| Interference overshadows much bigger BPL problems Allright I have just heard enough of interference and cannot take this anymore. The financials of BPL are ***TOTALLY**** ***TOTALLY*** ***TOTALLY*** flawed and hardly anybody has paid attention. Some people seems to think that itf the interference problem is solved, BPL is a fine solution. How did we get there? Let's take the media back here and please read on.
1 - DSL, Fiber and Cable equipment gear is reaching price commodity status while BPL gear has not gone though neither standardization and standards bodies yet. Related skills are also reaching commodity status while BPL still requires truck rolls and specialized people handling power lines. Wireless equipment gear is also reaching price commodity status alongside with the skills required to have a wISP in the rural areas. Deployment expenses would further increase in these areas with the internet backhaul costs, the larger number of BPL repeaters required and low subscriber density. CAPEX people will not let that through.
2 - Liability issues associated with disrupting powerline (&broadcast) services are daunting. Safety issues with BPL subscribers (&operating staff) are just as difficult. Although some lawers may benefit from this, the onus will be on the BPL Operators and Vendors and potentially their muni clients to defend themselves at great expenses. Lawers will not let that through.
3 - Not having a bandwidth roadmap, the technology is doomed to early obsolescence with tremendous writeoff costs and lots of people losing face. Skilled network planners will either work on more promising technologies or will not let that through.
4 - OPEX cost of adding a line is highly dependant on line topology and BPL repeater power levels; capacity of line also depends on notches and inbound interference that can dramatically decrease throughput; OPEX cost of acquiring (&provisioning) a subscriber is unknown. OPEX cost of maintaining 5NINES availability is unknown. Subscriber churn rate is unknown. OPEX troubleshooting cost of keeping a subscriber (e.g. loopback test) when threatening to churn is also unknown. OPEX cost of Maintenance Of Line (MOL) takes a whole new meaning under BPL and is totally unknown. Technical trials and market trials do not appear to have solved these issues and they can't hand this over into operations. Pilots have not matured beyond handling a handful of subscribers reached though underground powerlines. Skilled operation staff in will not let that through.
5 - In light of the above, costing a BPL subscriber service at $30 month looks most suspect. After the Enrons and likes, accountants will not let that through. Serious BPL investors will ask for these figures and will not let that through either. In light of a very suspect Return On Investment (ROI), elected officials in municipalities will not let that through, even if they really wish to generate revenues out of this.
I am looking forward to a media story where someone states that there are problems with BPL deployment far bigger than interference whether solved rightly or wrongly. Deploying BPL would suck precious financial resources and create a financial mayhem worse than the RF wasteland. We just can't afford to do these kinds of mistakes in these tough times. BPL investors and media, please educate yourself on the ROI financials side and smarten up out of this techie talk.
Must we let the system screw the dumb BPL investors (including munies) or should we educate them in better allocating their hard earned dollars?
Forum-mates: please help me out. Am I overreacting? |
|
| CheeseWare,
You clearly understand the financial dimension and your comments are a very clear insight into the situation.
As in past scams the innocent will be presented with the bill and the scammers will move on to the next scam.
The Electricity companies have a track record of vacuuming their victim’s wallets;
www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/26/national/main546097.shtml |
|
 TransmasterDon't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
1 edit | reply to CheeseWare
Excellent!!! I have been following this aspect of the issue
and the fact the stock in these companies last time I checked was in the 14 cents per share range should tell you just how much confidence the investment community has in this technology.
What really gets me is why doesn't doesn't our government invest in a national network system. I look at this as something like the "Defence Interstate Highway System"
The Government has spent billions on this system over the last 45 plus years, the money invested has been paid back
in the improvement in the gross national product many times over. I feel such a federal investment in a digital highway would reap the same benefits to the nation. Look what we have now, a bunch of large monopolistic players that not only try to rip each other, but prevent anyone else from getting in the game. power companies that want to put digital streams on 70+ year old power lines. We need something other then a politicised FCC to do it.
--
I love Irish Terriers, Low Brass, and the sound of a 1950 Johnson Viking 1 tranmitter on the air for the first time in 30 years. |
|
| reply to David95037
What gets me non-linear is that many "media" are falling in the trap of the BPL industry by totally blind sighting the worse case scenario of BPL, i.e. flawed financials leading to further loss of confidence in our financial institutions.
It is not that we have not been there before and should know better by now. I notice that the Enron scam auditors are about done with the nicely hairdo-ed and fast-talking Enron execs. Perhaps they should do a preemptive strike on the BPL industry scammers and audit their financial claims of monthly $30 per subscriber for not even a real broadband throughput. What are the assumptions made, are these assumptions validated with people with real credentials?
The most interesting story on BPL has now turned to how the media covers this. I am obviously seriously affected by Kucinick and his record dealing with the pucs. I can see the same flow of Public Relations money affecting how the stories are being spinned in order to scam investors out of their greed and delusion. With all respect to the most valuable service that BBR provides, I trust the story spinners understand that the forum participants will become more critical of the BPL news coverage. I can definitely see more people getting further irritated if this coverage does not get more balanced. |
|
|
|
| Shall we play poker? Allright the interference problem can be worked out. Tell us more about your financials then. How can you provide a lighweight broadband service at $30 a month?
Any takers out there to answer this one in the media??? |
|
| reply to Transmaster
Re: Interference overshadows much bigger BPL problems If the government was not so much in debt, perhaps a government solution could be considered. I am however sceptical here North of 49 of any government undertaking complex tasks.
What I see however is that the FCC supports in its own very weird way the existing monopolies by having supported all the uncertainties with BPL, hence supporting statu-quo with the appearance of doing something about deploying broadband.
Worse the FCC has confused investors and steered them away from more practical and feasible solutions that startups could cost effectively undertake -vs- the bloated monopolies. I would say to the FCC: get entirely out of this, or if you want to put your nose in this, resolve the uncertainty on BPL the sooner the better. Because you have blown it big times: quit supporting the monopolies statu-quo. It is blatant that you do and your goverment will get thrown out if you keep doing so until the next election. |
|
