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" <wireless@wispa.org>
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: 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/

Reply via email to