[WISPA] Poll

[George Rogato]

I'd like to take a poll on behalf of the board of directors.
As most of you know, wispa formed a promotion and marketing committee 
for the benefit of wispa and it's member wisps. We have had a few people 
step up and volunteer their time to help get this going. I'm sure the 
work the promo committee is doing will be highly successful and will 
benefit each and everyone of our wisps.


Now what we, the board of directors, want to know is how may of you 
would be interested in "Work Groups"?


The first work group would be a "Muni Wireless" Work Group

Would you be interested in joining and participating in a Muni Wireless 
work group?


This work group would be to discuss:
1- The pro's and con's of dealing with a municipality.
2- How to go about approaching a municipality for a muni project.
3- How to bid and secure a muni project in your own market.

The work group is to help wisps who have never been involved help 
themselves.


I'd like each and everyone to write back and tell us if you think a muni 
work group would be a benefit to you.



Pleas answer Yes( ) or No( )



Thanks

--
George Rogato

Welcome to WISPA

www.wispa.org

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] Poll

[Carl A Jeptha]

You have a Good Day now,


Carl A Jeptha
http://www.airnet.ca
office 905 349-2084
Emergency only Pager 905 377-6900
skype cajeptha



George Rogato wrote:

I'd like to take a poll on behalf of the board of directors.
As most of you know, wispa formed a promotion and marketing committee 
for the benefit of wispa and it's member wisps. We have had a few 
people step up and volunteer their time to help get this going. I'm 
sure the work the promo committee is doing will be highly successful 
and will benefit each and everyone of our wisps.


Now what we, the board of directors, want to know is how may of you 
would be interested in "Work Groups"?


The first work group would be a "Muni Wireless" Work Group

Would you be interested in joining and participating in a Muni 
Wireless work group?


This work group would be to discuss:
1- The pro's and con's of dealing with a municipality.
2- How to go about approaching a municipality for a muni project.
3- How to bid and secure a muni project in your own market.

The work group is to help wisps who have never been involved help 
themselves.


I'd like each and everyone to write back and tell us if you think a 
muni work group would be a benefit to you.



Pleas answer Yes( X) or No( )



Thanks


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] This is HUGE!

[Matt Liotta]

Tom DeReggi wrote:

Matt, used an example of Vonage, that did not show profits. But if 
that were the case with all investments VCs would not be in business. 
A certain percentage of them do very well and are very profitable. 
Thats what VCs are banking on. Some will be highly profitable.  A 
company that is highly profitable, and does not sacrifice in other 
areas, will most likely sell for higher.  Not in all cases, as 
profitabilty can be used to mislead the status of a company. For 
example if necessary upgrades are bypassed to show higher 
profitabilty, when in truth its neglect resulting in reliabilty and 
performance being sacrificed.  A run down network so to speak. Thats 
why I think there is no real answer on how to evaluate a company based 
on jsut comparing wether a number is higher than another in one 
specific area.


Actually, Vonage is a successful VC investment. They don't have to be 
profitable or even survive for very long in the public market, but the 
fact that they when public allows the VCs to exit with a large gain, 
which is all they care about.


-Matt
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] This is HUGE!

[Matt Liotta]

Mark Koskenmaki wrote:


If the FCC had not thrown the 911 monkeywrench into it, I'd have found a way
to roll my own VOIP service and we'd have been selling it at only a slight
markup, just to be an added value to my broadband.

 

The 911 thing is just a barrier to entry that for most markets is easy 
to overcome. Further, there is no reason to only have a slight markup; 
there is real money to be made on VoIP. When your average business is 
paying >$0.04 per minute for long distance and it costs you <$0.005 per 
minute there is some easy money to be made. Although, I think making 
money on long distance is only going to work for a short time. It is 
also quite easy to make money on lines.


Clearly, bundling VoIP with your data service is a viable way to 
increase your ARPU. We have a wholesale VoIP program for WISPs that can 
help if your interested. We just completed an interconnection with 
Level3 giving access to most of the US from a DID perspective and we 
will soon have support for E911 in most the markets where it actually 
exists. There is still no solution to the VoIP E911 requirement for 
markets that do even have E911 for POTS lines.


-Matt

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?

[Tom DeReggi]

A refund or a credit?
I'm not aware of many vendors that agree to give refunds.
A sale is a sale.
Just because the cost to get it shipped is near the profit margin, and 
probably more costly to process the return than the profit on the sale in 
most cases as well.


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


- Original Message - 
From: "Rudolph Worrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 2:16 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?



John,

I was looking for a response like yours.  I requested a refund lately and 
was

denied even though we called immediately after item was delivered.

Has anyone ever returned and item to Hyperlinktech.com


Quoting John Scrivner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


We were banned from doing business with them because we requested a
return once. Not kidding.
Scriv


Rudolph Worrell wrote:

>Can someone give me their honest opinion about doing business with
>www.hyperlinktech.com.  They seem to have a great deal of antennas and 
>cable


>but I am not sure they are WISP friendly as odd as that seems.
>
>-
>This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
>
>
>
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




-
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

RE: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?

[Dustin Jurman]

No, Shriv is correct. You get banned if you have a problem with the
equipment and get stuck in a RMA / credit loophole which you can't get in
touch with anyone to help you. My experience after 10 years of doing
business with them was shocking.

DSJ

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 9:00 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?

A refund or a credit?
I'm not aware of many vendors that agree to give refunds.
A sale is a sale.
Just because the cost to get it shipped is near the profit margin, and 
probably more costly to process the return than the profit on the sale in 
most cases as well.

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


- Original Message - 
From: "Rudolph Worrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 2:16 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?


> John,
>
> I was looking for a response like yours.  I requested a refund lately and 
> was
> denied even though we called immediately after item was delivered.
>
> Has anyone ever returned and item to Hyperlinktech.com
>
>
> Quoting John Scrivner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> We were banned from doing business with them because we requested a
>> return once. Not kidding.
>> Scriv
>>
>>
>> Rudolph Worrell wrote:
>>
>> >Can someone give me their honest opinion about doing business with
>> >www.hyperlinktech.com.  They seem to have a great deal of antennas and 
>> >cable
>>
>> >but I am not sure they are WISP friendly as odd as that seems.
>> >
>> >-
>> >This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> -- 
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
> -
> This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
>
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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











-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] This is HUGE!

[Pete Davis]

Pete Davis wrote:

Here is an example of a ROI period ending.

I put in a $500/mo T1 and rent a $100/mo tower space. My fixed costs 
are $600/mo
I put in a $1000 AP and router, and buy 100 $200 CPE. I am now $21000 
in the hole.

Each customer is paying me $50/mo. ($5000/mo total)
My ROI is 5 months, and my fixed cost per customer is $6 (upstream 
bandwidth and tower rent), leaving me $32/mo ($3200) "after ROI" profit.

DOH! - Thats $44/mo/sub profits in my dreamworld wisp.
That's all fine and good if this is your hobby, and you are not trying 
to make a living at this.


I just need 5 of these towers/AP's/model to pay for salaries, trucks, 
replacement CPE, installers, tools, and trips to conventions and trade 
shows.


I also need 3 more of these towers to pay interest on the bank note 
from borrowing the original $21,000, which was more like $200,000 by 
the time we over-spent, under planned, over estimated the demand, 
underestimated the costs, overestimated the employees abilities to 
work, underestimated the damage that lighting can cause, and so on and 
so forth.


I also need 7 more of these towers to offset the cost of not actually 
installing 100 clients on day 1, and not getting $100 tower rent, not 
getting 100 clients per AP, and not getting $200 CPE, and to offset 
the deadbeats who write hot checks, paying the cell phone bill, buy 
the fender when an antenna falls off of the roof during an install, 
buy the insurance to pay for it next time, buy new PCs, put tires on 
the trucks, change the oil, buying a mail server, buying another 
server to remove the spam from the first mail server, buying spare 
servers, routers, tools, and paying consultants when I cannot figure 
it out.


Then I need another 14 towers to pay for the psychotherapist when go 
nuts trying to manage 2900 subscribers, who are all  bitching and 
moaning because their PC has a virus, or their kid is downloading 
porn, or maybe they are getting spam, or they can't get their 
bittorrent client to download more than 500kbps.


I am not there yet. We are still working on getting tower number 7 
online, and installing customer number 350'ish, and I am not on the 
mood altering drugs... yet.


Eventually, there is a model there for making money in this business 
somewhere between the hobby stage and the looney bin.


The ways to do that should be the same as any other business whether 
you are selling internet, real estate, health care, computers, or donuts.


   1: Time is money, so don't waste time or money.
   2. Don't cut corners.
   3. Don't piss off the customers.

Pete Davis
NoDial.net




Travis Johnson wrote:

Tom,

There is no such thing as "average profit per sub after ROI period". 
Let me give an example:


I lease all my CPE. It is a recurring monthly debt that will never go 
away. Even after 3 years, when I own the CPE, there will be new CPE 
that needs purchased... and thus new towers, new AP's, new backhauls, 
new routers, new bandwidth, new whatever. Even if I move that paid 
for CPE to a new customer on the edges of my network, there are still 
costs mentioned above for that customer.


Maybe I'm not thinking the same as you, but I can never see an "after 
ROI period". It never happens.


Travis
Microserv


Tom DeReggi wrote:

I agree current profit is irrelevant, when considering company 
totals during the early growth period.
But calcualted future Profit clearly is relevant, as far as how much 
profit will be made per sub, and how soon.
Profitabilty can be misleading when jsut considering accounting 
paperwork (profit loss / balance sheets)


I'll give an example:

Lets say a company gets an ROI in 1 year. And had 4 years of selling 
subs. And by the 4th year, profit would be being made from each sub.
But then lets says a company had a 100% growth spurt in the 5th 
year. And lets say there is a 1 year ROI, meaning 12 dollars needs 
to be spent for ever new dollar that is made.  Because the growth 
rate of the company is so much higher in the later year, the 
expendatures are far greater than the revenue comming in from the 
samller customer base taken on the first 4 years. Thus, it appears 
the company is losing money and not profiting.


When in actuallity, the company has record high success.  All 
pre-existing subs ARE 100% profitable, and lot of new growth has 
been made to replicate the previous years successful model.


So yes, profitable books may mean a company is not growing and not 
making new sales.


However, showing the average profit per sub, after the ROI period is 
a VERY relevant bit of information. Its what defines the value of 
the business model in my mind.


In other words:

Forcasted Profit margin based on current years proven track record.

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


- Original Message - From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 6:19 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] This

Re: [WISPA] This is HUGE!

[Tom DeReggi]

John,

Your responses make sense.

I guess the bigger problem I have is, I jsut do not believe the stats.
I have rarely found that misleading inaccurate information works to one's 
advantage for long, on any topic.

Because eventually the real picture gets disclosed.
I wish WISPs really did have 8% of the market.

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


- Original Message - 
From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 12:50 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] This is HUGE!



Sorry TomI am going to drive a truck through your remarks here.   :-)

Tom DeReggi wrote:


8% means...

You do not get preferrential treatment in legislation.


8% means that 8% of the people are using our service which means that our 
politicians have to look at how to serve the needs of those customers. It 
is not about us. It is about our customers. That is the job of public 
servants.



You do not get subsidees to foster growth of a startup industry.


Wrong. Grants, loans, etc. are based on needs of CUSTOMERS not of 
providers. USDA does not care if you get broadband to Farmer Dan via a 
string between two tin cans if it works. By the way, I was the first 
broadband in my town, we are not a startup industry any more.



You get taxed equally as telcos and cable companies.


Do you really think tax policy is different if you serve 8% than if you 
serve 1/2%? I assure you if the broadband tax cometh, you will be paying, 
regardless of how many customers you serve.


ISPs have a viable alternative, so LECs no longer need to share their 
networks with ISPs.


 Like AT&T is so open with their network? PLEASE!



8% is a HUGE percentage of market share. I'm not sure we want to take 
credit for that.

At this stage I think it could work against us.


There is only good that can come from people thinking 8% of the US is 
getting their service from us. We have been on the radar for a long time. 
Now it is time to deliver broadband over that radar! (That reminds 
me...where is that 5.4  GHz band!)

:-)
Scriv



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


- Original Message - From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 6:31 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] This is HUGE!


The point is we have a well known, if not largely credible source, who 
has just released a report that says we (Fixed Wireless Broadband 
Providers) are serving the broadband needs of approximately 8% of US 
home users. We obviously have been completely ignored in other reports 
and surveys so for once it is nice to see us represented in some 
statistically important degree. I am not really that concerned about the 
exact number of customers. It is just nice to see us making the report 
in some meaningful way.

Scriv



David E. Smith wrote:


John Scrivner wrote:

Check this out from the Pew report. It appears that fixed wireless is 
much bigger than what even I thought. According to this report 8% of 
all broadband connections in the US are delivered via fixed broadband 
wireless.




Ouch. That study looks to be horribly methodologically flawed.

(It's at http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Broadband_trends2006.pdf 
if

you're interested.)

Their survey required the responders to know what they were talking
about -- if you have DSL, but a wireless router/access point, and 
you're

not all that technically competent, you may well say your laptop has
"wireless" Internet access when that's not quite what they intended.

Here's the question they asked:



Does the computer you use at home connect to the internet through a
dial-up telephone line, or do you have some other type of connection,
such as a DSL-enabled phone line, a cable TV modem, a wireless
connection, or a T-1 or fiber optic connection?



That question gives me a headache, and I'd like to think I do know what
I'm talking about most of the time.

Note that their survey only had about 1500 Internet-using responders,
which is jst barely enough to be considered a statistically valid
sample for a population of a couple hundred million. (Their methodology
is a bit vague on whether they're sampling all Americans, or just
adults, or...)

