Clint, Inline... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Clint Ricker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 9:21 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Push to install "Mobile Broadband" on laptops
> Tom, > The price structure of WiMax gear is, as you noted, structured such that > the > cost of the service provider gear is quite expensive (compared to the > typical gear that most WISPs use). > > I disagree with your assessment, though, that this is designed as some > sort > of protectionist system to keep little players out of the market. I agree, my original statement "intent to keep small players out" was unfair, and I retract it. However, whether or not there was "intent" to keep small players out is irrelevent. That is the indirect result that will occur. > Major > service providers have typically followed a model where they will invest > very heavily in their core infrastructure (headend / central office / data > center / cell tower / whatever) if it means that it will save them money > on > the CPE. They then market the hell out of the product to try to get the > density such that the infrastructure buildout cost is relatively small on > a > per-customer basis. This is not something that occurs because the Large carriers are more insightful. It occurs because the large players have more financial resources, to self fund and subsidize their deployments. The current financial market would never allow a small WISP to execute the same business model. (at least not with the profile of the average 2-7000 WISPs). > Most WISPs don't ever get high penetration; they also don't, in my > experience, focus as much on the marketing necessary to acheive any real > penetration. So, they are able to (forced to) shift the cost more on the > customer side. Actually, currently not true. WISP's current landscape has cheaper CPEs also. We didn't shift the cost to the CPE, we just got rid of the cost of the AP. > If you are able to achieve the market penetration, then 15K > (or much more even) for the AP is very cheap if you are able to cut down > on > or even eliminate engineered CPE deployments, truck rolls, and cut the CPE > costs. Yeah, but can it be done? WISPs live in a world of technical reality. Large player live in a world where their job is to fool Wall Street, and fabricate potential. I still question the Super Cell design in many markets. Its teh low cost of AP, that has allowed our company to grow, because we can isntall more APs, in irder to start gaining adequate coverage to reach scale. TheWIMAX dream, is that somehow the super powered single AP, miraculously delviers the coverage. Its not the reality in noise filled markets. In my mind, Wimax technology may be leading the industry technically, but they have brought the industry 10 years behind in their mentality on deployment/sales models. Sure WIMax may very well work for Clearwires/Sprints, tha have the luxury of National Licensed Spectrum. But not for the average WISPs. Building a technical model that works only for the one or two providers that can afford national licensed spectrum, is effectively turning ones back on the the remaining WISPs in America. I use the same arguement for Gigabit wireless technology. There are still cases that manufacturers can justify the $40,000 value of a single 1 mile GB ptp link in 80Ghz. But for players in competitive markets, with options, its hard for me to jsutify anything over $10k, after I analyze all the costs involved. The industry is held back, because the manufacturers are holding back technology from being affordable. The capabilty is there. There is no reason that GB gear can't cost sub $5000/link, and no justified reason why GB gear isn't on every building on town. Instead, WISPs get smart, and they leave 80Ghz spectrum sitting idle, and the buy 6-24Ghz, which they can afford, that is fast enough. > Of course, if you don't acheive the density, then you're pretty much > screwed--no limping by on a handful of customers per tower when your > up-front investment is 6 figures... Yes. And whos capable of getting the needed density, realistically? > Also, mosts WISPs sort of turn the system on the head by leveraging what > is > effectively repurposed LAN equipment (ie 802.11a/b/g chipsets) as service > provider technology, so they can take advantage of the economies of scale > for on the chipset side. When you think about traditional major service > provider gear, there's often only a few tens, hundreds or thousands of > units > of the technology in production (or often even less), so there's very > little > economy of scale involved, even by the largest of manufacturers. Yes, but it doesn't have to be that way. Intel views WiMax in the same light as commodity products in the sense they think a Wimax card should be in every laptop. And the probably WiMax players, like the Clearwires, are the ones targeting $29/mon residential mobile services. Why is expensive WiMax needed for low end services? That 802.11a chips has allowed business class services to be delivered at 10x the ARPU. I think what alot of people forget is "mobility" (cell phones) is easy to sell in scale. It sold at every retail establishment in town (Best buy, circuit city, etc). Fixed Wireless, is a different game. Its a one on one sales process. Its tought to scale it cost effectively, to scale that is required to charge next to nothing, and pay top dollar. > Clint Ricker > -Kentnis Technologies > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Tom DeReggi > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> > >> >The only idea that comes to my mind is for professionally-operated small >> >operators to somehow partner with the least established/most threatened >> >cellular operator which may be Sprint/Clearwire. If >> >professionally-operated small operators could somehow allow their >> >existing tower locations to be "overlaid" with a licensed WiMAX >> >deployment for example, in return for a chance to be both a sales agent >> >and to receive a share of the revenue then it could work for all >> >parties. >> >> That would assume that the WISPs owned their towers or had exclusive >> control >> of them, or that WISP tower/networks met the equivellent spec required by >> Sprint/Clearwire vision. (There becomes QOS guarantee, support issues, >> and >> reputation issues, that could outweight revenue from WISP partnerships). >> I'd argue most WISPs lease, and likely were not able to lease "all" >> spectrum >> rights. If Sprint/Clear wants a WISP's tower, they'll just buy space on >> it >> themselves. >> >> In order to make a deal with a SprintClearwire, it requires having an >> asset >> that Clearwire/Sprint needs, that they can't other wise get. Sometimes >> tower >> space can be the asset, if valuable space under a pre-existing good >> contract. Sometimes its the anonymousness that allows a small provider >> to >> get a better deal from a leasor than a large funded company that has the >> ability to pay up large. >> >> But personally, my feeling is the best option is for WISPs to utilize a >> widely accepted standards based technology, for their own architecture, >> so >> they don;t have to partner with goliath Cell companies. It would be >> great >> if Whitespace utilized a standardized technology, IF personal portable >> and >> mobile devices are allowed in the band. >> >> Wimax cards will get built-in to laptops, not only because Intel's >> investment, but because there will be an acconomy of scale to justify it. >> To get in on the game, WISPs would have to buy into WiMax. >> As long as WiMax gear is $15k a AP sector, it won't get traction from >> WISPs. >> Its chasing a dream that won;t materialize. >> This is not an accident. I believe its purposeful to keep Wimax proces >> high >> and out of the reach of small operators. Its what allows Wimax to be a >> "special club" technology that only the big boys can play in. The best >> thing taht WISPs can do to get in, is to lobby their manufacturers to >> make >> Wimax APs that are affordable for WISPs. There would then be no need to >> partner, we'd just piggy back on the fact that laptop already had >> embedded >> WiMax cards in them. >> >> The other hope is standards like 802.22, or 802.11y, or 802.16h, that are >> standards in the making. >> >> As much as I hate bias to a proprietary protocol that is called a >> "standard", it is really the only way to get support from laptop and >> mobile >> manufacturers, without paying for that support ourselves. >> >> My personal opinion is the last thing a WISP would want to do is partner >> with a Clearwire, to fund their competitor, until such time that the >> Sprint/Clearwires of the world realized the value to invest in small >> WISPs >> as partners. The value of being a WISP is owning ones network and >> future. >> >> Just my 2 cents. >> >> >> Tom DeReggi >> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> >> Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 11:15 AM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Push to install "Mobile Broadband" on laptops >> >> >> > inline >> > >> > David E. Smith wrote: >> >> Jack Unger wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> Top computer makers, mobile operators and technology providers >> announced >> >>> on Tuesday that upcoming laptop computers would feature mobile >> broadband >> >>> making them ready to surf right out of the box... >> >>> >> >> >> >> Dell, at least, has offered notebooks with internal air cards >> >> pre-installed for a year or more now. Presumably, they're just >> >> mini-PCI >> >> versions of the standard Sprint/AT&T/Verizon cards, maybe with a >> >> different antenna built into the case. >> >> >> >> If I traveled more, I'd probably buy one just for the convenience, and >> >> the "one less thing to lose" factor of having it built in. Wi-fi at >> >> hotels (at least the cheap ones I frequent) is spotty at best, and >> >> even >> >> when it does work it's basically a shared connection with a number of >> >> other guests, rarely with any useful QoS or prioritization, which >> >> means >> >> I'm sharing the connection with everyone whose kids installed Limewire >> >> on dad's notebook and didn't tell him. >> >> >> >> So how can the small operators get in on this? :D >> >> >> > Yes; that is the real question. I think the odds of small operators >> > getting in on this is low (less than 15%). >> > The only idea that comes to my mind is for professionally-operated >> > small >> > operators to somehow partner with the least established/most threatened >> > cellular operator which may be Sprint/Clearwire. If >> > professionally-operated small operators could somehow allow their >> > existing tower locations to be "overlaid" with a licensed WiMAX >> > deployment for example, in return for a chance to be both a sales agent >> > and to receive a share of the revenue then it could work for all >> > parties. >> > >> > jack >> >> David Smith >> >> MVN.net >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> >> 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/ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > -- >> > Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. >> > Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 >> > Cisco Press Author - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs" >> > NEXT ONLINE TRAINING OCTOBER 8th & 9th >> > <http://www.linktechs.net/askwi.asp> >> > FCC Lic. #PG-12-25133 LinkedIn Profile >> > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/jackunger> >> > Phone 818-227-4220 Email <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> > 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/ >> >> >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> 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/ >> > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > 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/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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/
