FCC...
>>
>> As a small businessman, one of the ways that we exist, is by being 
>> flexible
>> and by offering services in an ad-hoc basis that larger,
>> inflexible entities don't.   Often, small businesses are purely based upon
>> market need.   Individuals find a need and fill it.  And we
>> do so in our own town, or neighborhood, or in the areas near where we 
>> live.
>>
>> One of the most critical efforts that small business people undertake, is 
>> to
>> determine if there's a large enough market for what they
>> want to do.   Often, little funding is available for this, and they
>> substitute days, weeks, or even months of time and personal effort
>> instead of hiring research companies or marke

Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due

[Tom DeReggi]

What Ironic about the State rep's comments was

If they got the availabilty information from providers,  why would it be 
invaluable, if the intent to use the data was to let providers know where 
areas are under served?
THEY ALREADY HAVE  THE DATA YOU COLLECTED IT FROM THEM!!! DUH!!!

There is a flip side though.

One of the most common occurances is, LECs and Cable Cos selectively picking 
when and where to serve someone or not, regardless of whether they could.
If the LECs and CableCos, were required to report who they said "qualified" 
it is a mechanism to hold them accountable for when they do not. Whether 
from the perspective of False advertising, or not honoring their 
monopoly/franchise obligations to serve.

The missing point is, SMALL PROVIDERS DON"T HAVE THE INFORMATION.  The 
prupose should be to gather the information from incumbents, and given to 
competitor providers so that they can go after these less advantageous areas 
that nobody else wants.

What should be provided is that everytime a cable co or LECs gets a lead 
they can't serve, they should be required to report that they have declined 
to serve, and anytime a subscriber gets a response that they can't get 
served, there needs to be a place to record this information and make it 
known they desire to be served.

This should be the mechanism to inform competition. And use the information 
to establish Grant programs for small Providers.

The big mistake the government is making is they are trying to track where 
there "IS" broadband.  What they should be trying to track is where there is 
"NOT" broadband.

They should be tracking, anywhere (ZIP CODE), that there is recorded to be 
an underserved person, the area should be considered underserved.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 12:20 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due


> This is an excerpt from a comment filed by a state representative from
> Kansas:
>
> "As a state policy-maker attempting to develop incentives that will induce
> broadband
> providers (particularly the larger DSL and cable companies) to use 
> multiple
> technologies
> to reach beyond city limits, FCC data providing greater specificity about
> which potential
> customers are adversely impacted by the digital divide and left without a
> viable option
> for service would be invaluable."
>
> That ought to turn your stomach into knots.
>
> Let me interpret it...
>
> "We want detailed data, so we can help,cajole, coerce, or bribe the big 
> guys
> into universal coverage".
>
> This is not a question of the FCC determining how broadband is being
> deployed.
>
> This is a matter of us being required to provide the data so that public
> money can be used to benefit the politically connected.
>
> My comments to the FCC...
>
> As a small businessman, one of the ways that we exist, is by being 
> flexible
> and by offering services in an ad-hoc basis that larger,
> inflexible entities don't.   Often, small businesses are purely based upon
> market need.   Individuals find a need and fill it.  And we
> do so in our own town, or neighborhood, or in the areas near where we 
> live.
>
> One of the most critical efforts that small business people undertake, is 
> to
> determine if there's a large enough market for what they
> want to do.   Often, little funding is available for this, and they
> substitute days, weeks, or even months of time and personal effort
> instead of hiring research companies or marketing consultants, or buying 
> the
> data outright.
>
> In the case of a wireless ISP, for instance, one of the most critical
> elements for success, is to map out an area, and then begin
> "building out" a network.  Many such WISP's are one or two man operations,
> and start with minimal capital, usually enough to get
> started and operate in a limited area for a short period of time.   Then,
> funding from operations then provides capital for expansion
> and improvement of infrastructure.
>
> During this phase of the life of a WISP, the financial situation is
> generally very fragile, and a loss of markets to move into will
> generally cause business failure.
>
> If WISP's are required to do even MORE work, such as finding census 
> borders
> and maintaining massive and detailed databases of location
> etc, and the purpose of that work is to give free assistance to 
> competitors
> to show them where to take your markets away from you, this
> effort is 100% counterproductive.   Not only do the results hurt you, but
> the time it t

Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due

[Chuck McCown - 3]

Then I guess you do not want to evolve into a public utility.  Too bad, as 
the rest of the WISP industry is becoming defacto public utility.  You 
really need to become familiar with the principle of common carriage.  The 
legal doctrine can be traced clear back to the Roman Empire.  Personally I 
want the sanction and protection of the king, but in exchange I must be a 
good steward and must comply with some regulation.  So, I will be granted a 
fiefdom and rogues will be assimilated.