Don't get me wrong; it's an exciting quote. I just hope everyone takes
it with the proper perspective, and realizes that it's probably "high"
by some unknowable order of magnitude.

David Smith
MVN.net


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?

[Blake Bowers]

A vendor that will not give a refund or credit?

Pretty poor business practice.  Many will tell you
that there is a restocking fee if the proper product
was shipped, and delivered in good condition, but
truth be known will waive that fee.  They add the fee
so they can have a way to deal with purchasers who
turn out to be frequent refunders.

Most businesses consider it a good business practice
to take care of their customers - not make life more
difficult for those customers.  It may cost you a little -
at one point, but the returns on your investment by
taking care of your customer are tremendous.

If I buy a widget from a company, and decide it
is not what I wanted, I would expect that company
to make some sort of refund, and I would be willing
to pay a small restocking fee if it was strictly my fault
for ordering something that did not fit my needs, and
it was done with no suggestions about applicablity
from their staff.  The company that would not provide
a refund would never see my business again.

I know for a fact that Tessco, Hutton, Talley, and
Electro-comm does refunds.




A refund or a credit?
I'm not aware of many vendors that agree to give refunds.
A sale is a sale.
Just because the cost to get it shipped is near the profit margin, and
probably more costly to process the return than the profit on the sale in
most cases as well.

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




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

RE: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?

[JohnnyO]

I won't do business with a company that will not do refunds or credits.
If they can't take care of you when things go sour, why should you take
care of them by sending your $$ their way ?

JohnnyO

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 8:00 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?


A refund or a credit?
I'm not aware of many vendors that agree to give refunds.
A sale is a sale.
Just because the cost to get it shipped is near the profit margin, and 
probably more costly to process the return than the profit on the sale
in 
most cases as well.

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


- Original Message - 
From: "Rudolph Worrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 2:16 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?


> John,
>
> I was looking for a response like yours.  I requested a refund lately 
> and
> was
> denied even though we called immediately after item was delivered.
>
> Has anyone ever returned and item to Hyperlinktech.com
>
>
> Quoting John Scrivner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> We were banned from doing business with them because we requested a 
>> return once. Not kidding. Scriv
>>
>>
>> Rudolph Worrell wrote:
>>
>> >Can someone give me their honest opinion about doing business with 
>> >www.hyperlinktech.com.  They seem to have a great deal of antennas 
>> >and cable
>>
>> >but I am not sure they are WISP friendly as odd as that seems.
>> >
>> >-
>> >This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> --
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: 
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
> -
> This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
>
> --
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: 
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] This is HUGE!

[Tom DeReggi]

Pete,

Great post.

The other thing that gets to be a problem as subscriber base grows is
You can't be two places at the same time. The average time per sub to 
support them may not be very high, and easilly done with one technician 
based on total work hours in a day.  But failures rarely are courtious 
enough to wait for the previous outage to finish getting repaired first. :-) 
The staffing needs for support can be much higher than expected, if good 
response time is promised or expected by the subs.


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


- Original Message - 
From: "Pete Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 12:19 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] This is HUGE!



Here is an example of a ROI period ending.

I put in a $500/mo T1 and rent a $100/mo tower space. My fixed costs are 
$600/mo
I put in a $1000 AP and router, and buy 100 $200 CPE. I am now $21000 in 
the hole.

Each customer is paying me $50/mo. ($5000/mo total)
My ROI is 5 months, and my fixed cost per customer is $6 (upstream 
bandwidth and tower rent), leaving me $32/mo ($3200) "after ROI" profit.
That's all fine and good if this is your hobby, and you are not trying to 
make a living at this.


I just need 5 of these towers/AP's/model to pay for salaries, trucks, 
replacement CPE, installers, tools, and trips to conventions and trade 
shows.


I also need 3 more of these towers to pay interest on the bank note from 
borrowing the original $21,000, which was more like $200,000 by the time 
we over-spent, under planned, over estimated the demand, underestimated 
the costs, overestimated the employees abilities to work, underestimated 
the damage that lighting can cause, and so on and so forth.


I also need 7 more of these towers to offset the cost of not actually 
installing 100 clients on day 1, and not getting $100 tower rent, not 
getting 100 clients per AP, and not getting $200 CPE, and to offset the 
deadbeats who write hot checks, paying the cell phone bill, buy the fender 
when an antenna falls off of the roof during an install, buy the insurance 
to pay for it next time, buy new PCs, put tires on the trucks, change the 
oil, buying a mail server, buying another server to remove the spam from 
the first mail server, buying spare servers, routers, tools, and paying 
consultants when I cannot figure it out.


Then I need another 14 towers to pay for the psychotherapist when go nuts 
trying to manage 2900 subscribers, who are all  bitching and moaning 
because their PC has a virus, or their kid is downloading porn, or maybe 
they are getting spam, or they can't get their bittorrent client to 
download more than 500kbps.


I am not there yet. We are still working on getting tower number 7 online, 
and installing customer number 350'ish, and I am not on the mood altering 
drugs... yet.


Eventually, there is a model there for making money in this business 
somewhere between the hobby stage and the looney bin.


The ways to do that should be the same as any other business whether you 
are selling internet, real estate, health care, computers, or donuts.


   1: Time is money, so don't waste time or money.
   2. Don't cut corners.
   3. Don't piss off the customers.

Pete Davis
NoDial.net




Travis Johnson wrote:

Tom,

There is no such thing as "average profit per sub after ROI period". Let 
me give an example:


I lease all my CPE. It is a recurring monthly debt that will never go 
away. Even after 3 years, when I own the CPE, there will be new CPE that 
needs purchased... and thus new towers, new AP's, new backhauls, new 
routers, new bandwidth, new whatever. Even if I move that paid for CPE to 
a new customer on the edges of my network, there are still costs 
mentioned above for that customer.


Maybe I'm not thinking the same as you, but I can never see an "after ROI 
period". It never happens.


Travis
Microserv


Tom DeReggi wrote:

I agree current profit is irrelevant, when considering company totals 
during the early growth period.
But calcualted future Profit clearly is relevant, as far as how much 
profit will be made per sub, and how soon.
Profitabilty can be misleading when jsut considering accounting 
paperwork (profit loss / balance sheets)


I'll give an example:

Lets say a company gets an ROI in 1 year. And had 4 years of selling 
subs. And by the 4th year, profit would be being made from each sub.
But then lets says a company had a 100% growth spurt in the 5th year. 
And lets say there is a 1 year ROI, meaning 12 dollars needs to be spent 
for ever new dollar that is made.  Because the growth rate of the 
company is so much higher in the later year, the expendatures are far 
greater than the revenue comming in from the samller customer base taken 
on the first 4 years. Thus, it appears the company is losing money and 
not profiting.


When in actuallity, the company has record high success.  All 
pre-existing s

Re: [WISPA] This is HUGE!

[Tom DeReggi]

Travis,

Excellent point.
We've become victom to that mistake more than once.
But whats also important to realize is that the mistake is not always made 
because someone does not value their time or doesn;t understand your 
arguement.
More so the mistake is made because they under estimated the amount of time 
that will be required to finish doing the solution themselves.

Hind sight is 20/20.
When you do it yourself, even if you lose financially, you've learned 
something, and that has some value to help offset the loss.


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


- Original Message - 
From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 1:09 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] This is HUGE!



Hi,

I think that's the #1 mistake that small or startup operators make: Time 
is money, so don't waste time or money.


I hear stories of people literally spending hours and hours and hours 
"building" something because they don't want to pay $xxx for it already 
built. Everyone reading this list should remember - Your time is worth 
something. For some it may be $10/hour and for others it may be $200/hour. 
The question you have to always ask is "Can I generate more income by 
doing it myself, or having it already done so I can work on ".


Quick example: You can spend 3-4 hours building a new email server for 
your network (hardware cost=$500). Or you can buy a ready to run mail 
server for $1,000. However, if you could generate 5 new clients in that 
same amount of time each paying $40 per month, you just wasted your time. 
The 5 clients will pay for that extra $500 in less than 6 months (after 
costs, etc.) and you will be making more money in the long run.


Time is money... don't waste time. :)

Travis
Microserv

Pete Davis wrote:


Here is an example of a ROI period ending.

I put in a $500/mo T1 and rent a $100/mo tower space. My fixed costs are 
$600/mo
I put in a $1000 AP and router, and buy 100 $200 CPE. I am now $21000 in 
the hole.

Each customer is paying me $50/mo. ($5000/mo total)
My ROI is 5 months, and my fixed cost per customer is $6 (upstream 
bandwidth and tower rent), leaving me $32/mo ($3200) "after ROI" profit.
That's all fine and good if this is your hobby, and you are not trying to 
make a living at this.


I just need 5 of these towers/AP's/model to pay for salaries, trucks, 
replacement CPE, installers, tools, and trips to conventions and trade 
shows.


I also need 3 more of these towers to pay interest on the bank note from 
borrowing the original $21,000, which was more like $200,000 by the time 
we over-spent, under planned, over estimated the demand, underestimated 
the costs, overestimated the employees abilities to work, underestimated 
the damage that lighting can cause, and so on and so forth.


I also need 7 more of these towers to offset the cost of not actually 
installing 100 clients on day 1, and not getting $100 tower rent, not 
getting 100 clients per AP, and not getting $200 CPE, and to offset the 
deadbeats who write hot checks, paying the cell phone bill, buy the 
fender when an antenna falls off of the roof during an install, buy the 
insurance to pay for it next time, buy new PCs, put tires on the trucks, 
change the oil, buying a mail server, buying another server to remove the 
spam from the first mail server, buying spare servers, routers, tools, 
and paying consultants when I cannot figure it out.


Then I need another 14 towers to pay for the psychotherapist when go nuts 
trying to manage 2900 subscribers, who are all  bitching and moaning 
because their PC has a virus, or their kid is downloading porn, or maybe 
they are getting spam, or they can't get their bittorrent client to 
download more than 500kbps.


I am not there yet. We are still working on getting tower number 7 
online, and installing customer number 350'ish, and I am not on the mood 
altering drugs... yet.


Eventually, there is a model there for making money in this business 
somewhere between the hobby stage and the looney bin.


The ways to do that should be the same as any other business whether you 
are selling internet, real estate, health care, computers, or donuts.


   1: Time is money, so don't waste time or money.
   2. Don't cut corners.
   3. Don't piss off the customers.

Pete Davis
NoDial.net




Travis Johnson wrote:


Tom,

There is no such thing as "average profit per sub after ROI period". Let 
me give an example:


I lease all my CPE. It is a recurring monthly debt that will never go 
away. Even after 3 years, when I own the CPE, there will be new CPE that 
needs purchased... and thus new towers, new AP's, new backhauls, new 
routers, new bandwidth, new whatever. Even if I move that paid for CPE 
to a new customer on the edges of my network, there are still costs 
mentioned above for that customer.


Maybe I'm not thinking the same as you, but I can never see an "after 
ROI period". It never 

RE: [WISPA] 3650 equipment

[Brad Larson]

Tom, Dang you got this all wrong. Let's make sure we understand what
Alvarion's comments said so everyone understands. Our comment breaking the
band in two was to strip rural and suburban from the top 100 US markets. Top
100 markets split in two 25 Mhz chunks and licensed with the REST of the US
being UL. There is plenty of broadband in those top 100 markets. The FCC's
intent for the 3650 band is suburbs and rural access. 

" There are MANY WISPs ready to go and test the 3650 allocation, but it is
the manufacturers that are squashing the viabilty of the band by not having
the balls to make gear to meet the specification." 

That's just not correct. What we don't want to do is build a product that
you'll have to rip out and replace because it doesn't meet the future
spec when we finally get a ruling on what the product should look and
smell like then most will invest and deliver a product. 

"Its not only important to incourage innovation and more efficient use of
technology but also more innovative and efficient Policy.  The attempted
3650 rules were to foster improved policy.  Why would anyone fight that?"

The 3650 is a rural broadband play getting you access to your own spectrum
to serve those customers without having to compete with baby monitors and
wifi gear on every street corner. Innovation won't take place unless the FCC
takes a stand on technology. IMHO what we don't need is a bunch more
inefficient 20 mhz spectrum hogs at sub 10 meg speeds or worse. And to say
Alvarion is fighting improved policy is a stretch.

Tom, I really think you need to reread our filings or maybe stop listening
to those who may have an axe to grind. Brad


-Original Message-
From: Tom DeReggi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 9:37 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 equipment

>In other words, the number of
> licenses is infinite.

Yes, but you leave out that there is a requirement to attempt to coexist, or

cooperate to attempt to co-exist.
And it brings out into the open, all possible interferers, where they are 
located, and how to contact them.

It will be an interesting science project, to see if registration apposed to

operation in stealth mode (typical unlicened) helps or hinders the ability 
for more providers to cooexist.  And quite honestly, I think its an 
experiment that has to be had, t oreally see what happens. The outcome could

help shape the viabilty of future spectrum policy.

One thing I definately did NOT agree with, was Alvarion's FCC comments 
suggesting breaking the band in two. The band MUST stay for one cause. The 
reason is that people need the ability to move and adapt within their 
available spectrum range channels.  Narrowing channel selection down to the 
point where all channels are used to get 360 degrees, is foolish, and just 
repeats the limitations of the existing 5.8Ghz band, that has twice the 
spectrum range.  I also beleive that basing a business model or rules on 5 
Mhz channels, the maximum smallest viable size that would make sense, is 
also foolish, as it leaves little room (overhead) for margin.

However, I was in favor of limiting channel width to 10 Mhz, but not any 
requirement that required channel size less than 10 mhz.
This level, incourages efficient systems, without excessive limitations. I 
also did not care if it stayed contention based or time based, as long as it

all just stayed the same method, all contiguous space for the same purpose.

