All of your comments are from your perspective using your low ARPU
business model. When your ARPU easily exceeds $500 spending $2K on
radios doesn't seem expensive. Especially in light of the fact that
Canopy and Trango PtMP systems would run out of bandwidth too quick
for our business model. Newer modulation schemes for PtMP systems
could completely change our point-of-view though.
-Matt
On Jun 19, 2006, at 7:09 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:
Matt brings out a good point that shows the benefit of PTPs and
Syncing feature of Canopy.
I don't deny these advantages, and they can be beneficial in many
cases.
However, don't forget that your equipment costs go up at more than
double per new customer compared to PtMP deployments where each new
customer is jsut a CPE.
PtP model, each new customer is 2 grand. (canopy)
PtMP model, First customer is $1500. (Trango)
PtMP model, each new customer is $500. (Trango)
And this is BEFORE you consider roof right fees. I'd rather pay
$200 per month for 1 AP antenna than 5 AP/PTP end point antennas.
One of the biggest advantages of Wireless si the abilty to
oversubscribe and resell unused capacity. Few people use their
capacity.
PTP deployments prevent that.
There are arguements that in the long run, the PTP could be
preferred for avoiding remote interference, or higher capacity for
the end game.
But from a startup and profit point of view the PtMP method offers
a clear advantage, and reduces risk and/or long term liabilty if
leasing.
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 7:18 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT: about 70Mbps for under $6K
You don't need connectorized backhauls. The sync functionality
alone allows you to densely colocate backhauls. We've had as many
as 5 Canopy backhauls mounted within feet of each other all
operating on the same channel.
-Matt
On Jun 16, 2006, at 1:04 PM, Jon Langeler wrote:
It's theoretically possible to engineer up to 8 equally seperated
connectorized Canopy backhauls on a tower using alternating
polarizations and just one channel. Let's just say this is not
something you'll find in the Canopy manual :-)
Jon Langeler
Michwave Tech.
Travis Johnson wrote:
Matt,
How do you fit more than 10-12 of those type of dedicated links
on a single tower?
Travis
Microserv
Matt Liotta wrote:
We rarely use multi-point systems for customers and when we do
they are either small businesses with very little voice and
data needs or they are just data customers. All of our
customers with any significant amount of voice are running on
dedicated radios. I would say our average customer buys 12
lines of voice and delivering that over a Canopy backhaul
works just fine.
-Matt
Patrick Leary wrote:
So you agree then that being able to do VoIP is key. I'd like
to hear more
about your experiences with VoIP. Is your solution actually
doing it well or
is that your idea of doing VoIP well is 8 only concurrent
calls per sector
so long as the quality is decent for those few calls? We have
talked to many
very users of other common 5GHz brands these past few week
and we have been
consistently told that performance is just dandy until you
bump up against 8
calls. That is a less than 50 call per cell limit, which does
not seem like
enough to justify the investments needed on the NOC end for
the softswitch.
How do you define good VoIP performance Matt?
Patrick Leary
AVP Marketing
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday,
June 16, 2006 6:47 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT: about 70Mbps for under $6K
Patrick Leary wrote:
Matt, to further your comments that you see WISPs providing
layer 2
transort
for carriers.
We have multiple CLECs and non-CLECs buying layer 2 transport
from us now. All are used to buy alternative access from
fiber providers and therefore fixed wireless was a naturally
next step. Further, almost all indicated they would have done
it sooner, but the fixed wireless companies they approached
weren't willing to offer them layer 2 transport.
How about VoIP? How many of you consider VoIP to be an
important part of your service future as a WISP? If so, how
do you plan to
support since it cannot be done decently with the other
popular 5GHz
solutions. That's not my opinion so much as the opinion of
many larger
Trango and Motorola WISPs I have been talking to lately.
We are doing a significant amount of VoIP now. We have VoIP
customers running on top of both Trango and Canopy radios.
Canopy is a significantly better solution for VoIP since we
can properly prioritize voice with Canopy, while we cannot
with Trango. We also wholesale VoIP to other operators and
help them --if they require it-- with getting their network
ready to support VoIP.
If a key goal of WISPs is growing ARPU, what are WISPs plans
for doing that
with whatever your current technology permits?
I believe VoIP is the number one way to grow ARPU and the
fact that we bundle VoIP is why I believe we have one of the
highest ARPUs in the industry.
-Matt
--
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
