John, This is probably the only opportunity the small guys (WISPs) will have to compete on an even playing field with the big guys for spectrum that supports WiMax products.
The first step is a favorable ruling from the FCC and then the filing of a standard application for a Part 101 license. We are told that the equipment cost per subordinated path will be less than $500 and FCC certified equipment will be available ninety days after a favorable FCC ruling WSI would be please to discuss technical details, business strategies and the enormous opportunities of concurrent coordination with any WISP off list. Mike -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 6:20 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Next Big Thing in Wireless Mike, If we support your request for declaratory ruling what steps would be required for us to get our own licensed multipoint Part 101 based network deployment in our areas? What equipment is available now if any? What are the costs? How do you make money on this type of deal? I want to understand the logistics of actually using this in my network if we get the go ahead to do so. Many thanks, John Scrivner michael mulcay wrote: >Concurrently coordinated networks are Licensed Carrier Grade, which >means we no longer have to take second place to the big guys. Wireless >Strategies Inc (WSI) decided to focus on carrier grade backhaul where we >believe the GPM is higher and the COS lower than for the home subscriber >market. > >The $500 number was for 802.16 based CPE and was a conservative number. >My guess is that 802.16 product prices will end up similar to 802.11 >prices. > >We budget conservatively and plan for a Part 101 license to cost about >$2500 with another $2500 for the Prior Coordination. For this we have >enough spectrum (60MHz at 6GHz) to serve hundreds of clients. The >throughput is 134Mbps burstable to 268Mbps. > >I agree that asking the FCC for a rule change or a waiver would be >difficult, especially to get the FCC allow one foot antennas. That is >why NO RULE CHANGE OR WAIVER IS NEEDED. We engineered paths in a city >that could support legacy and concurrently coordinated networks, applied >for and have received licenses. To remove any uncertainty that an >antenna system with radiating elements (it is the radiating elements >that can have any type or size of radiator), is allowed UNDER EXISTING >RULES, we sent a Request for a Declaratory Ruling to the FCC asking for >confirmation that any antenna system, and specifically an antenna system >with radiating elements, that meets all the present regulations is >allowed. I would be pleased to send you individual copies of the >request. > >Our concern is that the big guys will make a "land grab" for spectrum >before the small, and often under funded, operators have staked their >claim. For most investors to put money into network construction they >want all perceived regulatory uncertainty removed. >This is why we are asking the FCC to remove any uncertainty. >Mike >831-659-5618 >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 >Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 7:12 AM >To: WISPA General List >Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Next Big Thing in Wireless > >I talked to Mike for quite a while the other day. > >I think this idea warrants some discussion. > >On the one hand, the idea that we can use the cheap, arguably >underutilized >6 gig band for licensed ptmp links has some draw for me. It's also an >idea >that the FCC has already hinted at a year or three ago (SPTF maybe???). > >On the other hand, any licensed bands seem to almost always wind up in >the >hands of people that don't deploy with it. At least not broadband. > >And, as our "tower" sites get ever more loaded with the access points >needed >to service customers, many of us will likely eventually move to licensed > >bands for backhaul. It would be a shame to not have licensed ptp only >spectrum available. Well, it could easily become a shame.... > >laters, >Marlon >(509) 982-2181 >(408) 907-6910 (Vonage) Consulting services >42846865 (icq) WISP Operator since >1999! >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >www.odessaoffice.com/wireless >www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam > > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "michael mulcay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[email protected]> >Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 2:23 PM >Subject: [WISPA] The Next Big Thing in Wireless > > > > >>Guys, >> >>As we wireless operators know, the costs of licensed networks >>(equipment, antennas and licensing) makes providing services to the >>majority of subscribers prohibitively expensive, and the cost at >> >> >auction > > >>for spectrum (for WiMax and 4G products) is beyond the reach of most >> >> >of > > >>us. >> >>To overcome these problems, two years ago Wireless Strategies began >>research into ways to use new technologies -- WiMAX and smart antennas >>-- to reuse side lobe radiation around sites of point-to-point 4GHz >> >> >and > > >>6GHz microwave links under the present FCC rules and without causing >>additional interference. >> >>Our finding is that networks can be designed to operate with smart >>antennas with distributed radiators and that the new paths can be >>concurrently coordinated, under existing FCC rules and without causing >>additional interference. >> >>We believe that concurrent coordination will be "The Next Big Thing in >>Wireless," leveling the playing field by making it possible for WISPs >> >> >to > > >>obtain multipurpose licensed spectrum at pennies on the dollar >> >> >compared > > >>to obtaining it at auction. By making use of the formerly wasted side >>lobe radiation of 4GHz and 6GHz paths, WISPs will be able to use IEEE >>802.16-based (WiMAX) equipment with small antennas to provide licensed >>broadband services to hundreds of additional subscribers at a >>provisioning cost of only about $500 per link. We appreciate that some >>members of the industry may initially perceive any change to the >> >> >status > > >>quo as a threat, but we believe that concurrent coordination will >>provide extraordinary benefits to the entire industry, especially >> >> >WISPs. > > >>Due to the potential for unprecedented industry-wide changes from the >>use of antennas with distributed radiators to provide multiple-path >>low-cost broadband services under the existing FCC rules, Wireless >>Strategies decided to remove any uncertainty for investors and service >>providers by, on February 23, 2007, filing with the Federal >>Communications Commission, a Request for a Declaratory Ruling on >>Compliance of Fixed Microwave Antennas Having Distributed Radiating >>Elements. >> >>However, to date, the FCC has taken no action. We believe that emails >> >> >of > > >>support from the WISP community can help speed up the process, by >>encouraging the FCC to either issue the requested declaratory ruling >> >> >or > > >>to issue a Public Notice for industry comment. >> >>Therefore, if you would like a copy of our FCC filing and/or >> >> >information > > >>about the new concept of concurrent coordination, please contact me at >>Wireless Strategies 831-659-5618 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] For >>additional information you can also visit our web site at >>www.wirelessstrategies.net. >> >>Thanks, >> >>Mike >> >>Michael Mulcay, CEO >>Wireless Strategies, Inc. >> >>-- >>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/