I also was strongly against Full licensed. As the only thing that benefits 
is the huge telecom company, single provider's use models, and exclude 
competiton and possible innovators.  The whole point in 3650 was to attempt 
to find a balance between licensed and unlicenced.

I felt Alvarion's position on this spectrum range's use was very harmful to 
Alvarion's reputation.  Its not only important to incourage innovation and 
more efficient use of technology but also more innovative and efficient 
Policy.  The attempted 3650 rules were to foster improved policy.  Why would

anyone fight that?

The only flaw with the 3650 allocation, is the stipulation for Contention 
based, without a contention based hardware platform available or in 
engineering phase designed for the spectrum range.  Its was innovative rules

prior to innovative technology, and therefore left unused.

There are MANY WISPs ready to go and test the 3650 allocation, but it is the

manufacturers that are squashing the viabilty of the band by not having the 
balls to make gear to meet the specification.

I also do not support the use of more than half the band for a single PtP 
link. The reason is that PtP links already are much more capable of using 
higher modulations, based on higher power more directional antennas to 
escape the noise and improve SNR.  When the whole band is allowed for PTP, 
it replicates the same flaw as existing unlicened where a single PTP radio 
can be pointed at a cell site, or pass through a

Re: [WISPA] This is HUGE!

[Peter R.]

Actually, Cbeyond originally only sold one product. A dynamic T1. 
Basically, one product offering to a specific target market.  Focused.


- Peter

Patrick Leary wrote:


Any operator with some decent residential mix would be drooling to have a
$100 ARPU Matt. No matter what technology is being used, that makes for an
excellent ROI. Those CLECs you mention are also likely providing fiber and
big TDM pipes as a primary focus.

Patrick Leary
AVP Marketing
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] DSL Comes to Town: What to do

[Peter R.]

One thing to do is shore up your most profitable customers.
Re-contract them. Add services for them. And survey them. Why do they 
buy from you; What other communication needs to they have; What 
challenges do they see in technology.


Video tape a testimonial from your best customers about why they pay you 
for dedicated service and run it on your website. It will be an add for 
you and them.


Know your customer.
Stay in front of your customer.
Upsell and cross-sell your customer.
Get Referrals from your customer.
Everyone in your business needs to understand that every single touch 
with the customer or prospect is a chance to win or lose. Make it a win. 
Script answers to frequently asked questions.
And have a scripted answer to this question: "Why should I pay you more 
when DSL is so much less?" (BTW, that is called a buying signal and/or 
objection. The prospect is giving you the opportunity to sell them on 
your service).


Sales skills are what put food on the table. Read a couple of sales 
books or listen to audio books.
Or, if you can, get a sales coach. He can shadow a few of your calls or 
role play with you to help you through difficult or uncomfortable 
situations.


Regards,

Peter
RAD-INFO, Inc.
All this and more monthly in my newsletter
4isps.com


Sam Tetherow wrote:

I am working on the dedicated bandwidth market and was making some 
headway until Qwest rolled out their DSL services at the begining of 
the month and now it is the education process all over again.  Trying 
to explain that 3-7 meg DSL is NOT the same quality as a dedicated 1.5 
meg circuit.  But they still look at $475/T1 vs $80/DSL and think hey 
if I get only half of the DSL speed I'm still way ahead, and right now 
the DSL is new enough that congestion is not an issue.


As for my market, until DSL was brought in, it has been a profitable 
business, I wasn't planning on retiring on just that business but it 
was paying the bills including my salary.  Now instead of me being the 
only broadband provider that provided any real bandwidth I now have 2 
other active DSL competitors and several others that provide DSL 
statewide.  I'm not saying my market is now unfavorable, just that I'm 
not sure what is going to happen in terms of growth.


   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] ARPU

[Peter R.]

Well, any metric can be sheep's wool, Tom.
EBITA comes to mind immediately. It isn't even an accounting standard. 
But Wall St. likes it, even though no 2 companies calculate it the same 
way. (It isn't a standard so they don't have to). As long as they 
consistent calculate it the same way year after year.


ARPU on the same network can be a good indicator. If I have a MOTO 
network and my ARPU is $99 and your MOTO network has $399. Unless you 
have lots of overhead and pay high leases, you should be more profitable.


In the case of CLECs: when I see one that is focused, with a true target 
market, selling a limited catalogue of services, with an ARPU upwards of 
$600, I see a model CLEC.  Considering most other CLECs have about 25k 
customers after 10 years and a couple of acquisitions and have much 
lower ARPU, there are lessons to be learned from the higher ARPU company.


Take DSL. Most ISPs have the same costs associated with it. Maybe one 
pays more for IP or labor, but the telecom costs are the same (ATM & DSL 
loops). So when I see one ISP with DSL ARPU at $100+ and another at 
$50-60, who do you think is probably doing better?


Plus the less profitable customers you have, the better off you are. 
It's not like you can make it up in volume, since growth and scale 
actually eat at profit.


Profit in telecom is hardly ever talked about. It would scare away any 
investors :)


- Peter

Tom DeReggi wrote:

Or they measure in ARPU to mask profitabilty. A higher ARPU subs is 
not always more profitable.

Average ARPU also does not show retention rate.
Having an average ARPU of $700 buck does not do any good if they are 
only a customer for 6 months, if they end up being disatisfied after 
the fact.
Nor is a higher ARPU that much better if the world has to be given 
away to get the $700 ARPU.


Getting an ARPU of $700 for a T1 speed line is pretty darn 
impressive.  But not neessarilly so, if 20mbps links need to be given 
away to get it, meaning less growth possibilty.  And a reoccurring 
cost following the ARPU longer.


(Not that I'm saying high ARPU is not good.)

I think their are more important factors like,

Time till ROI?
Profit during that time, and anticipated profit per year after that 
time (ROI).


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


- Original Message - From: "Peter R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 6:12 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] This is HUGE!



Because number of subs is the measuring stick.
Revenue is more important; but profit is the most important.
Not many can speak to profit, so they measure in subs.

- Peter



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Vonage

[Peter R.]

Never. The model doesn't work at their pricing model. They will never be 
profitable.
The $279 acquisition costs don't include hardware, advertising, referral 
fees, coop fees to retail partners.

Their churn is double digits.
They don't indicate how many purchase hardware and never activate.
Their acquisition cost would still be more than a year's worth of revenue.
However, that doesn't include payroll and ILEC & CLEC expenses which 
probably eat up 75% of their MRC.


- Peter


Tom DeReggi wrote:

Yes but Vonage is also a poor example of your arguement as 75% of 
their expendatures is in advertising.
That means 75% of their expendatures could be stopped on demand 
immediately, without reducing revenue.
How quickly could Vonage become profitable, when they reach the 
approrpiate scale, and they stop marketing?
I haven't done the math, but it paints a different picture of 
potential profitabilty.


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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Walla Walla

[Peter R.]

Actually, according to the Census data, Walla Walla has 2,252 businesses.
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/53/5375775.html

Even 5% of that would be a great business.

- Peter
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] 3650 equipment

[Tom DeReggi]

Brad,


Tom, Dang you got this all wrong. Let's make sure we understand what
Alvarion's comments said so everyone understands. Our comment breaking the
band in two was to strip rural and suburban from the top 100 US markets. 
Top
100 markets split in two 25 Mhz chunks and licensed with the REST of the 
US

being UL. There is plenty of broadband in those top 100 markets. The FCC's
intent for the 3650 band is suburbs and rural access.


Thanks for correcting that. I forgot that little detail, that makes a BIG 
difference for MANY WISPs.


However, I do not share Alvarion's view for several reasons.

1) 3650 is meant as a backhaul band first.  Most secondary markets still 
need to get their Internet Transit cost effectively from some where, to be 
successful. I do not liek it when secondary markets are held hostage by the 
local telcos and limited number of fiber carriers in their secondary 
markets.  Most WISPs in secondary markets will backhaul in their Internet 
Transit from the closest major city market, so they can get the best price 
on their transit.  If 3650 was not meant as a backhaul band, I would not 
have this view. Preventing its unlicenced use in the TOP 100 Markets means, 
that secondary markets can't use the 3650 rqange for the primary purpose 
getting cost effective bandwidth from the top 100 markets to the secondary 
markets.


2) I serve a top 100 market. Helping the rest of the rural world does me no 
good. In top 100 markets is where unlicensed is showing to be in the most 
shortage, therefore most needy of new unlicensed spectrum.  (This may be a 
mute point, as some have stated that my region (maryland/DC) is uneligible 
for 3650 based on proximity to pre-existing land stations. I have not 
confirmed this.)


3) One of the biggest mistakes being made in legislation and policy today in 
my opinion is officials are breaking down segments of consumers by rural, 
suburban, urban.  The problem is "Underserved".  I argue that there are near 
as many underserved consumers (in percentile) in Urban America as there are 
in Rural America.
Hole in coverage that DSL/Cable providers will likely NEVER have priority to 
serve.


4) I also believe that the TOP 100 markets are the most valuable. And giving 
those markets to the larger players that can afford buying the exclusive 
license, is giving the larger player an advantage to grow, and liekly help 
them more easilly move into the secondary markets to kill the secondary 
market providers eventually.  WISPs need to high income of Urban density to 
subsidize their growth as well as just the rural markets that nobody else 
wants.



" There are MANY WISPs ready to go and test the 3650 allocation, but it is
the manufacturers that are squashing the viabilty of the band by not 
having

the balls to make gear to meet the specification."

That's just not correct. What we don't want to do is build a product that
you'll have to rip out and replace because it doesn't meet the future
spec when we finally get a ruling on what the product should look and
smell like then most will invest and deliver a product.


Yes but the reason that there is not a "final ruling" and uncertainty is 
because manufacturers and special interests are protesting the final ruling 
that had already been made once.  Also take note, I am NOT specifically 
targeting Alvarion on this complaint of mine.  I was directing it to all 
manufacturers in the industry.
I guess I can't blaim manufacturers, as it is a lot of money to invest, to 
build a new product, when there is uncertainty in the spectrum.
But then again, that is why I made the cheap shot and added "have the balls 
to". Its a gutsy move to invest, and be the first to lead the way, in an 
uncertain market.



"Its not only important to incourage innovation and more efficient use of
technology but also more innovative and efficient Policy.  The attempted
3650 rules were to foster improved policy.  Why would anyone fight that?"

The 3650 is a rural broadband play getting you access to your own spectrum
to serve those customers without having to compete with baby monitors and
wifi gear on every street corner.



Innovation won't take place unless the FCC
takes a stand on technology.


Unfortuneately, that is what we are learning through this experiement. The 
FCC was trying to leave that up to the manufacturers and innovators. But 
that part of the science experiment is failing.  I agree the FCC is going to 
have to take their stance.



IMHO what we don't need is a bunch more
inefficient 20 mhz spectrum hogs at sub 10 meg speeds or worse.


That I fully agree with. But I do not think licensing the spectrum or 
splitting the band will solve that problem.

I am in favor of most suggestions that incourage that.
I am in favor of setting rules that require a certain level of efficiecy in 
the technology used.
Not necessarilly OFDM specifically, but a requirement to have X number of 
mbps per X mhz of spectrum, equivellent to the hig

Re: [WISPA] This is HUGE!

[John Scrivner]

For a long time WISP networks / BWI / Muniwireless / whatever name you 
want to give our platforms have been completely ignored as having a real 
impact on broadband delivery in this country. We get very little press 
about what we do and what impact we have had for broadband delivery, 
especially in underserved or unserved market areas. I have a had a big 
fear for a long time that the government would simply regulate us out of 
existence if we did not start getting some actual respectable data out 
there that we exist and that we are really serving broadband to people 
in a big way. The actual numbers are probably wrong but I bet we are 
serving at least 4 million people with fixed wireless broadband. That is 
nothing to sneeze at and certainly could justify a claim that we offer 
the true third pipe of broadband in this country. That is why I am 
excited about this report and I feel it is a good thing for us 
regardless of any errors in reporting. Pew is a respectable source of 
Internet market information so I doubt the errors will ever be given any 
real press and even if they did all it would lead to is more talk about 
the degree of impact we are having in delivering broadband. More talk 
like that is free press for us and is good. I tell people often that I 
really do not care if they are talking good or bad about me as much as I 
care that they are at least talking about me. If you are worthy of 
discussion then you are making things happen.  We made the report, I 
feel that is good for us.

Scriv



Tom DeReggi wrote:


John,

Your responses make sense.

I guess the bigger problem I have is, I jsut do not believe the stats.
I have rarely found that misleading inaccurate information works to 
one's advantage for long, on any topic.

Because eventually the real picture gets disclosed.
I wish WISPs really did have 8% of the market.

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


- Original Message - From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 12:50 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] This is HUGE!


Sorry TomI am going to drive a truck through your remarks here.   
:-)


Tom DeReggi wrote:


8% means...

You do not get preferrential treatment in legislation.



8% means that 8% of the people are using our service which means that 
our politicians have to look at how to serve the needs of those 
customers. It is not about us. It is about our customers. That is the 
job of public servants.



You do not get subsidees to foster growth of a startup industry.



Wrong. Grants, loans, etc. are based on needs of CUSTOMERS not of 
providers. USDA does not care if you get broadband to Farmer Dan via 
a string between two tin cans if it works. By the way, I was the 
first broadband in my town, we are not a startup industry any more.



You get taxed equally as telcos and cable companies.



Do you really think tax policy is different if you serve 8% than if 
you serve 1/2%? I assure you if the broadband tax cometh, you will be 
paying, regardless of how many customers you serve.


ISPs have a viable alternative, so LECs no longer need to share 
their networks with ISPs.