Who else serves around Milton Freewater?

- Original Message - 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 11:20 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due


> This is an excerpt from a comment filed by a state representative from
> Kansas:
>
> "As a state policy-maker attempting to develop incentives that will induce
> broadband
> providers (particularly the larger DSL and cable companies) to use 
> multiple
> technologies
> to reach beyond city limits, FCC data providing greater specificity about
> which potential
> customers are adversely impacted by the digital divide and left without a
> viable option
> for service would be invaluable."
>
> That ought to turn your stomach into knots.
>
> Let me interpret it...
>
> "We want detailed data, so we can help,cajole, coerce, or bribe the big 
> guys
> into universal coverage".
>
> This is not a question of the FCC determining how broadband is being
> deployed.
>
> This is a matter of us being required to provide the data so that public
> money can be used to benefit the politically connected.
>
> My comments to the FCC...
>
> As a small businessman, one of the ways that we exist, is by being 
> flexible
> and by offering services in an ad-hoc basis that larger,
> inflexible entities don't.   Often, small businesses are purely based upon
> market need.   Individuals find a need and fill it.  And we
> do so in our own town, or neighborhood, or in the areas near where we 
> live.
>
> One of the most critical efforts that small business people undertake, is 
> to
> determine if there's a large enough market for what they
> want to do.   Often, little funding is available for this, and they
> substitute days, weeks, or even months of time and personal effort
> instead of hiring research companies or marketing consultants, or buying 
> the
> data outright.
>
> In the case of a wireless ISP, for instance, one of the most critical
> elements for success, is to map out an area, and then begin
> "building out" a network.  Many such WISP's are one or two man operations,
> and start with minimal capital, usually enough to get
> started and operate in a limited area for a short period of time.   Then,
> funding from operations then provides capital for expansion
> and improvement of infrastructure.
>
> During this phase of the life of a WISP, the financial situation is
> generally very fragile, and a loss of markets to move into will
> generally cause business failure.
>
> If WISP's are required to do even MORE work, such as finding census 
> borders
> and maintaining massive and detailed databases of location
> etc, and the purpose of that work is to give free assistance to 
> competitors
> to show them where to take your markets away from you, this
> effort is 100% counterproductive.   Not only do the results hurt you, but
> the time it takes away from a small businessman often comes
> at the expense of operations, expansion, or even quality of service.
>
> Perhaps people who sit behind desks in Washington DC don't care about
> anything but press releases where they get to praise themselves
> and get lauded on TV, but for those of us who risk our life's savings and
> often years of our lives building a business by
> bootstrap have a LOT more at stake than a transitory and soon forgotten
> political posture by some appointed or hired public employee.
>
> So, as a small businessman, I cannot state how incredibly wrong ALL of 
> this
> is, and that IN NO WAY should the FCC be in the business of
> deliberating wasting the time, money, and resources of small business
> people solely for the purpose of harming their future.
>
> So, in closing, I state for the record, there is no good aspect the
> collection of detailed information.  It is not and has never been
> the business of Congress or the FCC to provide broadband.  That's being 
> done
> by thousands of hard working people who have risked
> everything they have to try to make it happen.  It seems worse than
> Machiavellian, then, for the FCC to demand that these people then
> waste thier time, money, and energy, in an effort where

Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due

[reader]

This is an excerpt from a comment filed by a state representative from 
Kansas:

"As a state policy-maker attempting to develop incentives that will induce 
broadband
providers (particularly the larger DSL and cable companies) to use multiple 
technologies
to reach beyond city limits, FCC data providing greater specificity about 
which potential
customers are adversely impacted by the digital divide and left without a 
viable option
for service would be invaluable."

That ought to turn your stomach into knots.

Let me interpret it...

"We want detailed data, so we can help,cajole, coerce, or bribe the big guys 
into universal coverage".

This is not a question of the FCC determining how broadband is being 
deployed.

This is a matter of us being required to provide the data so that public 
money can be used to benefit the politically connected.

My comments to the FCC...

As a small businessman, one of the ways that we exist, is by being flexible 
and by offering services in an ad-hoc basis that larger,
inflexible entities don't.   Often, small businesses are purely based upon 
market need.   Individuals find a need and fill it.  And we
do so in our own town, or neighborhood, or in the areas near where we live.

