Re: Wisdom, Kansas Style

Author	All Replies
CXM_Splicer a more sensible view Premium join:2011-08-11 NYC kudos:1 Reviews: ·Verizon FiOS	reply to brad Re: Wisdom, Kansas Style True... I think there is a BIG difference is saying 'spectrum is unlimited' and 'there is no spectrum crunch'. I don't think I have ever heard anyone profess the former. If spectrum is not an issue and demand will create competitors then why don't we have a hundred different wireless competing like they do in parts of Europe?
	to forum · permalink · 2013-02-25 18:38:41 ·
elray join:2000-12-16 Santa Monica, CA	said by CXM_Splicer: True... I think there is a BIG difference is saying 'spectrum is unlimited' and 'there is no spectrum crunch'. I don't think I have ever heard anyone profess the former. If spectrum is not an issue and demand will create competitors then why don't we have a hundred different wireless competing like they do in parts of Europe? Demand does not exist if you aren't willing to pay; most of the underserved/unserved low-density rural markets have a majority disconnected population that either isn't interested in, or unwilling to pay market rates for broadband. "Parts of Europe" don't have 100 different wireless "competitors". They have resellers, much like we have MVNOs, which is a more rational way of using (ahem) limited spectrum if you don't want to have a monopoly operator. Fixed LTE is in its infancy; in the next few years, we will see it widely deployed, and presuming it works, the profit potential will induce additional players to come to each market, and force the rates down further.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-02-26 14:27:11 ·
brad join:2007-09-06 Etobicoke, ON	said by elray: said by CXM_Splicer: True... I think there is a BIG difference is saying 'spectrum is unlimited' and 'there is no spectrum crunch'. I don't think I have ever heard anyone profess the former. If spectrum is not an issue and demand will create competitors then why don't we have a hundred different wireless competing like they do in parts of Europe? Demand does not exist if you aren't willing to pay; most of the underserved/unserved low-density rural markets have a majority disconnected population that either isn't interested in, or unwilling to pay market rates for broadband. "Parts of Europe" don't have 100 different wireless "competitors". They have resellers, much like we have MVNOs, which is a more rational way of using (ahem) limited spectrum if you don't want to have a monopoly operator. Fixed LTE is in its infancy; in the next few years, we will see it widely deployed, and presuming it works, the profit potential will induce additional players to come to each market, and force the rates down further. So then until the plans improve and the rates come down it isn't a replacement for wireline broadband connections.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-02-26 15:28:22 ·

elray join:2000-12-16 Santa Monica, CA	said by brad: said by elray: Demand does not exist if you aren't willing to pay; most of the underserved/unserved low-density rural markets have a majority disconnected population that either isn't interested in, or unwilling to pay market rates for broadband. Fixed LTE is in its infancy; in the next few years, we will see it widely deployed, and presuming it works, the profit potential will induce additional players to come to each market, and force the rates down further. So then until the plans improve and the rates come down it isn't a replacement for wireline broadband connections. In the case of the rural LEC, it is a replacement for wireline today, as those services don't even qualify as broadband, according to the goalpost-movers here. Again, assuming, that the technology works well as deployed - the jury is still out. I do agree with you, CXMSlicer, sonicmerlin, and others that the rate structure is disappointing at present. While your contingent apparently can't understand the fundamental need for structured limits, I concur that the bucket rates are unreasonably high. We should see that improve, dramatically, over the coming years.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-02-26 19:48:12 ·
CXM_Splicer a more sensible view Premium join:2011-08-11 NYC kudos:1 Reviews: ·Verizon FiOS	reply to elray "Parts of Europe" don't have 100 different wireless "competitors". I was referring to an article that has been cited here on the forums several times which claims European wireless companies can't expand due to lack of market funding. The article further claims this is a result of very tight competition as compared to their US counterparts: quote: The gap reflects differences in the competitive landscape. Europe has about 100 mobile firms to the United States' six, as well as harsher rules that have sapped profitability and contributed to four straight years of revenue decline. »news.yahoo.com/divide-between-eu···tor.html What do you think it is that keeps that from happening here in the US?
	to forum · permalink · 2013-02-26 20:29:47 ·
biochemistry join:2003-05-09 92361	Well it does help that Europe is an entire continent made up of 50 countries with even more languages.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-02-27 14:23:59 ·
elray join:2000-12-16 Santa Monica, CA	reply to CXM_Splicer We are thankfully, not Europe. The article is making a false comparison. The EU is 27 countries. I think you'd find that there are 4-5 "mobile firms" present in each. The EU does benefit from having a common radio protocol, which makes for more efficient use of spectrum, and makes forcing wholesale roaming tariffs a bit easier, so virtual cross-border operation doesn't require as much capital. Most of that does not, can not, and will not apply to us.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-02-27 14:33:23 ·

AT&T Conning Kentucky & Kansas Into Gutting Oversight, DSL > Wisdom, Kansas Style