Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013
Yes, copper is very popular, local churches getting their building scathed for it's copper. Prices are pretty high, it has gone up steadily since Jan. I can see that fiber could be cheaper in manufacture and in raw material. Z On 6/1/07, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Well, fiber and copper have been about the same cost to deploy lately because the bulk of the cost is in the labor. It makes sense that fiber is more attractive now because of copper pricing. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "chris cooper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 9:40 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013 >I was at a meeting yesterday that had several large carriers present. > One of the carriers made the comment that they are migrating away from > copper for new deployments. He said that FTTH is now cheaper than > copper due to increased material costs. > > c > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Tom DeReggi > Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 10:40 AM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013 > > Thats Funny. > Like A inplace copper plant is more costly to maintain than a new Fiber > network? Not likely. > > Tom DeReggi > RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > > > - Original Message - > From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 8:34 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013 > > >> Sam, >> >> My guess is these areas will be sold off to the smaller regional > companies >> with less overhead or they will muscle the states into footing the > bill. >> As someone once said "No one wants to be in office when the copper >> networks go dark." >> >> Regards, >> Dawn DiPietro >> >> >> Sam Tetherow wrote: >>> I don't deny any of that, but I'd be pretty pissed as a telco > customer if >>> they are allowed to pull out of those areas. A very large amount of >>> money has been funneled through the USF program so that voice lines > are >>> available in the hinterlands. >>> >>> How many millions of USF dollars has Verizon pulled out of their > Northern >>> New England customers? I would be very willing to bet that it is >>> significantly more than they have spent on maintaining the copper to >>> those customers. >>> >>> Yes the rural areas a losing money which is why the USF existed in > the >>> first place, someone decided that all telco customers should fund > voice >>> to every home regardless of its economic viability. Right or wrong, > that >>> was the deal they signed on for, they have taken the money for this > long >>> but now when they are having to make sizable reinvestment they are > trying >>> to weasel their way out of it. >>> >>> However, the real point of my reply on the email was that some > customers >>> are still more economically served via copper rather than wireless. >>> >>>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/ >> >> >> -- >> No virus found in this incoming message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: >> 269.8.4/825 - Release Date: 5/30/2007 3:03 PM >> > > -- > 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/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013
Well, fiber and copper have been about the same cost to deploy lately because the bulk of the cost is in the labor. It makes sense that fiber is more attractive now because of copper pricing. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "chris cooper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 9:40 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013 I was at a meeting yesterday that had several large carriers present. One of the carriers made the comment that they are migrating away from copper for new deployments. He said that FTTH is now cheaper than copper due to increased material costs. c -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 10:40 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013 Thats Funny. Like A inplace copper plant is more costly to maintain than a new Fiber network? Not likely. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 8:34 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013 Sam, My guess is these areas will be sold off to the smaller regional companies with less overhead or they will muscle the states into footing the bill. As someone once said "No one wants to be in office when the copper networks go dark." Regards, Dawn DiPietro Sam Tetherow wrote: I don't deny any of that, but I'd be pretty pissed as a telco customer if they are allowed to pull out of those areas. A very large amount of money has been funneled through the USF program so that voice lines are available in the hinterlands. How many millions of USF dollars has Verizon pulled out of their Northern New England customers? I would be very willing to bet that it is significantly more than they have spent on maintaining the copper to those customers. Yes the rural areas a losing money which is why the USF existed in the first place, someone decided that all telco customers should fund voice to every home regardless of its economic viability. Right or wrong, that was the deal they signed on for, they have taken the money for this long but now when they are having to make sizable reinvestment they are trying to weasel their way out of it. However, the real point of my reply on the email was that some customers are still more economically served via copper rather than wireless. 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/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.4/825 - Release Date: 5/30/2007 3:03 PM -- 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] Copper landlines gone by 2013
