2 edits | Free WiFi would look like this
Now these are great for 5 year olds, but the free part of this nationwide system will be worthless for 90% of the users. So what M2Z is asking for is FREE spectrum so they can sell their 3 mbps tier at $30/mo that can show porn, news, social sites, etc. that aren't appropriate for 5 yr olds.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? |
|
bbenso1
join:2004-11-28
Baltimore, MD | said by fAcEtIOUs:So what M2Z is asking for is FREE spectrum so they can sell their 3 mbps tier at $30/mo that can show porn. Not FREE. M2Z would pay the government 5% of their revenue. So instead of getting one payment up front the government would be getting recurring revenue as long as the company stays in business. |
|
 MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | reply to fAcEtIOUs
That is exactly what I was thinking Tk.
Not to mention, 10 years to build out 3Mbps? 10 years ago most of us were still on DIAL-UP! 3Mbps will be the equivalent of dial-up by then, not to mention 384Kbps. |
|
MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | reply to bbenso1
said by bbenso1:said by fAcEtIOUs:So what M2Z is asking for is FREE spectrum so they can sell their 3 mbps tier at $30/mo that can show porn. Not FREE. M2Z would pay the government 5% of their revenue. So instead of getting one payment up front the government would be getting recurring revenue as long as the company stays in business. Yes free. If they don't make money (or use creative accounting to hide it) they don't pay the Government a dime.
I am all for unseating the incumbents and releasing their stranglehold on the last mile, but this is a terrible use of the spectrum. I have to agree with the FCC on this one for once. |
|
|
|
bbenso1
join:2004-11-28
Baltimore, MD | said by Matt:said by bbenso1:said by fAcEtIOUs:So what M2Z is asking for is FREE spectrum so they can sell their 3 mbps tier at $30/mo that can show porn. Not FREE. M2Z would pay the government 5% of their revenue. So instead of getting one payment up front the government would be getting recurring revenue as long as the company stays in business. Yes free. If they don't make money (or use creative accounting to hide it) they don't pay the Government a dime. Incorrect. 5% of REVENUE, not 5% of PROFIT. If they bring in $1 million and have operating costs of $2 million they would still owe the government 5% of that $1 million even though they actually made no money.
So, the only way that the government would see no money from this deal would be if M2Z had absolutely zero income. If that were the case I can guarantee that the company wouldn't be around for long and then the government would get their spectrum back. |
|
MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | said by bbenso1:Incorrect. 5% of REVENUE, not 5% of PROFIT. If they bring in $1 million and have operating costs of $2 million they would still owe the government 5% of that $1 million even though they actually made no money. So, the only way that the government would see no money from this deal would be if M2Z had absolutely zero income. If that were the case I can guarantee that the company wouldn't be around for long and then the government would get their spectrum back. Did you read the filing? This only applies to their "Premium Offering" subscription service. And they "may" offer it. It doesn't say they HAVE to. They can plaster the free service ads or any number of creative schemes to make money that is exempt and never offer a premium service. |
|
