3Mbps half-duplex delivered using 50% time division is equivalent to 1.5Mbps full-duplex. The fact that many TDD radios can have dynamic time division makes a 3Mbps half-duplex link superior IMHO.


Travis Johnson wrote:


Are you saying that you compare your wireless service to T1 telco service? How are you doing full-duplex with wireless?


Tom DeReggi wrote:


I agree with your finding.
But its possible your focus group did not get all the fact. (Or what was the finding?) For example, its not only important to determine what terms the customer best recognizes and identify with, but also what meaning they have for those terms that they identify with.

For example, it does not surprise me a bit, that "High Speed Internet" was the term that the consumer best identified with. However, most people identify "High Speed Internet" as much with DialUP service as they do with "Broadband". And if not identified with DialUP, its then identifies with DSL or Cable services. Why do we want to create the image of offering commodity services, design for huge over subscription, low repair SLAs, and best effort?

Do you consider cable and DSL as a good or bad thing, as far as setting standards for quality?

We don't want to be identified as that.  We want to be something better.

Now if you are offering lower quality, best effort, Wifi services to your clients, and you are striving to be a competitor to Cable and DSL quality, sure Brand the product as DSL, and its a good thing. And please do so, so your wireless is not identified with what we offer, branding high quality fiber extension and T1 replacement services.

In your focus group did you get any results on their perception of quality that they associated with Cable and DSL or the term "High Speed Internet"?

Would you suggest branding your T1 or Fiber offerings as "High Speed Internet", since customers best identify with that term?

Maybe we should be branding our service as "Wi-Fiber". or Maybe "Ethernet Internet Access" (of course like end users will know what Ethernet means.)

Its a tough call because if we called our service "Fiber" or "T1" we'd most likely be liars based on their true definitions.
Nothing exists realting to quality for us to piggy back on.

All though "Broadband" may not be as well recognized, its doesn;t associate us with Telcos or Cable companies necessarilly. Broadband is truthfully defined as a general term to cover any media type of delivery of Internet Access.

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

----- Original Message ----- From: "chris cooper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 10:34 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband

We conducted a few focus groups here. Most of the attendees were in the 18-24 yr. age bracket. It was amazing how many didn't identify with the
word broadband.  The words they responded to best were 'high speed
internet"  Wireless was way down the list.  Too much confusion with

That said, I think wireless will hold its own as a marketing term
eventually.  Wireless is the sexy new darling of the world. It will be
worth trading on the word eventually. The other part of this is that we
are building brands as wireless providers, so it makes sense to keep
that in the mix until the world catches up.  In 95-96 I was out trying
to sell people on the words internet, email and website.  Those words
didn't register then but they are now a permanent part of the American
lexicon and in the American brain.  The word wireless and what it
represents will eventually do the same.


-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 10:13 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband

Agreed excellent point (wireless scares and confuses people), except....

Why associate your service with DSL, a low grade $39 a month service, as

advertized by Verizon?
Why not associate it with T1 or just Broadband, higher quality services?

If you associate it with DSL, then your are also associating it with the

same quality and price. They think you are ripping them off charging
$150 a
month when they can get it for $39 a month down the street.  When in
accuality you are saving them 70% off their T1 line.

Let me share a case that happened just yesterday. I got a call for DSL,

they currently had voip and data on a T1, and they were looking for a
line to transfer the Internet Data to, to free up bandwidth on their T1
their VOIP.  It was a 15 minute close over the phone, since we had the
building lit, and represented we could have their new circuit installed
following day. I represented we were selling broadband, a T1
replacement. I
made the mistake of leavingthe labeling of the contract heading as
Broadband Agreement". The customer saw Wireless and didn;t sign, and
to cancel order. I'm now likely going to win the client back, after most
yesterday on the phone answering questions from everyone under the sun.
problem was the customers computer consultant, had used Wireless in
and had nothing but troubles. He stated tons of Lightning related
problem that disrupted service regularly. (It was a Wifi service he was
using, there.) The question they asked me was, why is my service able to

compare againt T1 apposed to DSL, to justify the higher price? They
at it as a lower grade service.  My solution however, was a high end
service. It was an Engineered 30 mbps TDD 4 mile link with a Direct path

from the building to my core fiber peering point. I even have fiber in
building at $500, but don't use it, because the fiber has 4-5 hops to my

transit location compared to my wireless that is a direct shot and
many points of failure. I'll probably still get the business but after
sales agrevation and providing a good number of references.