I've been pricing fiber for a fiber project I'll be doing. I was shocked to find underground direct fiber for under .25 per foot. I'm pretty certain that my underground cat 5 costs more. George chris cooper wrote: I was at a meeting yesterday that had several large carriers present. One of the carriers made the comment that they are migrating away from copper for new deployments. He said that FTTH is now cheaper than copper due to increased material costs. c -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 10:40 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013 Thats Funny. Like A inplace copper plant is more costly to maintain than a new Fiber network? Not likely. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 8:34 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013 Sam, My guess is these areas will be sold off to the smaller regional companies with less overhead or they will muscle the states into footing the bill. As someone once said "No one wants to be in office when the copper networks go dark." Regards, Dawn DiPietro Sam Tetherow wrote: I don't deny any of that, but I'd be pretty pissed as a telco customer if they are allowed to pull out of those areas. A very large amount of money has been funneled through the USF program so that voice lines are available in the hinterlands. How many millions of USF dollars has Verizon pulled out of their Northern New England customers? I would be very willing to bet that it is significantly more than they have spent on maintaining the copper to those customers. Yes the rural areas a losing money which is why the USF existed in the first place, someone decided that all telco customers should fund voice to every home regardless of its economic viability. Right or wrong, that was the deal they signed on for, they have taken the money for this long but now when they are having to make sizable reinvestment they are trying to weasel their way out of it. However, the real point of my reply on the email was that some customers are still more economically served via copper rather than wireless. 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/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.4/825 - Release Date: 5/30/2007 3:03 PM -- 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] Copper landlines gone by 2013
I was at a meeting yesterday that had several large carriers present. One of the carriers made the comment that they are migrating away from copper for new deployments. He said that FTTH is now cheaper than copper due to increased material costs. c -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 10:40 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013 Thats Funny. Like A inplace copper plant is more costly to maintain than a new Fiber network? Not likely. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 8:34 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013 > Sam, > > My guess is these areas will be sold off to the smaller regional companies > with less overhead or they will muscle the states into footing the bill. > As someone once said "No one wants to be in office when the copper > networks go dark." > > Regards, > Dawn DiPietro > > > Sam Tetherow wrote: >> I don't deny any of that, but I'd be pretty pissed as a telco customer if >> they are allowed to pull out of those areas. A very large amount of >> money has been funneled through the USF program so that voice lines are >> available in the hinterlands. >> >> How many millions of USF dollars has Verizon pulled out of their Northern >> New England customers? I would be very willing to bet that it is >> significantly more than they have spent on maintaining the copper to >> those customers. >> >> Yes the rural areas a losing money which is why the USF existed in the >> first place, someone decided that all telco customers should fund voice >> to every home regardless of its economic viability. Right or wrong, that >> was the deal they signed on for, they have taken the money for this long >> but now when they are having to make sizable reinvestment they are trying >> to weasel their way out of it. >> >> However, the real point of my reply on the email was that some customers >> are still more economically served via copper rather than wireless. >> >>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/ > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: > 269.8.4/825 - Release Date: 5/30/2007 3:03 PM > -- 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] Copper landlines gone by 2013
Thats Funny. Like A inplace copper plant is more costly to maintain than a new Fiber network? Not likely. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 8:34 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013 Sam, My guess is these areas will be sold off to the smaller regional companies with less overhead or they will muscle the states into footing the bill. As someone once said "No one wants to be in office when the copper networks go dark." Regards, Dawn DiPietro Sam Tetherow wrote: I don't deny any of that, but I'd be pretty pissed as a telco customer if they are allowed to pull out of those areas. A very large amount of money has been funneled through the USF program so that voice lines are available in the hinterlands. How many millions of USF dollars has Verizon pulled out of their Northern New England customers? I would be very willing to bet that it is significantly more than they have spent on maintaining the copper to those customers. Yes the rural areas a losing money which is why the USF existed in the first place, someone decided that all telco customers should fund voice to every home regardless of its economic viability. Right or wrong, that was the deal they signed on for, they have taken the money for this long but now when they are having to make sizable reinvestment they are trying to weasel their way out of it. However, the real point of my reply on the email was that some customers are still more economically served via copper rather than wireless. 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/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.4/825 - Release Date: 5/30/2007 3:03 PM -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013
