 
Transmaster
Onward Through The Fog
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
edit:
August 3rd, @01:38PM
| Here we go again Well who paid off this clown. If he were a competent engineer instead of a political hack we would not be messing with this crap at all. 
I just read the MO&O and the FCC has just stepped on a bunch of toes. How ever there is one bright spot this ruling states BPL emissions have to be 20 DB below usual type 15 emission levels.
»hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/a···73A1.doc
It will still be economics that will kill this trash technology.
--
The older I get the more I prefer the company of my dogs over that of man kind. | |
|  | 
CoxCable4
banned from most servers for cheating
join:2002-10-02
PwnZone
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Here we go again beam me up, scottie | |
| | | 
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
| Re: Here we go again
You sure it wasn't this guy? |
--
Tancredo 2008! | |
| | | | 
pinhead22
@omcastbusiness.net
| Re: Here we go again Broadband via Power Lines wins people here can`t face the facts that BPL is here to stay and grow.... BPL will become one of the ACCESS BROADBAND pipes as well as the tool for upgrading our 120-year old ELECTRIC POWER GRIDS into a SMARTER grid... we lost so much time against other countries when it comes to VERY HI-SPEED BROADBAND TECHNOLOGY like AUSTRALIA, CHINA, ITALY, etc... these countries our trialling BPL as we speak.
FCC is a blessing for Consumers and a curse for the HAMS !!!
Texas, North Carolina, Indiana were spearheading the deployments folks... BPL with same speed upload and download using the new 200 Mbps BPL theoritical speed combining with FIBER-TO-THE-HOMES is a real blessing to America !!!
Support this technology !!! | |
| | | | | 
Dude111
An Awesome Dude
Premium
join:2003-08-04
USA
edit:
August 5th, @06:27AM
| Re: Here we go again Broadband via Power Lines wins  | |
| | | | | 
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| said by pinhead22 :
people here can`t face the facts that BPL is here to stay and grow.... BPL will become one of the ACCESS BROADBAND pipes as well as the tool for upgrading our 120-year old ELECTRIC POWER GRIDS into a SMARTER grid... we lost so much time against other countries when it comes to VERY HI-SPEED BROADBAND TECHNOLOGY like AUSTRALIA, CHINA, ITALY, etc... these countries our trialling BPL as we speak. The US has been trialing it as well, where have you been? Other countries are ahead of us in broadband because they've been deploying DSL, not BPL. BPL is just a footnote there like it is here.
The tool for making smarter grids is here now. Non-interfering, more economical and technically feasible PLC has been around for decades and is being used successfully on a widespread basis for meter reading.
FCC is a blessing for Consumers and a curse for the HAMS !!!
Many on BBR will argue that the FCC is the core of the problem with broadband in the US to begin with. BPL is just a too little, too late solution but one that fits into political agendas and is easily hyped to the general public who doesn't know any better. Despite your glee that hams didn't get some additional requests, the FCC still committed to protect wireless spectrum and act more quickly to address interfering systems. This will be a blessing for vendors who comply with the rules and address problems and a curse for those who ignore their responsibilities.
Texas, North Carolina, Indiana were spearheading the deployments folks... BPL with same speed upload and download using the new 200 Mbps BPL theoritical speed combining with FIBER-TO-THE-HOMES is a real blessing to America !!! Cincinnati is in Ohio, not Indiana, BTW. You conveniently forgot Manassas, VA, the first "BPL city". I don't recall North Carolina having a non-trial system with a significant number of paying subscribers. Where's a BPL customer getting anything that exceeds cable speeds using these new 200 Mbs systems? Please, show me one!!!!!! 
Theoretical speeds are just that, theoretical. Fiber beats BPL in spades, and so does DSL and Cable with speeds and deployments that are based in reality. Just look at the latest broadband numbers. In three or four years, BPL is still struggling to break the four digit subscriber barrier. Or should we be considering theoretical customer numbers as well? | |
| | | | | 
RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL
 ·AT&T Midwest
| said by pinhead22 :
people here can`t face the facts that BPL is here to stay and grow.... BPL will become one of the ACCESS BROADBAND pipes as well as the tool for upgrading our 120-year old ELECTRIC POWER GRIDS into a SMARTER grid... we lost so much time against other countries when it comes to VERY HI-SPEED BROADBAND TECHNOLOGY like AUSTRALIA, CHINA, ITALY, etc... these countries our trialling BPL as we speak.