 Like AT&T is so open with their network? PLEASE!



8% is a HUGE percentage of market share. I'm not sure we want to 
take credit for that.

At this stage I think it could work against us.



There is only good that can come from people thinking 8% of the US is 
getting their service from us. We have been on the radar for a long 
time. Now it is time to deliver broadband over that radar! (That 
reminds me...where is that 5.4  GHz band!)

:-)
Scriv



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


- Original Message - From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 6:31 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] This is HUGE!


The point is we have a well known, if not largely credible source, 
who has just released a report that says we (Fixed Wireless 
Broadband Providers) are serving the broadband needs of 
approximately 8% of US home users. We obviously have been 
completely ignored in other reports and surveys so for once it is 
nice to see us represented in some statistically important degree. 
I am not really that concerned about the exact number of customers. 
It is just nice to see us making the report in some meaningful way.

Scriv



David E. Smith wrote:


John Scrivner wrote:

Check this out from the Pew report. It appears that fixed 
wireless is much bigger than what even I thought. According to 
this report 8% of all broadband connections in the US are 
delivered via fixed broadband wireless.




Ouch. That study looks to be horribly methodologically flawed.

(It's at 
http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Broadband_trends2006.pdf if

you're interested.)

Their survey required the responders to know what they were talking
about -- if you have DSL, but a wireless router/access point, 

Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?

[Tom DeReggi]

Blake,

Its not that I disagree with you, that "it is good business to take care of 
your customers."
Nor am I defending Hyperlinktech, as we don't have enough business 
experience with them, to have a valid opinion. but...



This isn't retail HomeDepot that we are talking about, this is distribution.
In my 10 years experience previously in the distribution business, I can 
tell you there are not many companies that give "refunds."
We also found that the companies that couldn't understand why "refunds" was 
bad business for distributors, usually were the ones that didn't do enough 
volume to matter wether we lost them.  I'm not saying that I personally do 
not believe in giving refunds. I also believe its best practice to take care 
of the customer, in most cases. But that does not change the fact that most 
dealers do NOT give refunds.



Tessco, Talley. Hutton, Electrocomm.


They may give refunds, but there significant hassle in getting it, that in 
most cases will be more costly to the buyer in time than the value of the 
refund.
They also usually charge a higher profit margin on every sale than the 
smaller distributor that is competing on price, and therefore has more 
margin to justify eating the cost to give the refund.


I bet the price received from Hyperlinktech was significantly less than that 
the Tesscos or Hutton's would have charged?
When price drops, terms gets tougher.  A distributor must determine which 
business they want to be in, and they can't be in both successfully.
If in the price market they need to have price policies. Descretion needs to 
be taken out of the set policies, otherwise its impossible to manage RMA 
processes.


There are many reasons strict policies need to be inforced for Refunds

1. Price constantly falls based on time. And even a week or s odone the road 
the cost of the product may have dropped.

2. People find something cheaper after the fact.
3. Sales people may have already been paid commissions.
4. If special order product, the vendor ends up getting stuck with the full 
cost of the product sitting in inventory for a long time, while price drops 
by the time someone wants the product. Guaranteed to sell the product at a 
loss as well as tie up cash flow.
5. People often irreputably return other vendor's products. Company 1 has 
stock and can ship today. Company 2 has lower cost.  Company 1 product gets 
installed. Company 2 product when arrives gets sent back to company 1 for 
refund. Buyer actually makes a profit on the deal, getting a higher dollar 
refunded than he paid for the gear from company 2. You'd be surprised how 
often this happened. Sometimes even involving invoice forging and swapping 
serial number stickers.
6. The easy way to keep EVERYONE happy, is instead to just offer credits or 
replacements. It keeps everyone honest. If the buyer is really going to be a 
repeat customer, its just a matter of time before he has another order that 
he can apply the credit to.


This is standard distribution policies. There are some exceptions. If the 
buyer bought a product that the vendor normally keeps in stock and sells a 
lot of, and its a product that the buyer will likely never need again, and 
the buyer didn't cause big inconvenience demanding immediate shipment of 
product for a rush order.  On these cases, vendors almost always will give 
the refund, even if against standard policies.


But there is no way you can say standard distribution policy is to give 
refunds. Just about every term sheet from anybody specifically says "NO 
REFUNDS, ALL SALES ARE FINAL". Thats jsut the reality.


Unless specifically discussed otherwise in advance of shipment.

If someone gives refunds, thats a plus that shows they add value. But not 
giving refunds does not infer wrong doing.


Just my opinion.

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


- Original Message - 
From: "Blake Bowers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 9:47 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?



A vendor that will not give a refund or credit?

Pretty poor business practice.  Many will tell you
that there is a restocking fee if the proper product
was shipped, and delivered in good condition, but
truth be known will waive that fee.  They add the fee
so they can have a way to deal with purchasers who
turn out to be frequent refunders.

Most businesses consider it a good business practice
to take care of their customers - not make life more
difficult for those customers.  It may cost you a little -
at one point, but the returns on your investment by
taking care of your customer are tremendous.

If I buy a widget from a company, and decide it
is not what I wanted, I would expect that company
to make some sort of refund, and I would be willing
to pay a small restocking fee if it was strictly my fault
for ordering something that did not fit my needs, and
it was done with no suggestio

Re: [WISPA] Vonage

[Tom DeReggi]

However, that doesn't include payroll and ILEC & CLEC expenses which 
probably eat up 75% of their MRC.


I read somewhere that actually 75% of Vonages costs are 
advertising/marketing costs.
Wether or not 75% of that 25% left is eaten up by ILEC costs and payroll, I 
do not know.


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


- Original Message - 
From: "Peter R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 10:42 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vonage


Never. The model doesn't work at their pricing model. They will never be 
profitable.
The $279 acquisition costs don't include hardware, advertising, referral 
fees, coop fees to retail partners.

Their churn is double digits.
They don't indicate how many purchase hardware and never activate.
Their acquisition cost would still be more than a year's worth of revenue.
However, that doesn't include payroll and ILEC & CLEC expenses which 
probably eat up 75% of their MRC.


- Peter


Tom DeReggi wrote:

Yes but Vonage is also a poor example of your arguement as 75% of their 
expendatures is in advertising.
That means 75% of their expendatures could be stopped on demand 
immediately, without reducing revenue.
How quickly could Vonage become profitable, when they reach the 
approrpiate scale, and they stop marketing?
I haven't done the math, but it paints a different picture of potential 
profitabilty.


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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

RE: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?

[JohnnyO]

*snip* If someone gives refunds, thats a plus that shows they add value.
But not 
giving refunds does not infer wrong doing. *snip*

Tom - it is wrong doing when you ban someone for requesting a refund.
Hell, I've never bought from Hyperlink and from seeing their "ban"
policy with a few of the posts on here, we'll never do business with
them in the future. I guess I am not the only one that takes this point
of view either, so how much $$ did the "ban" on Scriv cost them actually
? :)

JohnnyO

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 11:34 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?


Blake,

Its not that I disagree with you, that "it is good business to take care
of 
your customers."
Nor am I defending Hyperlinktech, as we don't have enough business 
experience with them, to have a valid opinion. but...


This isn't retail HomeDepot that we are talking about, this is
distribution. In my 10 years experience previously in the distribution
business, I can 
tell you there are not many companies that give "refunds."
We also found that the companies that couldn't understand why "refunds"
was 
bad business for distributors, usually were the ones that didn't do
enough 
volume to matter wether we lost them.  I'm not saying that I personally
do 
not believe in giving refunds. I also believe its best practice to take
care 
of the customer, in most cases. But that does not change the fact that
most 
dealers do NOT give refunds.

>Tessco, Talley. Hutton, Electrocomm.

They may give refunds, but there significant hassle in getting it, that
in 
most cases will be more costly to the buyer in time than the value of
the 
refund.
They also usually charge a higher profit margin on every sale than the 
smaller distributor that is competing on price, and therefore has more 
margin to justify eating the cost to give the refund.

I bet the price received from Hyperlinktech was significantly less than
that 
the Tesscos or Hutton's would have charged?
When price drops, terms gets tougher.  A distributor must determine
which 
business they want to be in, and they can't be in both successfully. If
in the price market they need to have price policies. Descretion needs
to 
be taken out of the set policies, otherwise its impossible to manage RMA

processes.

There are many reasons strict policies need to be inforced for
Refunds

1. Price constantly falls based on time. And even a week or s odone the
road 
the cost of the product may have dropped.
2. People find something cheaper after the fact.
3. Sales people may have already been paid commissions.
4. If special order product, the vendor ends up getting stuck with the
full 
cost of the product sitting in inventory for a long time, while price
drops 
by the time someone wants the product. Guaranteed to sell the product at
a 
loss as well as tie up cash flow.
5. People often irreputably return other vendor's products. Company 1
has 
stock and can ship today. Company 2 has lower cost.  Company 1 product
gets 
installed. Company 2 product when arrives gets sent back to company 1
for 
refund. Buyer actually makes a profit on the deal, getting a higher
dollar 
refunded than he paid for the gear from company 2. You'd be surprised
how 
often this happened. Sometimes even involving invoice forging and
swapping 
serial number stickers.
6. The easy way to keep EVERYONE happy, is instead to just offer credits
or 
replacements. It keeps everyone honest. If the buyer is really going to
be a 
repeat customer, its just a matter of time before he has another order
that 
he can apply the credit to.

This is standard distribution policies. There are some exceptions. If
the 
buyer bought a product that the vendor normally keeps in stock and sells
a 
lot of, and its a product that the buyer will likely never need again,
and 
the buyer didn't cause big inconvenience demanding immediate shipment of

product for a rush order.  On these cases, vendors almost always will
give 
the refund, even if against standard policies.

But there is no way you can say standard distribution policy is to give 
refunds. Just about every term sheet from anybody specifically says "NO 
REFUNDS, ALL SALES ARE FINAL". Thats jsut the reality.

Unless specifically discussed otherwise in advance of shipment.

If someone gives refunds, thats a plus that shows they add value. But
not 
giving refunds does not infer wrong doing.

Just my opinion.

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


- Original Message - 
From: "Blake Bowers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 9:47 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?


>A vendor that will not give a refund or credit?
>
> Pretty poor business practice.  Many will tell you
> that there is a restocking fee if the proper product
> was shipped, and de

[WISPA] Towers and the Law

[Owen Harrell]

I hope someone can help me on this. I believe that back in 1997 or 1998 a
law was passed that prevented local governments from preventing tower
construction that would provide Internet service to remote areas. If anyone
knows of such a law or could at least point me in the right direction, it
would be greatly appreciated. I am in the process of getting permits for new
towers and I would just like to be prepared in the unlikely case that the
county was to turn me down for my permits.

Thanks in Advance

Owen Harrell
Technology Supervisor
Essex Computers
2 East 3rd Street
Sterling, IL 61081
(815)380-4267
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?

[fred]

I pretty much just buy their 5, 10 and 25W 802.11b amplifiers ;)

I guess the what and the why plays a role in whether or not a 'refund'
is expected. I generally am happy with a credit because I plan to do
more business with a vendor/distributor.

Now, I got burned by a south florida cctv dealer and had to get Amex
involved. All over the fact that the dvr card they sent was missing
the breakout pigtail that made the thing usable and they could/would
not get the part sent to me. That part was probably a $15 part and it
cost them WAY more than that - amex charged back the full order amount
including almost $100 in ups red costs - at least that was the s/h
cost they had passed on to me.

Not that geography has ANYTHING to do with anything...

I haven't purchased much from Hyperlinktech but the small orders I've
placed were fulfilled and shipped to my satisfaction and i haven't had
cause to try their return/rma/credit policy.
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?

[John Scrivner]

I will pass along these final thoughts I have on the issues I had with 
Hyperlink. First of all I do not unduly burden my vendors and I pay for 
problems that I bring on myself. I also pay for support from vendors 
that I feel is beyond normal pre-sales support. The situation I had with 
them for the one and only purchase I ever made was for a shipment of 12 
- 900 MHz yagis. These units were about 8 feet long and were designed to 
mount on the end to an eave or chimney, etc. The trouble is that they 
were enormous. I was not satisfied with them. I asked for a return /  
restocking fee whatever to send them back. That was denied. I asked for 
a credit towards another purchase. That was denied. Please note that all 
along we were not allowed to speak to a representative at all. This was 
their policy. Emails were rarely responded to without multiple attempts. 
We finally got someone to agree to a credit but when nailed down on the 
terms of the credit we were told that we would no longer be able to buy 
from Hyperlink now or in the future. We were banned from dong business 
with them. It was quite possibly one of the most bizarre experiences I 
have ever had with a seemingly well-known and recognized distributor.



JohnnyO wrote:


*snip* If someone gives refunds, thats a plus that shows they add value.
But not 
giving refunds does not infer wrong doing. *snip*


Tom - it is wrong doing when you ban someone for requesting a refund.
Hell, I've never bought from Hyperlink and from seeing their "ban"
policy with a few of the posts on here, we'll never do business with
them in the future. I guess I am not the only one that takes this point
of view either, so how much $$ did the "ban" on Scriv cost them actually
? :)

JohnnyO

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 11:34 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?


Blake,

Its not that I disagree with you, that "it is good business to take care
of 
your customers."
Nor am I defending Hyperlinktech, as we don't have enough business 
experience with them, to have a valid opinion. but...



This isn't retail HomeDepot that we are talking about, this is
distribution. In my 10 years experience previously in the distribution
business, I can 
tell you there are not many companies that give "refunds."