So its a valid point that Wireless does still scare some people. And
quality Wireless providers ruin the rep for the good quality WISPs. But
bigger point is that some customers actually think DSL is more reliable
an engineered wireless link used to replace Fiber and T1s.  So branding
Wireless as DSL, does not helpthe industry, it lowers the value of what

I've been plaqued by this problem, as my company name is... "RapidDSL".
gets me the leads, but it also starts every sales call out with why I'm
charging more than $50 a month for my service, that I generally get
$150-$500 a month for.

We now market our service as "Broadband" period. It has made all the
difference. We don't lie about using wireless, its plastered all over
website. But why advertise something that just confuses everyone and
everyone time to sort out.

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

----- Original Message ----- From: "Rick Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 8:55 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband

great point! :)

Scott Reed wrote:

Who says the L in  DSL must be Line?  Call it Digital Subsciber Link


it works for the customer and uses our normal language for the radio

Scott Reed
Wireless Networking
Network Design, Installation and Administration
www.nwwnet.net <http://www.nwwnet.net/>

*---------- Original Message -----------*
From: Rick Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: WISPA General List <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 00:39:48 -0400
Subject: Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband

> We find we can NOT sell our service as "Wireless Broadband"
> As soon as we market it to customers as DSL or just plain
> "High Speed Internet", we start scoring.
> Too many in this area have been educated against "Open WIFI"
> being BAD...
> The cable we install to the radio is a "line", right ?
> It carries digital signals, right ?
> It allows our customer to become a "subscriber", right ?
> DSL... ;)
> KyWiFi LLC wrote:
> >I'm noticing more and more WISP's selling their wireless
> >broadband service as "DSL" or "Wireless DSL". I know
> >that 75% of the people who call our sales number have
> >a difficult time understanding what Wireless Broadband is.
> >They already know what DSL is and that is what the majority
> >of them ask for so I would be interested in hearing everyone's
> >opinions on the pros and cons of a WISP labeling their
> >wireless broadband service as "DSL, wDSL or Wireless DSL"
> >instead of "Fixed Wireless, WiFI or Wireless Broadband".
> >
> >If the masses are more familiar with the term DSL then I
> >think we would generate more sales leads by advertising
> >our (WISPs') broadband as DSL instead of Wireless
> >Broadband. I'm sure the local telco would just love to see
> >all of us selling "DSL". Are there any legalities to this? Does
> >wireless broadband qualify as DSL or a form of DSL in the
> >eyes of the law? Is it legal for a WISP to sell their wireless
> >broadband service as DSL?
> >
> >
> >Sincerely,
> >Shannon D. Denniston, Co-Founder
> >KyWiFi, LLC - Mt. Sterling, Kentucky
> >http://www.KyWiFi.com <http://www.kywifi.com/>
> >http://www.KyWiFiVoice.com <http://www.kywifivoice.com/>
> >Phone: 859.274.4033
> >A Broadband Phone & Internet Provider
> >
> >==============================
> >Wireless Broadband, Local Calling and
> >UNLIMITED Long Distance only $69!
> >
> >No Taxes, No Regulatory Fees, No Hassles
> >
> >FREE Site Survey: http://www.KyWiFi.com <http://www.kywifi.com/>
> >==============================
> >
> --
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
*------- End of Original Message -------*

WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org


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

WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org


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

Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.2/280 - Release Date: 3/13/2006

WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org


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

WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org


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

Reply via email to