FCC is a blessing for Consumers and a curse for the HAMS !!!
Texas, North Carolina, Indiana were spearheading the deployments folks... BPL with same speed upload and download using the new 200 Mbps BPL theoritical speed combining with FIBER-TO-THE-HOMES is a real blessing to America !!!
Support this technology !!!
(to the tune of Shake Your Booty)
Fluff fluff fluff...
Fluff fluff fluff...
Fluff that dog stock...
Fluff that DOG STOCK.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
| | | | | | | 
Aggie Dan
Stop... Reverse That.
Premium
join:2001-01-30
Frisco, TX
clubs:
| "holds great promise as a ubiquitous broadband solution that would offer a viable alternative to cable, digital subscriber line, fiber, and wireless broadband solutions" He missed satellite. So, unless I messed up my counting, we've got 5 non-interfering options for broadband deployment (all shooting for 30% market share at least in order to remain profitable) in one corner and a single option that has had almost every trial stopped due to interference issues.
What a knucklehead.
--
Note : The statements made by myself are my own and not the opinions of my employer or of my coworkers. 15.81 GHz Crunching Power | My Random Thoughts... Yes, I have thoughts. | |
| | | PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
| Re: Here we go again said by aggie2  : ...a single option that has had almost every trial stopped due to interference issues. To be fair, almost all those trials were based on technology from a single supplier, one with known interference issues.
OTOH, the BPL deployment in Cinncinati hasn't had any complaints, and Motorola's BPL has been OK as well.
I'll agree that the economics vs. the competition look real tough; e.g., 'looks like a non-starter for rural deployments, dispite what the politicians say. | |
| | | |
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| Re: Here we go again said by PDXPLT :said by aggie2 : ...a single option that has had almost every trial stopped due to interference issues. To be fair, almost all those trials were based on technology from a single supplier, one with known interference issues. I think you're right that all of the shutdowns have involved one vendor, however there's two other vendors that have had several interference complaints, one that has been in the spotlight recently and another one that the FCC has been sitting on for a long time. | |
| | | | | | |
RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL | Clown? Kevvie is the fucking Ringmaster.
If you ever needed proof that he's only interested in feathering his next nest with his current position, there you have it.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
| | | | |
RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL | Re: Here we go again You can easily apply the accusation to all five. They climb out of the same car.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
| | | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| said by TK Junk Mail : And they all said the ARRL should not be worried because they will keep an eye on interference issues. Complete BS! They haven't responded to the interference issues. They have dragged their feet and will continue to do so until forced otherwise. | |
| | | | 
envoid
join:2002-12-21
Duluth, GA
| Re: Here we go again I think the FCC is making the market force the providers to lessen the interference. They basically don't want to mess with it, though they probably should.
It kinda makes sense, though. Let the BPL providers come out and see where they go with it. If they can't keep interference emmissions low then people complain and they get fined. FCC has more income while letting the market force the provider to comply. | |
| | | | | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Here we go again said by envoid :I think the FCC is making the market force the providers to lessen the interference. They basically don't want to mess with it, though they probably should. It kinda makes sense, though. Let the BPL providers come out and see where they go with it. If they can't keep interference emmissions low then people complain and they get fined. FCC has more income while letting the market force the provider to comply. Bad idea.
If the power companies think they can interfere a little bit now, they will go farther. Market forces will not help but hurt the situation when people compalin they aren't being served fast enough speeds or enough bandwidth.
Right now, the Motorola system is the ONLY one that doesn't interfere. Others do and they must be shut down. | |
| | | | | |
RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL | Re: Here we go again And, every time the FCC has decided to let "market forces" decide anything, it's ended up being an unmitigated disaster.
Just like this will be.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
| | 
guitarzan
"Ok World, now PUSH... I see the horns
Premium
join:2004-05-04
Skytop, PA
·epix
| said by Transmaster :Well who paid off this clown. That was my first thought, Transmaster, from reading the news topic. I guess this azzhat, has not learned to spell fiber optic, why is it, the higher the career position, the dumber these asshats become.?