We also found that the companies that couldn't understand why "refunds"
was 
bad business for distributors, usually were the ones that didn't do
enough 
volume to matter wether we lost them.  I'm not saying that I personally
do 
not believe in giving refunds. I also believe its best practice to take
care 
of the customer, in most cases. But that does not change the fact that
most 
dealers do NOT give refunds.


 


Tessco, Talley. Hutton, Electrocomm.
   



They may give refunds, but there significant hassle in getting it, that
in 
most cases will be more costly to the buyer in time than the value of
the 
refund.
They also usually charge a higher profit margin on every sale than the 
smaller distributor that is competing on price, and therefore has more 
margin to justify eating the cost to give the refund.


I bet the price received from Hyperlinktech was significantly less than
that 
the Tesscos or Hutton's would have charged?

When price drops, terms gets tougher.  A distributor must determine
which 
business they want to be in, and they can't be in both successfully. If

in the price market they need to have price policies. Descretion needs
to 
be taken out of the set policies, otherwise its impossible to manage RMA


processes.

There are many reasons strict policies need to be inforced for
Refunds

1. Price constantly falls based on time. And even a week or s odone the
road 
the cost of the product may have dropped.

2. People find something cheaper after the fact.
3. Sales people may have already been paid commissions.
4. If special order product, the vendor ends up getting stuck with the
full 
cost of the product sitting in inventory for a long time, while price
drops 
by the time someone wants the product. Guaranteed to sell the product at
a 
loss as well as tie up cash flow.

5. People often irreputably return other vendor's products. Company 1
has 
stock and can ship today. Company 2 has lower cost.  Company 1 product
gets 
installed. Company 2 product when arrives gets sent back to company 1
for 
refund. Buyer actually makes a profit on the deal, getting a higher
dollar 
refunded than he paid for the gear from company 2. You'd be surprised
how 
often this happened. Sometimes even involving invoice forging and
swapping 
serial number stickers.

6. The easy way to keep EVERYONE happy, is instead to just offer credits
or 
replacements. It keeps everyone honest. If the buyer is really going to
be a 
repeat customer, its just a matter of time before he has another order
that 
he can apply the credit to.


This is standa

Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?

[Blair Davis]

I really don't know why some have had problems.  I have a sales rep 
there that I always talk to.  (Neil)  I talk to him and him only to 
order or RMA or anything.


I do not order off the web page, from them or anyone.  I want a sales 
rep that I can call on the phone an b*tch at when I have a problem.  
Works for me.


Good luck.


John Scrivner wrote:

I will pass along these final thoughts I have on the issues I had with 
Hyperlink. First of all I do not unduly burden my vendors and I pay 
for problems that I bring on myself. I also pay for support from 
vendors that I feel is beyond normal pre-sales support. The situation 
I had with them for the one and only purchase I ever made was for a 
shipment of 12 - 900 MHz yagis. These units were about 8 feet long and 
were designed to mount on the end to an eave or chimney, etc. The 
trouble is that they were enormous. I was not satisfied with them. I 
asked for a return /  restocking fee whatever to send them back. That 
was denied. I asked for a credit towards another purchase. That was 
denied. Please note that all along we were not allowed to speak to a 
representative at all. This was their policy. Emails were rarely 
responded to without multiple attempts. We finally got someone to 
agree to a credit but when nailed down on the terms of the credit we 
were told that we would no longer be able to buy from Hyperlink now or 
in the future. We were banned from dong business with them. It was 
quite possibly one of the most bizarre experiences I have ever had 
with a seemingly well-known and recognized distributor.



JohnnyO wrote:


*snip* If someone gives refunds, thats a plus that shows they add value.
But not giving refunds does not infer wrong doing. *snip*

Tom - it is wrong doing when you ban someone for requesting a refund.
Hell, I've never bought from Hyperlink and from seeing their "ban"
policy with a few of the posts on here, we'll never do business with
them in the future. I guess I am not the only one that takes this point
of view either, so how much $$ did the "ban" on Scriv cost them actually
? :)

JohnnyO

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 11:34 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?


Blake,

Its not that I disagree with you, that "it is good business to take care
of your customers."
Nor am I defending Hyperlinktech, as we don't have enough business 
experience with them, to have a valid opinion. but...



This isn't retail HomeDepot that we are talking about, this is
distribution. In my 10 years experience previously in the distribution
business, I can tell you there are not many companies that give 
"refunds."

We also found that the companies that couldn't understand why "refunds"
was bad business for distributors, usually were the ones that didn't do
enough volume to matter wether we lost them.  I'm not saying that I 
personally
do not believe in giving refunds. I also believe its best practice to 
take
care of the customer, in most cases. But that does not change the 
fact that

most dealers do NOT give refunds.

 


Tessco, Talley. Hutton, Electrocomm.
  



They may give refunds, but there significant hassle in getting it, that
in most cases will be more costly to the buyer in time than the value of
the refund.
They also usually charge a higher profit margin on every sale than 
the smaller distributor that is competing on price, and therefore has 
more margin to justify eating the cost to give the refund.


I bet the price received from Hyperlinktech was significantly less than
that the Tesscos or Hutton's would have charged?
When price drops, terms gets tougher.  A distributor must determine
which business they want to be in, and they can't be in both 
successfully. If

in the price market they need to have price policies. Descretion needs
to be taken out of the set policies, otherwise its impossible to 
manage RMA


processes.

There are many reasons strict policies need to be inforced for
Refunds

1. Price constantly falls based on time. And even a week or s odone the
road the cost of the product may have dropped.
2. People find something cheaper after the fact.
3. Sales people may have already been paid commissions.
4. If special order product, the vendor ends up getting stuck with the
full cost of the product sitting in inventory for a long time, while 
price
drops by the time someone wants the product. Guaranteed to sell the 
product at

a loss as well as tie up cash flow.
5. People often irreputably return other vendor's products. Company 1
has stock and can ship today. Company 2 has lower cost.  Company 1 
product
gets installed. Company 2 product when arrives gets sent back to 
company 1

for refund. Buyer actually makes a profit on the deal, getting a higher
dollar refunded than he paid for the gear from company 2. You'd be 
surprised

how often this happened. Sometimes 

[WISPA] merchant accounts/credit cards

[danlist]

Can anybody suggest any good vendors for a merchant account and card processing
terminal?

Thanks


Dan Metcalf
Wireless Broadband Systems
www.wbisp.com
781-566-2053 ext 6201
1-888-wbsystem (888) 927-9783
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.0/352 - Release Date: 05/30/2006
 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

RE: [WISPA] merchant accounts/credit cards

[Frank]

Both of these have worked well for me:

http://www.authorize.net

http://www.primerchants.com


Thank you

Frank Keeney
Pasadena Networks, LLC
Antennas, Cables and Equipment:
http://www.wlanparts.com 
 

> -Original Message-
> On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Can anybody suggest any good vendors for a merchant account 
> and card processing terminal?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> Dan Metcalf
> Wireless Broadband Systems
> www.wbisp.com
> 781-566-2053 ext 6201
> 1-888-wbsystem (888) 927-9783
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  
> 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

RE: [WISPA] merchant accounts/credit cards

[Frank]

I also used ECHO many years ago when I had an ISP in the mid 90s. They
worked well for me at the time:

http://www.echo-inc.com



Frank Keeney
Pasadena Networks, LLC
Antennas, Cables and Equipment:
http://www.wlanparts.com  


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

RE: [WISPA] Towers and the Law

[Rick Smith]

We went and built 4 towers (rohn 25g, 50 footers each) on an island
where we needed to setup a wireless
Backbone around the island.

The town came blasting guns, we threw OTARD at them and they bought it.
My partner's a good sales guy, though :)

We ended up paying $250 per tower in fines, and the $75 permit fee, and
we went on our way.   YMMV :)

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Owen Harrell
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 1:23 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Towers and the Law


I hope someone can help me on this. I believe that back in 1997 or 1998
a law was passed that prevented local governments from preventing tower
construction that would provide Internet service to remote areas. If
anyone knows of such a law or could at least point me in the right
direction, it would be greatly appreciated. I am in the process of
getting permits for new towers and I would just like to be prepared in
the unlikely case that the county was to turn me down for my permits.

Thanks in Advance

Owen Harrell
Technology Supervisor
Essex Computers
2 East 3rd Street
Sterling, IL 61081
(815)380-4267
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

RE: [WISPA] merchant accounts/credit cards

[Brian Webster]

I use PayPal and am very happy. I do not have a terminal and do not need to
swipe cards from here. Their rates for non-eBay items seem to be in line
with others. I have full control over my account and even have a Master Card
debit card from them. Simple and painless and I don't have to maintain any
secure web sites to accept payment. Your needs may be different. Oh and by
the way people do not have to be PayPal members to post payments.



Thank You,
Brian Webster

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 3:40 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] merchant accounts/credit cards


Can anybody suggest any good vendors for a merchant account and card
processing
terminal?

Thanks


Dan Metcalf
Wireless Broadband Systems
www.wbisp.com
781-566-2053 ext 6201
1-888-wbsystem (888) 927-9783
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.0/352 - Release Date: 05/30/2006


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

RE: [WISPA] merchant accounts/credit cards

[Kelly Shaw]

I have had a good experience with these guys. They are compatible with my
billing/provisioning program.  They saved me a ton of money over my Bank of
America merchant account.

Infinity Payment Systems
Sales Office
800-706-7591
Richmond, VA

My contact was Rich Babbitt, but I've had to talk to him for over a year, so
I'm not sure he still works there.


Kelly Shaw
Pure Internet, Inc.
www.pure.net


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 3:40 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] merchant accounts/credit cards

Can anybody suggest any good vendors for a merchant account and card
processing terminal?

Thanks


Dan Metcalf
Wireless Broadband Systems
www.wbisp.com
781-566-2053 ext 6201
1-888-wbsystem (888) 927-9783
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.0/352 - Release Date: 05/30/2006
 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Towers and the Law

[Larry Yunker]

For the record, OTARD applies to residential rights to have an antenna which 
enables reception of TV broadcast/satelite signals.  I think that OTARD 
could be used to establish a similar right for a residential use of 
broadband access antennas as well.  However, OTARD doesn't do anything to 
give the PROVIDER (rather than the end-user) rights to install necessary 
antennas.  So, it sounds like you got lucky with your towers.


- Larry
- Original Message - 
From: "Rick Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 3:05 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Towers and the Law



We went and built 4 towers (rohn 25g, 50 footers each) on an island
where we needed to setup a wireless
Backbone around the island.

The town came blasting guns, we threw OTARD at them and they bought it.
My partner's a good sales guy, though :)

We ended up paying $250 per tower in fines, and the $75 permit fee, and
we went on our way.   YMMV :)

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Owen Harrell
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 1:23 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Towers and the Law


I hope someone can help me on this. I believe that back in 1997 or 1998
a law was passed that prevented local governments from preventing tower
construction that would provide Internet service to remote areas. If
anyone knows of such a law or could at least point me in the right
direction, it would be greatly appreciated. I am in the process of
getting permits for new towers and I would just like to be prepared in
the unlikely case that the county was to turn me down for my permits.

Thanks in Advance

Owen Harrell
Technology Supervisor
Essex Computers
2 East 3rd Street
Sterling, IL 61081
(815)380-4267
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Towers and the Law

[Matt Liotta]

From http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html...

Q: Does the rule apply to commercial property or only residential property?

A: Nothing in the rule excludes antennas installed on commercial 
property. The rule applies to property used for commercial purposes in 
the same way it applies to residential property.


-Matt

Larry Yunker wrote:

For the record, OTARD applies to residential rights to have an antenna 
which enables reception of TV broadcast/satelite signals.  I think 
that OTARD could be used to establish a similar right for a 
residential use of broadband access antennas as well.  However, OTARD 
doesn't do anything to give the PROVIDER (rather than the end-user) 
rights to install necessary antennas.  So, it sounds like you got 
lucky with your towers.


- Larry
- Original Message - From: "Rick Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 3:05 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Towers and the Law



We went and built 4 towers (rohn 25g, 50 footers each) on an island
where we needed to setup a wireless
Backbone around the island.

The town came blasting guns, we threw OTARD at them and they bought it.
My partner's a good sales guy, though :)

We ended up paying $250 per tower in fines, and the $75 permit fee, and
we went on our way.   YMMV :)

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Owen Harrell
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 1:23 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Towers and the Law


I hope someone can help me on this. I believe that back in 1997 or 1998
a law was passed that prevented local governments from preventing tower
construction that would provide Internet service to remote areas. If
anyone knows of such a law or could at least point me in the right
direction, it would be greatly appreciated. I am in the process of
getting permits for new towers and I would just like to be prepared in
the unlikely case that the county was to turn me down for my permits.

Thanks in Advance

Owen Harrell
Technology Supervisor
Essex Computers
2 East 3rd Street
Sterling, IL 61081
(815)380-4267
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] merchant accounts/credit cards

[D. Ryan Spott]

Cybersource.com via Bank of America.

DO NOT buy a terminal, use the virtual terminal.

I use the virtual terminal for my subscribers I enter a setup fee for  
$WW, subscription for $XX amount billed on YY day each month for  
ever, or until they want to leave my service.


I perform this entire transaction via their installed connection  
using my laptop before I leave.


It emails the client before and after the billing happens and emails  
them a warning when they need to call me to update their expiration  
date etc.


The virtual terminal also helps my insurance rates. I was quoted  
insurance premium x6 if I kept credit cards on file at my business. I  
figure BofA has more security goons than I do to keep this data safe.


If you do need a terminal, buy one off of ebay as the rental fees are  
like paying extortion!


Hope this helps!

ryan

On May 31, 2006, at 12:40 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
wrote:


Can anybody suggest any good vendors for a merchant account and  
card processing

terminal?

