I've got a remote rural location where we're thinking of putting up a
100' tower on a mountain owned by a large customer. Turns out that
location can see one of our existing networks, which is great.
However, the customer has extremely poor (or non-existent) cell phone
coverage and would like
First of all just because you don't have a signal does not mean a cell
carrier is waiting for you to put up a tower but that said I built a 120'
Commercial tower back 3 years ago and total cost to build was around 50k.
That was a tower to support cell and two way radio at 90mph wind load. I
think
A tower to support a cell carrier would easily approach $100,000
Thank You,
Brian Webster
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 11:19 AM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] A new tower for WISP and Cell Carrier?
I've
At 11:43 AM -0400 3/14/07, Frank Watts wrote:
First of all just because you don't have a signal does not mean a cell
carrier is waiting for you to put up a tower but that said I built a 120'
Commercial tower back 3 years ago and total cost to build was around 50k.
That was a tower to support
At 10:53 AM -0500 3/14/07, JohnnyO wrote:
15K seems awful low for a tower on top of a mountain.
You can build a 100ft Rohn45/Rohn55 for 15k - on flat / level land where
there aren't any major challenges Then again - No Cell carrier I
know of would go on such a tower.
What kind of tower
Chuck,
My first impression of the situation is that your customer is seeing
dollar signs because he has heard cell companies pay big bucks to locate
on towers but does not actually realize all the costs associated with
such a tower that a cell company might possibly locate on. I have seen
First off, reception is not a good gauge. There
are many factors that play into whether or not
you can attract a carrier.
High spots used to be the king locations, but
now due to loading issues, and frequency
re-use they are not always the premier spots anymore.
No one in the business is
Cell carriers normally use site acquisition people, contract most
of the time. Not brokers.
Another thing that prevents them often from considering smaller
companies towers is agreements they have with the larger companies. As
an example, we have agreements with two carriers - flat rate
At 12:35 PM -0400 3/14/07, Dawn DiPietro wrote:
Chuck,
My first impression of the situation is that your customer is seeing
dollar signs because he has heard cell companies pay big bucks to
locate on towers but does not actually realize all the costs
associated with such a tower that a cell
At 12:03 PM -0500 3/14/07, Blake Bowers wrote:
Cell carriers normally use site acquisition people, contract most
of the time. Not brokers.
I used the wrong term (not being in the business). That's essentially
what I meant. I've come across the site acq. people before.
Another thing that
Depends what the Cell co puts in, I have seen small Cell sites around
here on 80' and 100' poles
Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of
When I was with ATT we budgeted $150k per 100' monopole...
On 3/14/07, Brian Webster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A tower to support a cell carrier would easily approach $100,000
Thank You,
Brian Webster
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
12 matches
Mail list logo