With such hot weather, the power grids are at max capacity as it is now try to meet increasing demands. I truly wish BPL was up and running now, just to get a good laugh and a, see we told you that would happen, when overloaded power grids explode or do whatever they do, to place large areas in the dark for a week or so. I bet not many people would want BPL then. 
--
Bass....the glue of rhythm and harmony...the heartbeat of the band.! Shaking the earth with deep,sonorous vibrations.The dark ominous thunder of an approching storm. | |
| | | | | | | RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
·XMission
| Re: Here we go again I lose power a lot. As long as the UPS (and soon to be generator) holds out I have DSL internet (as long as the power loss is the 80% that does not hit the DSLAM). If that happens then I get on the 10K (yup, 10K) dialup, if I need to.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. | |
| | zacharysc
join:2006-08-03
Lebanon, IN
| I think they should maybe work to find better ways to provide faster internet service to the rural community. Living only 3 miles from town and not havng a dang faster connection besides satellite. (Which I'm not counting has high speed, either should they. Satellite is slow, horrible, and very costly.)
I'm stuck with dial-up, everyone else should be lucky they have something faster such as cable, DSL, or Fiber Optics. Stop being so damn greedy is what I say.
Though BPL "may be a new hope", it will inevitably crash. And most new services, even "long-distance" wireless (eg. WiMAX) is only going to be offered to suburban/urbab communities where there is already a wide variety of services.
I won't complain though if BPL was actually used for good, such as powering up the Rural community with faster internet. (Doubtful to happen.) | |
| |
Dude111
An Awesome Dude
Premium
join:2003-08-04
USA
| said by Transmaster :It will still be economics that will kill this trash technology. I hope so!!!!!
We dont want to lose 1/2 the radio spectrum for this fucka garbage!!! | |
| | | | | nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| Re: BPL may be good. those speeds are probably the theoretical maximums, obtainable only in simulations or under laboratory conditions. Nobody currently offering or thinking of offering BPL is anywhere near these speeds, or will be anytime soon. | |
| | | 
insomniac84
join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN | Re: BPL may be good. Well AT&T right now is banking on theoretical maximums to keep dsl alive, so working towards a theoretical maximum doesn't mean the technology is trash. | |
| | | | nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| Re: BPL may be good. said by insomniac84 :...so working towards a theoretical maximum doesn't mean the technology is trash. the fact that BPL might never reach it's theoretical maximum isn't why I'm not so enthusiastic about BPL. I was just pointing out you shouldn't hold your breath waiting for those speeds. | |
| | | |
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
edit:
August 3rd, @05:31PM
| said by insomniac84 :Well AT&T right now is banking on theoretical maximums to keep dsl alive, so working towards a theoretical maximum doesn't mean the technology is trash. There's a big difference here. DSL is banking on theoretical limits that are actually achievable with the physical medium (copper twisted pair does 250 Mbs on one pair in gigabit Ethernet). The BPL industry is banking on a 1 Gbs theoretical limit on a medium that is built for perhaps 500 kHz of bandwidth. (That's kilo, not megahertz.) | |
| |
Transmaster
Onward Through The Fog
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
| These are the claims made by the BPL industry mostly to sucker investors in.
--
The older I get the more I prefer the company of my dogs over that of man kind. | |
| | 
cableties
Premium
join:2005-01-27
Levittown, PA
| I had been doing trials with some transformers-on-ethernet and let me tell you...after 30 days, each would just fail. Now these were just ethernet over power convertors, but I was disappointed to have to use 6 in two months. And speed was more like 1.4Mb/s over a residential 12/3 wiring. (may even been 14/2 in some rooms).
We suspected it was the "quality" of the power (spikes, surges, brown outs, dips..). And this was not even during the prime storm months (June-August and Winter season).
I wonder how the HAM ops feel over this one.  | |
| |
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| That's a bit simplistic. There's more to a broadband solution than just bandwidth, otherwise fiber would totally negate the need for dsl, cable, or wireless. BPL has significant backhaul costs and equipment costs. Has anyone shown a 200 Mbs system yet that actually delivers anything close to 200 Mbs to the end user (and is cost effective and doesn't trash 30 Mhz of spectrum)? | |
| 
Jan Janowski
join:2000-06-18
Skokie, IL
·AT&T Midwest
| Ignorance is Bliss Perfect example of how 'appointees' who have no technical expertise, can make bad decisions....