Thanks


Dan Metcalf
Wireless Broadband Systems
www.wbisp.com
781-566-2053 ext 6201
1-888-wbsystem (888) 927-9783
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.0/352 - Release Date:  
05/30/2006



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

[WISPA] Building a Nationwide WISP Collective

[Peter R.]

May 24, 2006

Why have one big wireless ISP when you can have hundreds of small ones?

That's the question NuTel Broadband Corporation 
 of Cranbury, New Jersey seems to be 
answering. The company wants to create partnerships with existing ISPs — 
or just entrepreneurial individuals or businesses — who think their town 
or suburb deserves better broadband.


"We're talking to small to medium communities, looking at each of them 
as individual operating entities — each gets its own company," says Joe 
Fiero, CEO of NuTel. "We're the managing partner; they're the operating 
partner."


That partnership breaks down into NuTel handling everything on the back 
end, from billing to support, while the operating partner pays for and 
installs the equipment (mesh products from SkyPilot Networks 
) to NuTel's specifications. The local 
operator owns the relationship with the customer and gets paid by NuTel 
for running things out of what customers get billed.


--


Regards,

Peter
RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist
We Help ISPs Connect & Communicate
813.963.5884 
http://4isps.com/newsletter.htm



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Towers and the Law

[Blake Bowers]

As long as you quote, Larry is correct.  Look at the web page
you mention...   The subject line...

Over the Air RECEPTION devices rule.

Then it does make a little exception down lower in the page,

On October 25, 2000, the Commission further amended the rule so that it 
applies


to customer-end antennas that receive and transmit fixed wireless signals.

This amendment became effective on May 25, 2001.


CUSTOMER-end antennas.

Q: Does the rule apply to hub or relay antennas?

A: The rule applies to "customer-end antennas" which are antennas placed at 
a customer location for the purpose of providing service to customers at 
that location. The rule does not cover antennas used to transmit signals to 
and/or receive signals from multiple customer locations.




Then it pretty much squashes a WISP's antennas for providing service to 
multiple users.








- Original Message - 
From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 4:11 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Towers and the Law



From http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html...

Q: Does the rule apply to commercial property or only residential 
property?


A: Nothing in the rule excludes antennas installed on commercial property. 
The rule applies to property used for commercial purposes in the same way 
it applies to residential property.


-Matt

Larry Yunker wrote:

For the record, OTARD applies to residential rights to have an antenna 
which enables reception of TV broadcast/satelite signals.  I think that 
OTARD could be used to establish a similar right for a residential use of 
broadband access antennas as well.  However, OTARD doesn't do anything to 
give the PROVIDER (rather than the end-user) rights to install necessary 
antennas.  So, it sounds like you got lucky with your towers.


- Larry



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Towers and the Law

[Matt Liotta]

I wasn't arguing that point; I was arguing that OTARD doesn't only apply 
to residential property.


-Matt

Blake Bowers wrote:


As long as you quote, Larry is correct.  Look at the web page
you mention...   The subject line...

Over the Air RECEPTION devices rule.

Then it does make a little exception down lower in the page,

On October 25, 2000, the Commission further amended the rule so that 
it applies


to customer-end antennas that receive and transmit fixed wireless 
signals.


This amendment became effective on May 25, 2001.


CUSTOMER-end antennas.

Q: Does the rule apply to hub or relay antennas?

A: The rule applies to "customer-end antennas" which are antennas 
placed at a customer location for the purpose of providing service to 
customers at that location. The rule does not cover antennas used to 
transmit signals to and/or receive signals from multiple customer 
locations.




Then it pretty much squashes a WISP's antennas for providing service 
to multiple users.








- Original Message - From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 4:11 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Towers and the Law



From http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html...

Q: Does the rule apply to commercial property or only residential 
property?


A: Nothing in the rule excludes antennas installed on commercial 
property. The rule applies to property used for commercial purposes 
in the same way it applies to residential property.


-Matt

Larry Yunker wrote:

For the record, OTARD applies to residential rights to have an 
antenna which enables reception of TV broadcast/satelite signals.  I 
think that OTARD could be used to establish a similar right for a 
residential use of broadband access antennas as well.  However, 
OTARD doesn't do anything to give the PROVIDER (rather than the 
end-user) rights to install necessary antennas.  So, it sounds like 
you got lucky with your towers.


- Larry







--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] merchant accounts/credit cards

[Rich Comroe]

I use PayPal and am very happy.


I originally used PayPal and was forced to switch to a merchant e-account. 
Too many orders from countries where PayPal didn't serve.



Oh and by
the way people do not have to be PayPal members to post payments.


Too many orders lost from customers that don't have PayPal accounts (unless 
things changed in the last 2 years since I switched to e-account, but way 
back you had to setup a PayPal account to make a purchase).


Too many orders lost from customers that refused to use PayPal.  Too much 
time spent providing customers with bank transfer info that couldn't or 
wouldn't use PayPal.  It was a wonderful relief the moment I left PayPal 
behind and had direct credit card clearing from mastercard or visa.


Vendor recommendations?  I'll admit I didn't shop independently.  Our 
hosting service provided e-commerce with MIVA Merchant, and enabled credit 
card clearing with LinkPoint CSI.  Works great.


Rich

- Original Message - 
From: "Brian Webster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 3:14 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] merchant accounts/credit cards


I do not have a terminal and do not need to

swipe cards from here. Their rates for non-eBay items seem to be in line
with others. I have full control over my account and even have a Master 
Card

debit card from them. Simple and painless and I don't have to maintain any
secure web sites to accept payment. Your needs may be different. Oh and by
the way people do not have to be PayPal members to post payments.



Thank You,
Brian Webster

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 3:40 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] merchant accounts/credit cards


Can anybody suggest any good vendors for a merchant account and card
processing
terminal?

Thanks


Dan Metcalf
Wireless Broadband Systems
www.wbisp.com
781-566-2053 ext 6201
1-888-wbsystem (888) 927-9783
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.0/352 - Release Date: 05/30/2006


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Fw: [WISPA] Towers and the Law

[Larry Yunker]

I stand corrected.  The actual text of the document indicates that the rules
apply:
"on property within the exclusive use or control of the antenna user where
the user has a direct or indirect ownership or leasehold interest in the
property"

So, if the antenna is situated on leased or owned land (residential or
commercial), OTARD can apply.  However, OTARD still only deals with 
end-user

antennas and not WISP broadcast service antennas.

- Larry

- Original Message - 
From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 4:31 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Towers and the Law


I wasn't arguing that point; I was arguing that OTARD doesn't only apply 
to residential property.


-Matt

Blake Bowers wrote:


As long as you quote, Larry is correct.  Look at the web page
you mention...   The subject line...

Over the Air RECEPTION devices rule.

Then it does make a little exception down lower in the page,

On October 25, 2000, the Commission further amended the rule so that it 
applies


to customer-end antennas that receive and transmit fixed wireless 
signals.


This amendment became effective on May 25, 2001.


CUSTOMER-end antennas.

Q: Does the rule apply to hub or relay antennas?

A: The rule applies to "customer-end antennas" which are antennas placed 
at a customer location for the purpose of providing service to customers 
at that location. The rule does not cover antennas used to transmit 
signals to and/or receive signals from multiple customer locations.




Then it pretty much squashes a WISP's antennas for providing service to 
multiple users.








- Original Message - From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 4:11 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Towers and the Law



From http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html...

Q: Does the rule apply to commercial property or only residential 
property?


A: Nothing in the rule excludes antennas installed on commercial 
property. The rule applies to property used for commercial purposes in 
the same way it applies to residential property.


-Matt

Larry Yunker wrote:

For the record, OTARD applies to residential rights to have an antenna 
which enables reception of TV broadcast/satelite signals.  I think 
that OTARD could be used to establish a similar right for a 
residential use of broadband access antennas as well.  However, OTARD 
doesn't do anything to give the PROVIDER (rather than the end-user) 
rights to install necessary antennas.  So, it sounds like you got 
lucky with your towers.


- Larry







--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] merchant accounts/credit cards

[Jason Hensley]

One question here would be are you integrating with a billing system of any 
kind?  If so, what does that billing system support?  I've had great luck 
with Linkpoint (integrated with Platypus), and also use Innovative Merchant 
Solutions (integrated with Quickbooks Point of Sale - no other choice that I 
know of, but the are VERY reasonable) for my storefront / retail sales 
activities.





- Original Message - 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 2:40 PM
Subject: [WISPA] merchant accounts/credit cards


Can anybody suggest any good vendors for a merchant account and card 
processing

terminal?

Thanks


Dan Metcalf
Wireless Broadband Systems
www.wbisp.com
781-566-2053 ext 6201
1-888-wbsystem (888) 927-9783
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.0/352 - Release Date: 05/30/2006


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Walla Walla

[Mark Koskenmaki]

I don't serve Walla Walla.   Walla Walla has 3 WISP's, DSL and cable.   Let
me re-phrase, I don't market to Walla Walla at all.My only office
connection is downtown, however.  I made a residential customer a deal on
adding his office.

I market to the surrounding areas not served by DSL or Cable - specifically
remote areas in the mountains, etc.


North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061
personal correspondence to:  mark at neofast dot net
sales inquiries to:  purchasing at neofast dot net
Fast Internet, NO WIRES!

-
- Original Message - 
From: "Peter R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 7:54 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Walla Walla


> Actually, according to the Census data, Walla Walla has 2,252 businesses.
> http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/53/5375775.html
>
> Even 5% of that would be a great business.
>
> - Peter
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Towers and the Law

[George Rogato]

Rick Smith wrote:

We went and built 4 towers (rohn 25g, 50 footers each) on an island
where we needed to setup a wireless
Backbone around the island.

The town came blasting guns, we threw OTARD at them and they bought it.
My partner's a good sales guy, though :)

We ended up paying $250 per tower in fines, and the $75 permit fee, and
we went on our way.   YMMV :)


Your lucky.
I got a lease signed by the city for the water towers.
Before I got to go on the tower the city told me I needed to have a 
building permit.I debated the need for a building permit, but ended up 
"buying" one anyways, I could be wrong and figured it's just a permit a 
and some money. And who cares if the city wants to get a few more bucks 
out of me, it's my city and they gave me a smoking deal on the towers, 
which I am grateful for.


So, then I am about ready to build out the tower, with my lease and 
permit in hand and I get a call from another city dept head telling me 
that there was some codes that required me to get a conditional use 
permit, that nobody realized before they signed a lease and gave me a 
permit.
We debated my need for that as well. Then I was told that the city had 
adopted a tower ordinance for 'telecommunications' sites. They said that 
if the antennas were to be placed at more than 9' above the structure 
that I would have to go in front of the planning commission and get a 
conditional use permit. So I told them that the antennas were being 
mounted on the railings of the water tank which is like 20' below the 
top of the tanks. She comes back with in our ordinance it also says 9' 
above the ground or above the top of the structure. And your antennas 
are 9' above the ground.


So we debated this abit. I also tossed out there that what I do is not 
telecommunications but information technology and the FCC says so and 
the ordinance did not apply to me, just telecommunications.


I talked to several other city hall people who you would say are at the 
top of the chain of command who agreed with me.


But I kept having this one person who ultimately was the one to approve 
and she kept reading the ordinance and disputing what those above her 
said. There is a protocol involved.


I also have on our server a copy of all the city council meetings, 
planning commission meetings, etc.


I found a copy of the meeting where the city council and mayor 
unanimously approved me building out on the water tanks and directed the 
city manager to write up a lease.


To no avail.
I just couldn't get this one person to get with the program.
Finally I get everyone involved, it gets discussed at a city council 
meeting and again they say yes George belongs on the tower and he doe 
NOT need a conditional use permit.


Relief, or so I thought.

I actually applied for and paid 900.00 for the conditional use permit 
"application"


Then finally I get city hall telling me to go pick up my check that it 
wasn't needed seeing I didn't have to get a conditional use permit.


Tiffany goes to pick up the check an she is told, you need to have a 
design review and that costs 800.00...


I came back with that there must have been a design review done because 
I was given a building permit and I had my guy who is an architectural 
grad draft up an auto cad of the entire installation right down to the 
clamps used to scale.


She comes back with, we gave you a permit for the bottom of the tower 
not the top.


I couple of phone calls later I got final approval and a call from her 
saying that she was going to allow me to proceed, but she didn't agree 
with the i saying it was against the code and she was only giving it to 
me because her boss is making her .


All it takes is one person, regardless if you have 99 other people 
rooting for you, to stick a spoke in your wheels.


Cingular also is in the process of signing a lease on one of these 
towers and they were grilled by the planning commission who had stacks 
of letters from neighbors who said they didn't want a cell phone site so 
close to their homes. They might get cancer from fr radiation.
In our county they do have an ordinance saying that all cell phone sites 
have to be at least 1000' away from a residence.


Lucky for me, I wasn't really in a hurry because I've been waiting for 
the final version of Lonnie's war boards to come out.


I just today got the approved set of prints back and will start this 
week on my tower project.


George




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?

[Tom DeReggi]

Well JohnnyO,

That I agree with.  My defense was not of Hyperlink. My defense was that not 
giving refunds is not a bad thing.
Banning someone (a prosective buyer) for such a request or for that matter 
ANY REASON is absolutely rediculous.
Vendors have the right to set their policies, but they also have the 
responsibility to be the bigger person, and to not let individual 
transaction decisions with a consumer effect their judgement, emotion, 
professionalism, and future business decissions.


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


- Original Message - 
From: "JohnnyO" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 12:58 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?



