Reviews:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Camelot One
Re: $3100 per customer is a big investment It's not $3100 per customer. It's $3100 per POTENTIAL customer. I can bet you anything that 29,000 people in rural Indiana have NOT put down non-refundable deposits and signed commitment contracts for broadband.
The true cost per customer will be a lot higher than $3100. |
|
| ... It's also $3100 per potential customer over 10 years. If they can get $100 per month out of 1/3 of the market they'll probably do well. I'm clueless to it's feasibility, but with fiber's ability to carry phone, exceptionally fast internet, and television it would seem to have a lot going for it.
/End of arm chair CFO |
|
|
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by Millenniumle:It's also $3100 per potential customer over 10 years. If they can get $100 per month out of 1/3 of the market they'll probably do well. doing the math: $100/month * 120 months * 29000 customers * 1/3 uptake = $116 million over 10 years for an upfront investment of $90 million.
I could do a lot better investing in CDs. That is a terrible rate of return.
Also -- 1/3 of the customers paying $100 month is probably wildly optimistic.
The numbers just don't add up on this one. |
|
 BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | said by MyDogHsFleas:said by Millenniumle:It's also $3100 per potential customer over 10 years. If they can get $100 per month out of 1/3 of the market they'll probably do well. doing the math: $100/month * 120 months * 29000 customers * 1/3 uptake = $116 million over 10 years for an upfront investment of $90 million. I could do a lot better investing in CDs. That is a terrible rate of return. Also -- 1/3 of the customers paying $100 month is probably wildly optimistic. The numbers just don't add up on this one. WOW the internet is only going to last 10 more years?
1/3 is too much? You do realize these people have ZERO other options. |
|
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
Optimism aside, I think the monthly capital costs to investors and loans would be far less than 90 million over ten years. Again, I don't know squat about what sign-up percentage they can reasonably expect. You may well be right that 1/3 is wildly optimistic. But I still think if they got even a 1/3 at an average of $100 they'd do well. |
|
| reply to BF69
10 years is just a general capitalization rate.
|
|
 r81984Fair and BalancedPremium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T DSL Service
 ·row44
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
said by MyDogHsFleas:I could do a lot better investing in CDs. That is a terrible rate of return. Did you ever think that there are companies out there that care about their customer first over their investors?
Any company that cares about their investors over their customers and their own workers should not be in business.
--
»www.ryanoneill.us |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by r81984:said by MyDogHsFleas:I could do a lot better investing in CDs. That is a terrible rate of return. Did you ever think that there are companies out there that care about their customer first over their investors? Any company that cares about their investors over their customers and their own workers should not be in business. If the company goes out of business because it loses too much money, how can they care for their customers?
Caring for customers does not mean giving things to them that you can't, as a business, afford to give. |
|
r81984Fair and BalancedPremium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T DSL Service
·row44
| According to the post I was responding to they were profitable, just not to the poster's liking.
You have to be profitable to operate, but the order of who is important is:
1. Customers
2. Workers
3. Suppliers
4. Investors
That is also the order of who should benefit from profits.
--
»www.ryanoneill.us |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by r81984:According to the post I was responding to they were profitable, just not to the poster's liking. You have to be profitable to operate, but the order of who is important is: 1. Customers 2. Workers 3. Suppliers 4. Investors That is also the order of who should benefit from profits. You're living in a dream world. |
|
r81984Fair and BalancedPremium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T DSL Service
·row44
| said by MyDogHsFleas:said by r81984:According to the post I was responding to they were profitable, just not to the poster's liking. You have to be profitable to operate, but the order of who is important is: 1. Customers 2. Workers 3. Suppliers 4. Investors That is also the order of who should benefit from profits. You're living in a dream world. Well if we do not live by this, more and more jobs will go to china.
How could you put investors over customers and workers???
If you put investors first, the company suffers.
If you put customers and workers first the investors will benefit from higher profits.
--
»www.ryanoneill.us |
|
| Idiot.
If you run your business into the ground by investing your capital into programs that don't produce operating income then it doesn't matter what your priorities are, because they're all going to get nothing and the creditors will take it over in bankruptcy court.
You geniuses that think spending $3100 per home passed is a wise investment should stay in government jobs where you can't do any harm to real people or companies. |
|
r81984Fair and BalancedPremium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T DSL Service
·row44
| The war in Iraq is costing every household in America $100 a day.
Thats $36,500 per household a year with no benefit for the american people.
If they build their network with the future in sight and make it scalable, house and business developers will be looking to build there. Any internet business would love a cheap rural area with great internet access.
Internet is a huge driver of business. The 10 year ROI might be low based on the current houses, but with news like this I would say people will be moving into the area and the ROI will only go up over time.
--
»www.ryanoneill.us |
|