I guess they thought that moving to digital television would eliminate TVI?????
"You have TVI?? You probably have an 'older analog' television, right? With digital TV you won't have interference!!!"
--
Looking for 1939 Indian Motocycle | |
| nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| I just gots to find some competition, dammit! So sez Kevvie as he crosses his fingers, mumbles a silent prayer and releases the BPL order on the nation.
HEY YOU STOOPID GITS! HOW ABOUT DOING SOMETHING TO PROMOTE REAL COMPETITION BEFORE ATT AND VERIZON RUIN THE INTERNET?
My predicition: in the next 5 years, there will be no meaningful, large scale deployments of BPL that will be successful. | |
| plattypus1
join:2005-04-08
Riverside, CA
 ·Charter VOIP
·Charter Pipeline
| Mr. Martin needs to talk to anyone with enough brains to get a ham license. Hell, my wife is not technical in any way, and once I explained the idea of putting RF down wires, and then pointed to my wire antenna, she understood completely.
Mr. Martin, if you'd like to chat with somebody who has enough rudimentary understanding of RF technology to figure out why BPL is such a bad idea, please feel free to respond to me and I will be glad to arrange a meeting.
To all the ham ops out there, if BPL comes to your town, buy a 1.5KW amp and stick your antennas as close to the power lines as possible. Now, get a few friends together and start a 24/7 net. See how much of a "great broadband hope" this stuff is after that...
73 DE AE6YD | |
| | 
Tzale
Ron Paul 2008 - Proud Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
NJ, USA
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online
| Re: Mr. Martin needs to talk I hear ya' buddy. I plan on doing that if BPL comes to my neck of the woods. A nice YAGI situated 20 feet from the power lines broadcasting 1.5kW legal limit into those lines will surely cause some problems. And guess what! NOT MY PROBLEM - I'M OPERATING LEGALLY.
That idea of a 24X7 net ain't that bad. I'll call it the rolling net on 146.520. Join in on simplex and ragchew as long as you want - at 1.5kW!
73 TZALE | |
| |
Dude111
An Awesome Dude
Premium
join:2003-08-04
USA
| said by plattypus1 :To all the ham ops out there, if BPL comes to your town, buy a 1.5KW amp and stick your antennas as close to the power lines as possible. Now, get a few friends together and start a 24/7 net. See how much of a "great broadband hope" this stuff is after that... Yes.....Time to break out the spark gap transmitters!  | |
| BPLSUCKS
join:2006-04-26
Grand Ledge, MI
| Hmm.... Trial is still going on here in my hometown. Speeds are anywhere from 512k to 3mbps depending on the package you buy. You must have LOS of the tower though because it is a wireless/bpl hybrid where the data is over the air until it hits a pole near your house and then is transfered to the power lines that run into your home. Speed tests from about 26 different homes show near or above speeds. But it does interfear with the lower frequency bands in the shortwave and ham area. It is vaporware in my opinion but if applied in the right way could be useful for grid monitoring if the frequency was changed to the Ghz or upper Mhz range instead of the HF/HAM/SW1/SW2 Range | |
| | | | | viperlmw
Premium
join:2005-01-25
·Qwest.net
| Re: Washington SUCKS said by Tzale :Not to mention, the FCC is required to contact and fine anybody who interferes with Amateur Radio or ANY licensed service. Including FM Radio, Emergency Comm, Aviation, etc... Those fines range from $10,000 to infinity. -Tzale Good luck with that. | |
| steveymacjr
join:2001-01-25
Matthews, NC | can't wait for it I for one can't wait to get BPL!! Duke Energy has been testing it in my area, and its been promising... this can't come fast enough!! | |
| |
Tzale
Ron Paul 2008 - Proud Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
NJ, USA | Re: can't wait for it I hope you don't have a medical emergency and the EMS can't find your house! | |
| | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| said by steveymacjr :I for one can't wait to get BPL!! Duke Energy has been testing it in my area, and its been promising... this can't come fast enough!! IF Duke Energy is using the Motorola system, then there is no problem. The system used in Manassas, VA. does polute and needsto be shut down. | |
| | nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| said by steveymacjr :I for one can't wait to get BPL!! Duke Energy has been testing it in my area, and its been promising... this can't come fast enough!! when you get it, come back and let us know how it is. Maybe it will be good enough. | |
| short
join:2006-07-21 | ........ congress will do yet another tax braek for the energy industry. the companies will promise fast and quik deployment of this. its gonna end up being another boondoggle that taxpayers end ufooting the bill for | |
| 
Pashune
Your average, anemic person.