*snip* If someone gives refunds, thats a plus that shows they add value.
But not
giving refunds does not infer wrong doing. *snip*

Tom - it is wrong doing when you ban someone for requesting a refund.
Hell, I've never bought from Hyperlink and from seeing their "ban"
policy with a few of the posts on here, we'll never do business with
them in the future. I guess I am not the only one that takes this point
of view either, so how much $$ did the "ban" on Scriv cost them actually
? :)

JohnnyO

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 11:34 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?


Blake,

Its not that I disagree with you, that "it is good business to take care
of
your customers."
Nor am I defending Hyperlinktech, as we don't have enough business
experience with them, to have a valid opinion. but...


This isn't retail HomeDepot that we are talking about, this is
distribution. In my 10 years experience previously in the distribution
business, I can
tell you there are not many companies that give "refunds."
We also found that the companies that couldn't understand why "refunds"
was
bad business for distributors, usually were the ones that didn't do
enough
volume to matter wether we lost them.  I'm not saying that I personally
do
not believe in giving refunds. I also believe its best practice to take
care
of the customer, in most cases. But that does not change the fact that
most
dealers do NOT give refunds.


Tessco, Talley. Hutton, Electrocomm.


They may give refunds, but there significant hassle in getting it, that
in
most cases will be more costly to the buyer in time than the value of
the
refund.
They also usually charge a higher profit margin on every sale than the
smaller distributor that is competing on price, and therefore has more
margin to justify eating the cost to give the refund.

I bet the price received from Hyperlinktech was significantly less than
that
the Tesscos or Hutton's would have charged?
When price drops, terms gets tougher.  A distributor must determine
which
business they want to be in, and they can't be in both successfully. If
in the price market they need to have price policies. Descretion needs
to
be taken out of the set policies, otherwise its impossible to manage RMA

processes.

There are many reasons strict policies need to be inforced for
Refunds

1. Price constantly falls based on time. And even a week or s odone the
road
the cost of the product may have dropped.
2. People find something cheaper after the fact.
3. Sales people may have already been paid commissions.
4. If special order product, the vendor ends up getting stuck with the
full
cost of the product sitting in inventory for a long time, while price
drops
by the time someone wants the product. Guaranteed to sell the product at
a
loss as well as tie up cash flow.
5. People often irreputably return other vendor's products. Company 1
has
stock and can ship today. Company 2 has lower cost.  Company 1 product
gets
installed. Company 2 product when arrives gets sent back to company 1
for
refund. Buyer actually makes a profit on the deal, getting a higher
dollar
refunded than he paid for the gear from company 2. You'd be surprised
how
often this happened. Sometimes even involving invoice forging and
swapping
serial number stickers.
6. The easy way to keep EVERYONE happy, is instead to just offer credits
or
replacements. It keeps everyone honest. If the buyer is really going to
be a
repeat customer, its just a matter of time before he has another order
that
he can apply the credit to.

This is standard distribution policies. There are some exceptions. If
the
buyer bought a product that the vendor normally keeps in stock and sells
a
lot of, and its a product that the buyer will likely never need again,
and
the buyer didn't cause big inconvenience demanding immediate shipment of

product for a rush order.  On these cases, vendors almost always will
give
the refund, even if against standard policies.

But there is no way you can say standard distribution policy is to give
refunds. Just about every term sheet from 

Re: [WISPA] Towers and the Law

[Tom DeReggi]

Unfortuneately I believe the legal battle went in the favor of the county. 
There is one major case that addressed this.
For the life of me, the details are escaping my mind.  From what I remember 
the law was meant to encourage prompt response from the county, apposed to a 
requirement that the county had to authorize the tower building.




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


- Original Message - 
From: "Owen Harrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 1:22 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Towers and the Law




I hope someone can help me on this. I believe that back in 1997 or 1998 a
law was passed that prevented local governments from preventing tower
construction that would provide Internet service to remote areas. If 
anyone

knows of such a law or could at least point me in the right direction, it
would be greatly appreciated. I am in the process of getting permits for 
new

towers and I would just like to be prepared in the unlikely case that the
county was to turn me down for my permits.

Thanks in Advance

Owen Harrell
Technology Supervisor
Essex Computers
2 East 3rd Street
Sterling, IL 61081
(815)380-4267
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?

[Tom DeReggi]

John,

Wow, I don't know what to say to that.
Thats crazy!  I never heard anything like that before. 
I get your point.


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


- Original Message - 
From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?


I will pass along these final thoughts I have on the issues I had with 
Hyperlink. First of all I do not unduly burden my vendors and I pay for 
problems that I bring on myself. I also pay for support from vendors 
that I feel is beyond normal pre-sales support. The situation I had with 
them for the one and only purchase I ever made was for a shipment of 12 
- 900 MHz yagis. These units were about 8 feet long and were designed to 
mount on the end to an eave or chimney, etc. The trouble is that they 
were enormous. I was not satisfied with them. I asked for a return /  
restocking fee whatever to send them back. That was denied. I asked for 
a credit towards another purchase. That was denied. Please note that all 
along we were not allowed to speak to a representative at all. This was 
their policy. Emails were rarely responded to without multiple attempts. 
We finally got someone to agree to a credit but when nailed down on the 
terms of the credit we were told that we would no longer be able to buy 
from Hyperlink now or in the future. We were banned from dong business 
with them. It was quite possibly one of the most bizarre experiences I 
have ever had with a seemingly well-known and recognized distributor.



JohnnyO wrote:


*snip* If someone gives refunds, thats a plus that shows they add value.
But not 
giving refunds does not infer wrong doing. *snip*


Tom - it is wrong doing when you ban someone for requesting a refund.
Hell, I've never bought from Hyperlink and from seeing their "ban"
policy with a few of the posts on here, we'll never do business with
them in the future. I guess I am not the only one that takes this point
of view either, so how much $$ did the "ban" on Scriv cost them actually
? :)

JohnnyO

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 11:34 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?


Blake,

Its not that I disagree with you, that "it is good business to take care
of 
your customers."
Nor am I defending Hyperlinktech, as we don't have enough business 
experience with them, to have a valid opinion. but...



This isn't retail HomeDepot that we are talking about, this is
distribution. In my 10 years experience previously in the distribution
business, I can 
tell you there are not many companies that give "refunds."

We also found that the companies that couldn't understand why "refunds"
was 
bad business for distributors, usually were the ones that didn't do
enough 
volume to matter wether we lost them.  I'm not saying that I personally
do 
not believe in giving refunds. I also believe its best practice to take
care 
of the customer, in most cases. But that does not change the fact that
most 
dealers do NOT give refunds.


 


Tessco, Talley. Hutton, Electrocomm.
   



They may give refunds, but there significant hassle in getting it, that
in 
most cases will be more costly to the buyer in time than the value of
the 
refund.
They also usually charge a higher profit margin on every sale than the 
smaller distributor that is competing on price, and therefore has more 
margin to justify eating the cost to give the refund.


I bet the price received from Hyperlinktech was significantly less than
that 
the Tesscos or Hutton's would have charged?

When price drops, terms gets tougher.  A distributor must determine
which 
business they want to be in, and they can't be in both successfully. If

in the price market they need to have price policies. Descretion needs
to 
be taken out of the set policies, otherwise its impossible to manage RMA


processes.

There are many reasons strict policies need to be inforced for
Refunds

1. Price constantly falls based on time. And even a week or s odone the
road 
the cost of the product may have dropped.

2. People find something cheaper after the fact.
3. Sales people may have already been paid commissions.
4. If special order product, the vendor ends up getting stuck with the
full 
cost of the product sitting in inventory for a long time, while price
drops 
by the time someone wants the product. Guaranteed to sell the product at
a 
loss as well as tie up cash flow.

5. People often irreputably return other vendor's products. Company 1
has 
stock and can ship today. Company 2 has lower cost.  Company 1 product
gets 
installed. Company 2 product when arrives gets sent back to company 1
for 
refund. Buyer actually makes a profit on the deal, getting a higher
dollar 
refunded than he paid for the gear from company 2

Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?

[Bob Knight]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

John - that is truly bizarre, as you say. We've bought a lot of antenna stuff 
from
Hyperlink in the past, but your experience sours me on doing business with them 
in the
future. I've found that a lot of vendors to the WISP space are very helpful and 
will work
with you, even if you (me in this case) possess no or wrong clues :). That's 
one of the
things I've liked about doing this coop, feeling that there was a sense of 
community even
with the vendors.

I guess there are people who don't understand about customer service. That's 
OK, there are
plenty that do and they'll get our biz.

Bob

John Scrivner wrote:
> I will pass along these final thoughts I have on the issues I had with
> Hyperlink. First of all I do not unduly burden my vendors and I pay for
> problems that I bring on myself. I also pay for support from vendors
> that I feel is beyond normal pre-sales support. The situation I had with
> them for the one and only purchase I ever made was for a shipment of 12
> - 900 MHz yagis. These units were about 8 feet long and were designed to
> mount on the end to an eave or chimney, etc. The trouble is that they
> were enormous. I was not satisfied with them. I asked for a return / 
> restocking fee whatever to send them back. That was denied. I asked for
> a credit towards another purchase. That was denied. Please note that all
> along we were not allowed to speak to a representative at all. This was
> their policy. Emails were rarely responded to without multiple attempts.
> We finally got someone to agree to a credit but when nailed down on the
> terms of the credit we were told that we would no longer be able to buy
> from Hyperlink now or in the future. We were banned from dong business
> with them. It was quite possibly one of the most bizarre experiences I
> have ever had with a seemingly well-known and recognized distributor.
> 
> 
> JohnnyO wrote:
> 
>> *snip* If someone gives refunds, thats a plus that shows they add value.
>> But not giving refunds does not infer wrong doing. *snip*
>>
>> Tom - it is wrong doing when you ban someone for requesting a refund.
>> Hell, I've never bought from Hyperlink and from seeing their "ban"
>> policy with a few of the posts on here, we'll never do business with
>> them in the future. I guess I am not the only one that takes this point
>> of view either, so how much $$ did the "ban" on Scriv cost them actually
>> ? :)
>>
>> JohnnyO
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 11:34 AM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?
>>
>>
>> Blake,
>>
>> Its not that I disagree with you, that "it is good business to take care
>> of your customers."
>> Nor am I defending Hyperlinktech, as we don't have enough business
>> experience with them, to have a valid opinion. but...
>>
>>
>> This isn't retail HomeDepot that we are talking about, this is
>> distribution. In my 10 years experience previously in the distribution
>> business, I can tell you there are not many companies that give
>> "refunds."
>> We also found that the companies that couldn't understand why "refunds"
>> was bad business for distributors, usually were the ones that didn't do
>> enough volume to matter wether we lost them.  I'm not saying that I
>> personally
>> do not believe in giving refunds. I also believe its best practice to
>> take
>> care of the customer, in most cases. But that does not change the fact
>> that
>> most dealers do NOT give refunds.
>>
>>  
>>
>>> Tessco, Talley. Hutton, Electrocomm.
>>>   
>>
>> They may give refunds, but there significant hassle in getting it, that
>> in most cases will be more costly to the buyer in time than the value of
>> the refund.
>> They also usually charge a higher profit margin on every sale than the
>> smaller distributor that is competing on price, and therefore has more
>> margin to justify eating the cost to give the refund.
>>
>> I bet the price received from Hyperlinktech was significantly less than
>> that the Tesscos or Hutton's would have charged?
>> When price drops, terms gets tougher.  A distributor must determine
>> which business they want to be in, and they can't be in both
>> successfully. If
>> in the price market they need to have price policies. Descretion needs
>> to be taken out of the set policies, otherwise its impossible to
>> manage RMA
>>
>> processes.
>>
>> There are many reasons strict policies need to be inforced for
>> Refunds
>>
>> 1. Price constantly falls based on time. And even a week or s odone the
>> road the cost of the product may have dropped.
>> 2. People find something cheaper after the fact.
>> 3. Sales people may have already been paid commissions.
>> 4. If special order product, the vendor ends up getting stuck with the
>> full cost of the product sitting in inventory for a long time, while
>> price

Re: [WISPA] Towers and the Law

[Jack Unger]

George,

Congratulations on your ability and your willingness to hang in there!

jack


George Rogato wrote:


Rick Smith wrote:


We went and built 4 towers (rohn 25g, 50 footers each) on an island
where we needed to setup a wireless
Backbone around the island.

The town came blasting guns, we threw OTARD at them and they bought it.
My partner's a good sales guy, though :)

We ended up paying $250 per tower in fines, and the $75 permit fee, and
we went on our way.   YMMV :)



Your lucky.
I got a lease signed by the city for the water towers.
Before I got to go on the tower the city told me I needed to have a 
building permit.I debated the need for a building permit, but ended up 
"buying" one anyways, I could be wrong and figured it's just a permit a 
and some money. And who cares if the city wants to get a few more bucks 
out of me, it's my city and they gave me a smoking deal on the towers, 
which I am grateful for.


So, then I am about ready to build out the tower, with my lease and 
permit in hand and I get a call from another city dept head telling me 
that there was some codes that required me to get a conditional use 
permit, that nobody realized before they signed a lease and gave me a 
permit.
We debated my need for that as well. Then I was told that the city had 
adopted a tower ordinance for 'telecommunications' sites. They said that 
if the antennas were to be placed at more than 9' above the structure 
that I would have to go in front of the planning commission and get a 
conditional use permit. So I told them that the antennas were being 
mounted on the railings of the water tank which is like 20' below the 
top of the tanks. She comes back with in our ordinance it also says 9' 
above the ground or above the top of the structure. And your antennas 
are 9' above the ground.


So we debated this abit. I also tossed out there that what I do is not 
telecommunications but information technology and the FCC says so and 
the ordinance did not apply to me, just telecommunications.


I talked to several other city hall people who you would say are at the 
top of the chain of command who agreed with me.