- Original Message - From: "Sam Tetherow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 7:50 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013 I don't deny any of that, but I'd be pretty pissed as a telco customer if they are allowed to pull out of those areas. A very large amount of money has been funneled through the USF program so that voice lines are available in the hinterlands. Why? Its not like those customers won't have service - just not service through Verizon. Plenty of companies waiting out there to purchase phone pops, no matter how rural. The latest sc... I mean plan... is for a group to form made up of minorities, who apply for federal funds, and purchase a rural telco area. Then they contract with one of the existing Telcos to "manage" the service. The company that ends up "managing" of course sets the whole thing up - so that they get cheap money. Like you say, copper is not going away -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013
Sam, My guess is these areas will be sold off to the smaller regional companies with less overhead or they will muscle the states into footing the bill. As someone once said "No one wants to be in office when the copper networks go dark." Regards, Dawn DiPietro Sam Tetherow wrote: I don't deny any of that, but I'd be pretty pissed as a telco customer if they are allowed to pull out of those areas. A very large amount of money has been funneled through the USF program so that voice lines are available in the hinterlands. How many millions of USF dollars has Verizon pulled out of their Northern New England customers? I would be very willing to bet that it is significantly more than they have spent on maintaining the copper to those customers. Yes the rural areas a losing money which is why the USF existed in the first place, someone decided that all telco customers should fund voice to every home regardless of its economic viability. Right or wrong, that was the deal they signed on for, they have taken the money for this long but now when they are having to make sizable reinvestment they are trying to weasel their way out of it. However, the real point of my reply on the email was that some customers are still more economically served via copper rather than wireless. 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] Copper landlines gone by 2013
Sam Tetherow wrote: Sam Tetherow wrote: Hmm, I'll take that bet. People that make these types of claims obviously haven't been in areas where you can go for more than 40 miles with no cell service, on a major highway, not to mention getting off the beaten path to individuals homes. Some times it really is more economical to string copper than put up towers. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless Naw. It is almost never cheaper to string copper than to put up towers. It is just that existing copper is cheaper than any alternative. In the panhandle of Oklahoma my grandfather ran five miles of copper on poles ten feet off the ground to get to his home. That copper was in place till 1960 when the ILEC's decided they could make a profit by replacing it. That economy is still in play. -m- -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013
Quite honestly, if that article is a sampling of Evslin's grasp of networking, he is damned lucky he was a co-founder of AT&T and ITXC because his thought process is so short sighted it is scary. For those that haven't read the short article he is saying that since landline phones have dropped from 96% to 94% between 98 and 03 then surely the other 94% will be going in the next 5 years. And what pray tell does he suggest will replace this copper? Why it will be WiFi-enabled mobile phones like the ones T-Mobile is rolling out. So you will be using VOIP enabled WiFi handsets connected to wireless hotspots in our homes. Seems to me he has missed one key ingredient... Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless George Rogato wrote: Sam, I thought it was an outrageous statement to be made myself. Figured it might be good for list discussion. George Sam Tetherow wrote: Hmm, I'll take that bet. People that make these types of claims obviously haven't been in areas where you can go for more than 40 miles with no cell service, on a major highway, not to mention getting off the beaten path to individuals homes. Some times it really is more economical to string copper than put up towers. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless George Rogato wrote: Worldnet founder: Copper landlines gone by 2013 “By 2012 [there will be] no more reason to use our landlines--so we won’t,” Evslin wrote. “I don’t think the copper plant will last past 2012. The problem is the cost of maintaining and operating it when it has very few subscribers. Obviously [it’s] a huge problem for AT&T and Verizon. And an important social issue as well.” http://telephonyonline.com/home/news/copper_landlines_gone_052507/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013
Sam, I thought it was an outrageous statement to be made myself. Figured it might be good for list discussion. George Sam Tetherow wrote: Hmm, I'll take that bet. People that make these types of claims obviously haven't been in areas where you can go for more than 40 miles with no cell service, on a major highway, not to mention getting off the beaten path to individuals homes. Some times it really is more economical to string copper than put up towers. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless George Rogato wrote: Worldnet founder: Copper landlines gone by 2013 “By 2012 [there will be] no more reason to use our landlines--so we won’t,” Evslin wrote. “I don’t think the copper plant will last past 2012. The problem is the cost of maintaining and operating it when it has very few subscribers. Obviously [it’s] a huge problem for AT&T and Verizon. And an important social issue as well.” http://telephonyonline.com/home/news/copper_landlines_gone_052507/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013