Premium
join:2006-04-14
Gautier, MS | BPL faster speed than cable/dsl? BPL will be a good broadband service for those who live in the sticks, that's all I can say, or for those who wish a faster speed that is yet unavailable with their cable/DSL service (if available). I'm ignorant, shoot me. | |
| | ThereYouAre
join:2003-11-17
| Re: BPL faster speed than cable/dsl? No, I won't shoot you, but this is an old argument the BPL crowd has tossed around for years, yet it won't work. BPL is expensive to deploy, and they need repeaters along the power lines. All of that costs money; if there aren't enough customers in "the sticks" to justify cable or DSL, then why would anyone spend the money on BPL?
Speeds are nowhere as good as the BPL pundits keep claiming. | |
| | | wev567
join:2006-02-25
Pittsburgh, PA
| Re: BPL faster speed than cable/dsl? said by ThereYouAre :BPL is expensive to deploy, and they need repeaters along the power lines. All of that costs money; if there aren't enough customers in "the sticks" to justify cable or DSL, then why would anyone spend the money on BPL? About the only advantage is the power lines are already run, for the most part. In theory, just set up those repeaters and away you go, right?
But BPL has been talked about for years and still is just a dream. Look how fast other unique technologies (like VoIP) have grown, and then look at the progress made on BPL. Doubt it'll happen. | |
| | | |
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| Re: BPL faster speed than cable/dsl? said by wev567 :said by ThereYouAre :BPL is expensive to deploy, and they need repeaters along the power lines. All of that costs money; if there aren't enough customers in "the sticks" to justify cable or DSL, then why would anyone spend the money on BPL? About the only advantage is the power lines are already run, for the most part. In theory, just set up those repeaters and away you go, right? But BPL has been talked about for years and still is just a dream. Look how fast other unique technologies (like VoIP) have grown, and then look at the progress made on BPL. Doubt it'll happen. I agree. If only it were as easy as setting up the feedpoints and the repeaters; one needs to get the Internet to the feedpoint. I think this is the big killer for rural BPL. In a sparsely populated area, it's probably tough to even cover the recurring costs of telco facilities to backhaul the Internet traffic.
Regarding the growth of BPL, the recent FCC broadband report showed the number of BPL subscribers is up from 4,872 in June 2005 to 5,859 in December. Assuming current growth rates, BPL will have 8,437 subscribers at the end of 2006, gaining ground but still slightly behind DSL which I calculate will be at 27,913,590 customers, and cable which should be at 29,290,240 subscribers. Despite being ready for prime time as the industry says and the benefits of broadband being known to most living, breathing people in the civilized world, BPL growth numbers are stuck in the early 1990's dialup days. | |
| kd6cae
P2p Shouldn't Be A Crime
join:2001-08-27
Palmdale, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
 ·Dreamhost
·Charter Pipeline
| There are better ways to provide broadband Speaking as both an amateur radio operator and a bandwidth geek (I have 10mbps/1mbps cable, the fastest speed I can get in my area), I have to ask, why is BPL the only way to provide broadband to "everyone?" The only argument for BPL that I've heard, is that everyone has a power line so everyone can get it. Well phone lines are just as plentiful and all can be capable of DSL if more remote terminals would be deployed.
I'm not sure what the speeds are of BPL but personal experience has shown that both fiber, and cable and DSL, even wireless, offer very good speeds both ways! So besides deliberately interfering with radio communications, what makes BPL this we have to have right now option, when clearly options such as more fiber or wireless or even wider deployment of cable and DSL systems would do fine? | |
| 
Sabre
Di relung hatiku bernyanyi bidadari
join:2005-05-17
·Comcast
| I'm curious. I'm not trolling or trying to be snarky on anyone. I don't know too much about this, and I'm asking honestly.