But I kept having this one person who ultimately was the one to approve 
and she kept reading the ordinance and disputing what those above her 
said. There is a protocol involved.


I also have on our server a copy of all the city council meetings, 
planning commission meetings, etc.


I found a copy of the meeting where the city council and mayor 
unanimously approved me building out on the water tanks and directed the 
city manager to write up a lease.


To no avail.
I just couldn't get this one person to get with the program.
Finally I get everyone involved, it gets discussed at a city council 
meeting and again they say yes George belongs on the tower and he doe 
NOT need a conditional use permit.


Relief, or so I thought.

I actually applied for and paid 900.00 for the conditional use permit 
"application"


Then finally I get city hall telling me to go pick up my check that it 
wasn't needed seeing I didn't have to get a conditional use permit.


Tiffany goes to pick up the check an she is told, you need to have a 
design review and that costs 800.00...


I came back with that there must have been a design review done because 
I was given a building permit and I had my guy who is an architectural 
grad draft up an auto cad of the entire installation right down to the 
clamps used to scale.


She comes back with, we gave you a permit for the bottom of the tower 
not the top.


I couple of phone calls later I got final approval and a call from her 
saying that she was going to allow me to proceed, but she didn't agree 
with the i saying it was against the code and she was only giving it to 
me because her boss is making her .


All it takes is one person, regardless if you have 99 other people 
rooting for you, to stick a spoke in your wheels.


Cingular also is in the process of signing a lease on one of these 
towers and they were grilled by the planning commission who had stacks 
of letters from neighbors who said they didn't want a cell phone site so 
close to their homes. They might get cancer from fr radiation.
In our county they do have an ordinance saying that all cell phone sites 
have to be at least 1000' away from a residence.


Lucky for me, I wasn't really in a hurry because I've been waiting for 
the final version of Lonnie's war boards to come out.


I just today got the approved set of prints back and will start this 
week on my tower project.


George






--
Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993
Author of the WISP Handbook - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
Our next WISP Workshop is June 21-22 in Atlanta, GA.
Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220  www.ask-wi.com




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Re: [WISPA] Towers and the Law

[George Rogato]

Thanks Jack,

Besides hanging in there, I tried very hard not to piss anyone off or 
offend them.


Politics can get messy.

George

Jack Unger wrote:

George,

Congratulations on your ability and your willingness to hang in there!

jack


George Rogato wrote:


Rick Smith wrote:


We went and built 4 towers (rohn 25g, 50 footers each) on an island
where we needed to setup a wireless
Backbone around the island.

The town came blasting guns, we threw OTARD at them and they bought it.
My partner's a good sales guy, though :)

We ended up paying $250 per tower in fines, and the $75 permit fee, and
we went on our way.   YMMV :)




Your lucky.
I got a lease signed by the city for the water towers.
Before I got to go on the tower the city told me I needed to have a 
building permit.I debated the need for a building permit, but ended up 
"buying" one anyways, I could be wrong and figured it's just a permit 
a and some money. And who cares if the city wants to get a few more 
bucks out of me, it's my city and they gave me a smoking deal on the 
towers, which I am grateful for.


So, then I am about ready to build out the tower, with my lease and 
permit in hand and I get a call from another city dept head telling me 
that there was some codes that required me to get a conditional use 
permit, that nobody realized before they signed a lease and gave me a 
permit.
We debated my need for that as well. Then I was told that the city had 
adopted a tower ordinance for 'telecommunications' sites. They said 
that if the antennas were to be placed at more than 9' above the 
structure that I would have to go in front of the planning commission 
and get a conditional use permit. So I told them that the antennas 
were being mounted on the railings of the water tank which is like 20' 
below the top of the tanks. She comes back with in our ordinance it 
also says 9' above the ground or above the top of the structure. And 
your antennas are 9' above the ground.


So we debated this abit. I also tossed out there that what I do is not 
telecommunications but information technology and the FCC says so and 
the ordinance did not apply to me, just telecommunications.


I talked to several other city hall people who you would say are at 
the top of the chain of command who agreed with me.


But I kept having this one person who ultimately was the one to 
approve and she kept reading the ordinance and disputing what those 
above her said. There is a protocol involved.


I also have on our server a copy of all the city council meetings, 
planning commission meetings, etc.


I found a copy of the meeting where the city council and mayor 
unanimously approved me building out on the water tanks and directed 
the city manager to write up a lease.


To no avail.
I just couldn't get this one person to get with the program.
Finally I get everyone involved, it gets discussed at a city council 
meeting and again they say yes George belongs on the tower and he doe 
NOT need a conditional use permit.


Relief, or so I thought.

I actually applied for and paid 900.00 for the conditional use permit 
"application"


Then finally I get city hall telling me to go pick up my check that it 
wasn't needed seeing I didn't have to get a conditional use permit.


Tiffany goes to pick up the check an she is told, you need to have a 
design review and that costs 800.00...


I came back with that there must have been a design review done 
because I was given a building permit and I had my guy who is an 
architectural grad draft up an auto cad of the entire installation 
right down to the clamps used to scale.


She comes back with, we gave you a permit for the bottom of the tower 
not the top.


I couple of phone calls later I got final approval and a call from her 
saying that she was going to allow me to proceed, but she didn't agree 
with the i saying it was against the code and she was only giving it 
to me because her boss is making her .


All it takes is one person, regardless if you have 99 other people 
rooting for you, to stick a spoke in your wheels.


Cingular also is in the process of signing a lease on one of these 
towers and they were grilled by the planning commission who had stacks 
of letters from neighbors who said they didn't want a cell phone site 
so close to their homes. They might get cancer from fr radiation.
In our county they do have an ordinance saying that all cell phone 
sites have to be at least 1000' away from a residence.


Lucky for me, I wasn't really in a hurry because I've been waiting for 
the final version of Lonnie's war boards to come out.


I just today got the approved set of prints back and will start this 
week on my tower project.


George








--
George Rogato

Welcome to WISPA

www.wispa.org

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] merchant accounts/credit cards

[Butch Evans]

On Wed, 31 May 2006, Rich Comroe wrote:

Too many orders lost from customers that don't have PayPal accounts 
(unless things changed in the last 2 years since I switched to 
e-account, but way back you had to setup a PayPal account to make a 
purchase).


Paypal has a terminal available that allows you to process 
MasterCard, Visa, Discover and American Express.  I believe those 
are all included in their terminal (haven't needed the Discover or 
AE, yet).  It will handle debit and credit cards.  Rates are very 
reasonable for what I personally use it for.  I don't do a lot of 
credit card processing, either.


Too many orders lost from customers that refused to use PayPal. 
Too much time spent providing customers with bank transfer info 
that couldn't or wouldn't use PayPal.


The customer never knows it was processed through PayPal.  I take 
the card number and other information (via the virtual terminal), 
and it is processed.  It shows up on your credit card bill as a 
purchase from Butch Evans Consulting.  Unless I tell you, you'd 
never know that's who I used.


--
Butch Evans
Network Engineering and Security Consulting
http://www.butchevans.com/
Mikrotik Certified Consultant
(http://www.mikrotik.com/consultants.html)
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?

[Rudolph Worrell]

Do you offer refunds for your service?


Quoting Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Well JohnnyO,
> 
> That I agree with.  My defense was not of Hyperlink. My defense was that not
> 
> giving refunds is not a bad thing.
> Banning someone (a prosective buyer) for such a request or for that matter 
> ANY REASON is absolutely rediculous.
> Vendors have the right to set their policies, but they also have the 
> responsibility to be the bigger person, and to not let individual 
> transaction decisions with a consumer effect their judgement, emotion, 
> professionalism, and future business decissions.
> 
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
> 
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "JohnnyO" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 12:58 PM
> Subject: RE: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?
> 
> 
> > *snip* If someone gives refunds, thats a plus that shows they add value.
> > But not
> > giving refunds does not infer wrong doing. *snip*
> >
> > Tom - it is wrong doing when you ban someone for requesting a refund.
> > Hell, I've never bought from Hyperlink and from seeing their "ban"
> > policy with a few of the posts on here, we'll never do business with
> > them in the future. I guess I am not the only one that takes this point
> > of view either, so how much $$ did the "ban" on Scriv cost them actually
> > ? :)
> >
> > JohnnyO
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> > Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 11:34 AM
> > To: WISPA General List
> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?
> >
> >
> > Blake,
> >
> > Its not that I disagree with you, that "it is good business to take care
> > of
> > your customers."
> > Nor am I defending Hyperlinktech, as we don't have enough business
> > experience with them, to have a valid opinion. but...
> >
> >
> > This isn't retail HomeDepot that we are talking about, this is
> > distribution. In my 10 years experience previously in the distribution
> > business, I can
> > tell you there are not many companies that give "refunds."
> > We also found that the companies that couldn't understand why "refunds"
> > was
> > bad business for distributors, usually were the ones that didn't do
> > enough
> > volume to matter wether we lost them.  I'm not saying that I personally
> > do
> > not believe in giving refunds. I also believe its best practice to take
> > care
> > of the customer, in most cases. But that does not change the fact that
> > most
> > dealers do NOT give refunds.
> >
> >>Tessco, Talley. Hutton, Electrocomm.
> >
> > They may give refunds, but there significant hassle in getting it, that
> > in
> > most cases will be more costly to the buyer in time than the value of
> > the
> > refund.
> > They also usually charge a higher profit margin on every sale than the
> > smaller distributor that is competing on price, and therefore has more
> > margin to justify eating the cost to give the refund.
> >
> > I bet the price received from Hyperlinktech was significantly less than
> > that
> > the Tesscos or Hutton's would have charged?
> > When price drops, terms gets tougher.  A distributor must determine
> > which
> > business they want to be in, and they can't be in both successfully. If
> > in the price market they need to have price policies. Descretion needs
> > to
> > be taken out of the set policies, otherwise its impossible to manage RMA
> >
> > processes.
> >
> > There are many reasons strict policies need to be inforced for
> > Refunds
> >
> > 1. Price constantly falls based on time. And even a week or s odone the
> > road
> > the cost of the product may have dropped.
> > 2. People find something cheaper after the fact.
> > 3. Sales people may have already been paid commissions.
> > 4. If special order product, the vendor ends up getting stuck with the
> > full
> > cost of the product sitting in inventory for a long time, while price
> > drops
> > by the time someone wants the product. Guaranteed to sell the product at
> > a
> > loss as well as tie up cash flow.
> > 5. People often irreputably return other vendor's products. Company 1
> > has
> > stock and can ship today. Company 2 has lower cost.  Company 1 product
> > gets
> > installed. Company 2 product when arrives gets sent back to company 1
> > for
> > refund. Buyer actually makes a profit on the deal, getting a higher
> > dollar
> > refunded than he paid for the gear from company 2. You'd be surprised
> > how
> > often this happened. Sometimes even involving invoice forging and
> > swapping
> > serial number stickers.
> > 6. The easy way to keep EVERYONE happy, is instead to just offer credits
> > or
> > replacements. It keeps everyone honest. If the buyer is really going to
> > be a
> > repeat customer, its just a matter of time before he has another order
> > that
> > he can apply the credit to.
> >
> > T

RE: [WISPA] Returns to Hyperlinktech.com is it possible?

[Chris Cooper]

We had a tech that specd the wrong amp once.  I opened the box as soon as we
received it.  I saw that the  connectors were wrong, and called hyperlink
immediately.  All I wanted to do was exchange the amps for the same units
with a different style connector. No dice.  They told me the sale was final
but they would like to sell me new units. Im not the smartest guy in the
world, but I know when someone doesnt value my business.  Plus, it takes
hyperlink sales two days to return calls. No thanks

Chris

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] merchant accounts/credit cards

[Rich Comroe]

Looks like they've definitely made some major improvements since I used them 
for my online store long ago.  What about the supported countries?  I was 
always getting emails from customers from African countries I'd never even 
heard of that couldn't place their orders thru paypals.


cheers,
Rich

- Original Message - 
From: "Butch Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 9:52 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] merchant accounts/credit cards



On Wed, 31 May 2006, Rich Comroe wrote:

Too many orders lost from customers that don't have PayPal accounts 
(unless things changed in the last 2 years since I switched to e-account, 
but way back you had to setup a PayPal account to make a purchase).


Paypal has a terminal available that allows you to process MasterCard, 
Visa, Discover and American Express.  I believe those are all included in 
their terminal (haven't needed the Discover or AE, yet).  It will handle 
debit and credit cards.  Rates are very reasonable for what I personally 
use it for.  I don't do a lot of credit card processing, either.


Too many orders lost from customers that refused to use PayPal. Too much 
time spent providing customers with bank transfer info that couldn't or 
wouldn't use PayPal.


The customer never knows it was processed through PayPal.  I take the card 
number and other information (via the virtual terminal), and it is 
processed.  It shows up on your credit card bill as a purchase from Butch 
Evans Consulting.  Unless I tell you, you'd never know that's who I used.


--
Butch Evans
Network Engineering and Security Consulting
http://www.butchevans.com/
Mikrotik Certified Consultant
(http://www.mikrotik.com/consultants.html)
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] merchant accounts/credit cards

[Butch Evans]

On Wed, 31 May 2006, Rich Comroe wrote:

used them for my online store long ago.  What about the supported 
countries?  I was always getting emails from customers from African 
countries I'd never even heard of that couldn't place their orders 
thru paypals.


This may still be an issue.  I have a few customers that pay via 
bank transfer (one is from South Africa), so that may still be an 
issue.  You'd have to check with Paypal direct unless someone else 
here on the list has experience with that.


--
Butch Evans
Network Engineering and Security Consulting
http://www.butchevans.com/
Mikrotik Certified Consultant
(http://www.mikrotik.com/consultants.html)
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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