One of the most critical efforts that small business people undertake, is to 
determine if there's a large enough market for what they
want to do.   Often, little funding is available for this, and they 
substitute days, weeks, or even months of time and personal effort
instead of hiring research companies or marketing consultants, or buying the 
data outright.

In the case of a wireless ISP, for instance, one of the most critical 
elements for success, is to map out an area, and then begin
"building out" a network.  Many such WISP's are one or two man operations, 
and start with minimal capital, usually enough to get
started and operate in a limited area for a short period of time.   Then, 
funding from operations then provides capital for expansion
and improvement of infrastructure.

During this phase of the life of a WISP, the financial situation is 
generally very fragile, and a loss of markets to move into will
generally cause business failure.

If WISP's are required to do even MORE work, such as finding census borders 
and maintaining massive and detailed databases of location
etc, and the purpose of that work is to give free assistance to competitors 
to show them where to take your markets away from you, this
effort is 100% counterproductive.   Not only do the results hurt you, but 
the time it takes away from a small businessman often comes
at the expense of operations, expansion, or even quality of service.

Perhaps people who sit behind desks in Washington DC don't care about 
anything but press releases where they get to praise themselves
and get lauded on TV, but for those of us who risk our life's savings and 
often years of our lives building a business by
bootstrap have a LOT more at stake than a transitory and soon forgotten 
political posture by some appointed or hired public employee.

So, as a small businessman, I cannot state how incredibly wrong ALL of this 
is, and that IN NO WAY should the FCC be in the business of
 deliberating wasting the time, money, and resources of small business 
people solely for the purpose of harming their future.

So, in closing, I state for the record, there is no good aspect the 
collection of detailed information.  It is not and has never been
the business of Congress or the FCC to provide broadband.  That's being done 
by thousands of hard working people who have risked
everything they have to try to make it happen.  It seems worse than 
Machiavellian, then, for the FCC to demand that these people then
waste thier time, money, and energy, in an effort where the only result 
possible, is to harm them.





- Original Message - 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 9:31 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due


> I'm going to ask that we oppose this in its entirety, due to it giving 
> away
> information we really don't need given away.
>
> Whatever your take... please file. ... something.
>
>




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due

[reader]

I'm going to ask that we oppose this in its entirety, due to it giving away 
information we really don't need given away.

Whatever your take... please file. ... something.





- Original Message - 
From: "Rick Harnish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'WISPA's FCC Committee'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 
"'Motorola Canopy User Group'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'WISPA General List'" 

Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 8:06 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due


> Dear Members and NonMembers:
>
> For those that may be filing comment on the Form 477 NPRM, please be
> reminded that comments on the Section IV(B), which seeks comment on the
> adoption of a national broadband mapping program and the Commission's
> tentative conclusion that the Commission collect information that 
> providers
> use to respond to prospective customers to determine on an
> address-by-address basis whether service is available, are due on July 17
> (replies due on Aug. 1).   Comments on the other sections of the NPRM
> (reporting number of lines and channels, delivered speed information
> gathering, broadband price information, preserving confidentiality and
> broadband customer surveys) are due on Aug. 1 (replies due Sept. 1).
>
>
>
> This is Docket Number 07-38 and I have attached the NPRM pdf.  You can go 
> to
> http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi to file your comments
> online.
>
>
>
> This reminder was sent from Ron Harden of VoxCorp.  Thank you Ron.
>
>
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Rick Harnish
>
>





>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

[WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due

[Rick Harnish]

Dear Members and NonMembers:

For those that may be filing comment on the Form 477 NPRM, please be
reminded that comments on the Section IV(B), which seeks comment on the
adoption of a national broadband mapping program and the Commission's
tentative conclusion that the Commission collect information that providers
use to respond to prospective customers to determine on an
address-by-address basis whether service is available, are due on July 17
(replies due on Aug. 1).   Comments on the other sections of the NPRM
(reporting number of lines and channels, delivered speed information
gathering, broadband price information, preserving confidentiality and
broadband customer surveys) are due on Aug. 1 (replies due Sept. 1).

 

This is Docket Number 07-38 and I have attached the NPRM pdf.  You can go to
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi to file your comments
online.

 

This reminder was sent from Ron Harden of VoxCorp.  Thank you Ron.

 

Respectfully,

Rick Harnish



DA-08-1586A1.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/