| reply to KrK
Re: Other options.. said by KrK:I'm reluctantly forced to agree. It should be obvious to all that attempting to start-up a broadband ISP to compete with the incumbent is a venture doomed to fail. Not because people don't want your services or because you can't provide customer support; but because you'll have so many legal and regulatory roadblocks placed in front of you that you simply won't be able to outlast their legal efforts to crush you. Everything from blocking deployment and dragging feet on network buildout issues (such as permission to attach to poles, then payment for said rights, etc) to denial of right-of-ways and easements, holding up of permits and inspections; blocking from fair access to content at reasonable prices and the like. In the end your limited capital would expire. Wisps dont have those problems.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
|
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| said by fAcEtIOUs:Wisps dont have those problems. 1) I'm quite certain the incumbents don't see WISPs as real competition; most WISPs are trying to provide coverage in areas the incumbents won't touch
2) wireless broadband is currently not a substitute (or only a very poor one) for wired broadband and it's possible it never will be
3) WISPs, by their very nature, are likely to be covering only a small geographical area
as a result of 1, 2 and 3, incumbents do not see WISPs as presenting any danger to their revenue stream now or at any time in the future. Therefore, they don't care and don't sue. |
|
|
|
 SeleniaI love DebianPremium
join:2006-09-22
Lanesboro, MA
kudos:2
 ·Verizon Online DSL
 ·AT&T Wireless Br..
·Verizon Wireless..
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:Wisps dont have those problems. Don't overlook this post too much. Wireless technology and its speed is now really taking off around the world. long range wireless technology that was slower than dial-up a few years ago can now deliver upwards of 100 mbit, if used to its potential. Anybody remember when cable was 256 kbit max? Those days are gone. It wasn't that long ago when cable was 5 mbit and now they are pushing up to 100 in some areas. A wisp may be legit competition in a few years. In fact, Slime Warner and Company might be doing us a favor by making this technology a harder push to get away from them. Then we may all be free from wires in several years...and Slime Warner will be bankrupt  Wishful thinking maybe, but certainly not out of the realm of possibilities. |
|
 KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T DSL Service
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:Wisps dont have those problems. Now that is true. It's "easier" to start a WISP... but they have their own unique problems.
a) Capacity. Unlike wired broadband, they cannot just "Add more capacity" once their spectrum approaches saturation.
b) Permits and licensing (For the airwaves.)
c) Price of backhaul. In most areas the incumbents (their competition) get to control their costs of purchasing bandwidth to support their network. Easy to squeeze them here.
I'd say a WISP is a good business to try in a market where broadband options don't exist, but going up against incumbents in a populated area would be rough-- they can out offer you.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
|
|
 rawgerzThe hell was that?Premium
join:2004-10-03
Grove City, PA | reply to fAcEtIOUs
They can't compete with $20 DSL. I thought of doing this myself since it would have been our only choice a couple years ago, but after looking at the operating costs ($1 per foot lease space on cell tower, need at least 300Ft, T1's $1100 month 2yr contract, and equipment costs of $100-200 per sub) it just is not feasible.
--
You can't make all the people happy all of the time. But it should be common sense to shoot for the majority. |
|
| reply to Selenia
wisps are leaps and bounds slower than normal connections. By the time LTE comes around it may be different but at current situations, it's not the same level of competitiveness.
6MB downstream on a wisp maximum doesn't compare to 22mb downstream on comcast - those are different offerings. |
|
 maartenaElmoPremium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:1
·AT&T U-Verse
 ·DIRECTV
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:Wisps dont have those problems. No but they have other problems. For now, they are relatively limited to the amount of bandwidth they can deliver. This will change, but at this moment you won't get much more then 1 Mbps or so.
Secondly they require expensive equipment to be attached to your house, and in many cases you need to raise the antenna to get reception. Those living in an apartment building, or those with a 3-story building right next door may not even get any service.
Third, many houses are in "dead zones", where there is lot of interference from other radio signals. They really don't have a map of where it does and doesn't work, but from experience and having a company come in and install wireless as a bridge-gap solution for about 6 months, I know it is all but simple to install wireless. But that was 5 years back.
--
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
That's not the "best" technology to use either. Fiber is king. It's the technology for the future because it does not have interference issues that wireless has and because it can deliver more data in the same amount of time. Wisps and other wireless technologies have their uses, but fiber is the way to go, imho. So, the little guy has no chance. |
|