I don't deny any of that, but I'd be pretty pissed as a telco customer if they are allowed to pull out of those areas. A very large amount of money has been funneled through the USF program so that voice lines are available in the hinterlands. How many millions of USF dollars has Verizon pulled out of their Northern New England customers? I would be very willing to bet that it is significantly more than they have spent on maintaining the copper to those customers. Yes the rural areas a losing money which is why the USF existed in the first place, someone decided that all telco customers should fund voice to every home regardless of its economic viability. Right or wrong, that was the deal they signed on for, they have taken the money for this long but now when they are having to make sizable reinvestment they are trying to weasel their way out of it. However, the real point of my reply on the email was that some customers are still more economically served via copper rather than wireless. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless Dawn DiPietro wrote: Sam, It's the rural areas that are affected when it comes to the copper network. As I understand it, the original purpose of the USF was to help pay for the rural areas, otherwise there would be no copper there to begin with. If the urban areas are losing landlines by the droves there is no surplus to help pay for the rural areas either. There are too many miles of copper and not enough customers to pay for it in these areas. Why do you think Verizon is selling off huge parts of their telephone network in Northern New England? It is not that these people have not personally been there it is the fact that rural areas are losing money no matter how you look at it. I know it still costs a fortune to get bandwidth in these areas but that is not going to make up for how much money is being lost to maintain the copper. If any of my facts are wrong I am sure someone will correct me. ;-) Regards, Dawn DiPietro Sam Tetherow wrote: Hmm, I'll take that bet. People that make these types of claims obviously haven't been in areas where you can go for more than 40 miles with no cell service, on a major highway, not to mention getting off the beaten path to individuals homes. Some times it really is more economical to string copper than put up towers. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless George Rogato wrote: Worldnet founder: Copper landlines gone by 2013 “By 2012 [there will be] no more reason to use our landlines--so we won’t,” Evslin wrote. “I don’t think the copper plant will last past 2012. The problem is the cost of maintaining and operating it when it has very few subscribers. Obviously [it’s] a huge problem for AT&T and Verizon. And an important social issue as well.” http://telephonyonline.com/home/news/copper_landlines_gone_052507/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013
Sam, It's the rural areas that are affected when it comes to the copper network. As I understand it, the original purpose of the USF was to help pay for the rural areas, otherwise there would be no copper there to begin with. If the urban areas are losing landlines by the droves there is no surplus to help pay for the rural areas either. There are too many miles of copper and not enough customers to pay for it in these areas. Why do you think Verizon is selling off huge parts of their telephone network in Northern New England? It is not that these people have not personally been there it is the fact that rural areas are losing money no matter how you look at it. I know it still costs a fortune to get bandwidth in these areas but that is not going to make up for how much money is being lost to maintain the copper. If any of my facts are wrong I am sure someone will correct me. ;-) Regards, Dawn DiPietro Sam Tetherow wrote: Hmm, I'll take that bet. People that make these types of claims obviously haven't been in areas where you can go for more than 40 miles with no cell service, on a major highway, not to mention getting off the beaten path to individuals homes. Some times it really is more economical to string copper than put up towers. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless George Rogato wrote: Worldnet founder: Copper landlines gone by 2013 “By 2012 [there will be] no more reason to use our landlines--so we won’t,” Evslin wrote. “I don’t think the copper plant will last past 2012. The problem is the cost of maintaining and operating it when it has very few subscribers. Obviously [it’s] a huge problem for AT&T and Verizon. And an important social issue as well.” http://telephonyonline.com/home/news/copper_landlines_gone_052507/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013
Hmm, I'll take that bet. People that make these types of claims obviously haven't been in areas where you can go for more than 40 miles with no cell service, on a major highway, not to mention getting off the beaten path to individuals homes. Some times it really is more economical to string copper than put up towers. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless George Rogato wrote: Worldnet founder: Copper landlines gone by 2013 “By 2012 [there will be] no more reason to use our landlines--so we won’t,” Evslin wrote. “I don’t think the copper plant will last past 2012. The problem is the cost of maintaining and operating it when it has very few subscribers. Obviously [it’s] a huge problem for AT&T and Verizon. And an important social issue as well.” http://telephonyonline.com/home/news/copper_landlines_gone_052507/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013
George, I seem to remember someone else made this prediction 2 years ago. ;-) Regards, Dawn DiPietro George Rogato wrote: Worldnet founder: Copper landlines gone by 2013 “By 2012 [there will be] no more reason to use our landlines--so we won’t,” Evslin wrote. “I don’t think the copper plant will last past 2012. The problem is the cost of maintaining and operating it when it has very few subscribers. Obviously [it’s] a huge problem for AT&T and Verizon. And an important social issue as well.” http://telephonyonline.com/home/news/copper_landlines_gone_052507/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013
Worldnet founder: Copper landlines gone by 2013 “By 2012 [there will be] no more reason to use our landlines--so we won’t,” Evslin wrote. “I don’t think the copper plant will last past 2012. The problem is the cost of maintaining and operating it when it has very few subscribers. Obviously [it’s] a huge problem for AT&T and Verizon. And an important social issue as well.” http://telephonyonline.com/home/news/copper_landlines_gone_052507/ -- 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/
