Mike Hammett wrote: > with annual revenues of $1M or less from Internet services
What's wrong with that? That's only about $83k a month, which if you have a high ARPU could be as few as 800-1000 existing subscribers. I can understand having some sort of revenue cutoff, but that seems awfully low. I'm not sure I agree with the sentiment (why penalize people who have a demonstrated record of success?) but at least I understand it. > deploying wireless services with speeds in excess of 10/2 for $100/month > or less Is there PtMP gear available right now that can do this on a decent scale, providing that service to 30-50 customers per AP or head-end device, and is reasonably affordable? What is it? I'd like to buy a whole bunch of it. :) Keep in mind that you can't just say "oh grants will pay for it all," because not even the government's coffers are bottomless, and the current administration seems to have a bit more focus on getting value for their dollar than the previous one. Given a choice between providing good service to 10,000 people or great service to 1,000, I suspect they'd choose the former. > Require wholesale net neutrality, but not retail net neutrality I'm not even sure what this means. > prefer wireless networks over landlines due to cost effectiveness There's no guarantee that wireless is always more cost-effective and always will be so. At this time, for low population-density areas, it often is, but that's nowhere near certain. David Smith MVN.net -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