If BPL isn't the answer (and the comments here present strong arguments to that effect), what is the BBR community consensus as to what would be a better technology to push for the rural areas that don't currently have access? It seems that every technology solution that comes up either has major pitfalls or extremely high pricing requirements. Do we have the silver bullet yet? What should we be looking at?
--
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. | |
| | plattypus1
join:2005-04-08
Riverside, CA
·Charter VOIP
·Charter Pipeline
| Re: I'm curious. There are a lot of solutions out there. Licensed WiMax or proprietary protocols, 802.11 mesh networking, increased DSL or cable deployment... all of these would work. Personally I'd say an 802.11 community network with WiMax or fiber backhaul would be the best solution, but the concensus is either purpose-built wireless or better wired options.
BPL's problem in rural access is that it requires the same things as other wired options, like repeaters and backhaul, AND it is technically flawed, especially for rural areas. Many rural public safety systems still operate on the VHF lowband around 40 or 50 Mhz, which some BPL systems interfere with as well.
Thanks for actually asking a good question, I hope I've satisfied your curiosity. | |
| | nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| said by Sabre :... What should we be looking at? wireless, of course, but I think the govt should use the USF to build out broadband to all areas where the ILECs won't do it. Right now, the USF is a several billion dollar a year waste of money. | |
| |
guitarzan
"Ok World, now PUSH... I see the horns
Premium
join:2004-05-04
Skytop, PA
·epix
| said by Sabre :I'm not trolling or trying to be snarky on anyone. I don't know too much about this, and I'm asking honestly. If BPL isn't the answer (and the comments here present strong arguments to that effect), what is the BBR community consensus as to what would be a better technology to push for the rural areas that don't currently have access? It seems that every technology solution that comes up either has major pitfalls or extremely high pricing requirements. Do we have the silver bullet yet? What should we be looking at? One should not look to BPL as the answer, due to BPL's price requirements, along with the interference problems it causes. Consider the cost to run BPL.
Repeaters and the BPL equivalent of DSL DSLAMs will need to be deployed. BPL service is provided by a DSLAM/Cable headend type device, but its effective distance is 200 meters or 656 feet.
Every 200 meters a repeater must be used to regenerate the signal. BPL service can't really be distributed from a central point like Cable or DSL, so the upstream Internet network must be backhauled to each BPL feed point via telco facilities such as fiber or copper.
Some who have delusions that BPL is a humanitarian effort to deliver the Internet to huddled masses of rural folk starving for bandwidth are overly idealistic and unrealistic. This is a business with one thing in mind - revenue.
Q: Why won't BPL be economical in rural areas?
A: Let's do the math for 10 people per mile of powerline with BPL...
Assume:
CPE cost: $500 each
Repeaters: $1K each
Customer Take Rate: 30%
Backhaul cost: $1k per month (a T1)
Repeater distance: 600 feet
Feedpoint cost/misc routing equip: $5k
Revenue per customer per month: $40
So:
Number of repeaters needed: 8
Number of customers: 3
Nonrecurring cost: $14.5k
Nonrecurring costs over two years: $604 per month
Recurring Cost: $1k per month
Revenue: $120 per month
It's easy to see that rural BPL isn't profitable.If anything it's a pyramid scheme to con investors out of money.to deliver broadband in areas that cable and DSL don’t so there will be no competition to drive down prices. The costs to deliver to these less populated areas will be higher, so the motivation for low prices in these area is absent. But it’s likely BPL will be deployed exactly where cable and DSL is now because that’s where the revenue is.
BPL is not going rural any time soon. In fact BPL will be deployed exactly where cable and DSL is now because that’s where the revenue is. It'll prove itself to be to costly a venture with no ROI short or long term.
Because, If you don't have broadband now, there's probably one good reason - lack of sufficient revenue in your area.
--
Bass....the glue of rhythm and harmony...the heartbeat of the band.! Shaking the earth with deep,sonorous vibrations.The dark ominous thunder of an approching storm. | |
| |
|
|
FCC Embraces BPL
Re: Hmm....