  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | FreedomPop Challenging Major Broadband Providers Is this a joke? It uses Clearwire which is hardly anywhere. How is this disruptive to anything? | |
|
 | | | Re: FreedomPop Challenging Major Broadband Providers Business plan:
1. Get the I-can't-afford-Internet-access and My-dial-up-is-fast-enough crowds on board and grow the footprint.
2. Switch over to LTE and fill the Swiss-cheese holes in existing coverage.
3. Sell-off to Google, who'll then have both the high-end and low-end "experiments" to play with.
--
"...but ya doesn't hasta call me Johnson!" | |
|
| | | | Re: FreedomPop Challenging Major Broadband Providers No carrier worth their salt is going to sell access to their LTE network. And no Sprint and the smaller carriers don't count, this is a nationwide service. | |
|
| | | | | Re: FreedomPop Challenging Major Broadband Providers We're still talking about FreedomPop here, right?
--
"...but ya doesn't hasta call me Johnson!" | |
|
| | | | | | Re: FreedomPop Challenging Major Broadband Providers said by NotTheMama:We're still talking about FreedomPop here, right?
Yes. Just putting a hole in the presumption that freedompop will be able to waltz over to LTE access once wimax goes offline. It won't be that easy.
It's unclear what sprint's overlords will want to do with their LTE, but there's no way in heck VZ or ATT will opening up their LTE networks to freedompop or anyone else anytime soon. And that's my point, smart companies on solid footing don't wholesale their crown jewel. | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: FreedomPop Challenging Major Broadband Providers Hmmm, right... and my last question:
On a scale of from 1 to 10--with '1' being the least and '10' being the most, exactly how serious did you think I was there?
--
"...but ya doesn't hasta call me Johnson!" | |
|
| elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | said by BF69:Is this a joke? It uses Clearwire which is hardly anywhere. How is this disruptive to anything?
It is not yet disruptive. But if the founders have the coin to see it through to LTE, and it works as advertised then, at least 1/3 of cable/telco's wired base is at risk for defection. I know its akin to blasphemy here to discuss, but there is a substantial population that simply doesn't use any volume, and is only subscribed to broadband for the "always on" capability.
Price is everything. A $90 "free" service, and a $10/10GB service are very attractive when your alternative is $35/month or more and you don't use it, and/or you've migrated to a "smart" phone as your primary internet access, and are considering cutting the home access.
For the rural user, it may not be disruptive ever, OR, it may influence telco to offer national fixed-wireless/LTE plans that are competitive on a per-GB basis than currently offered. That may not satisfy someone who expects FTTF(arm) for $30/month, but it will thrill all of the dialup and marginal DSL users, and keep the local Wisp on its toes. | |
|
| | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: FreedomPop Challenging Major Broadband Providers said by elray:It is not yet disruptive. But if the founders have the coin to see it through to LTE, and it works as advertised then, at least 1/3 of cable/telco's wired base is at risk for defection. I know its akin to blasphemy here to discuss, but there is a substantial population that simply doesn't use any volume, and is only subscribed to broadband for the "always on" capability. The they could just use cell phone data couldn't they, since they already have and already pay for that? | |
|
| | | elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | Re: FreedomPop Challenging Major Broadband Providers said by BF69:said by elray:It is not yet disruptive. But if the founders have the coin to see it through to LTE, and it works as advertised then, at least 1/3 of cable/telco's wired base is at risk for defection. I know its akin to blasphemy here to discuss, but there is a substantial population that simply doesn't use any volume, and is only subscribed to broadband for the "always on" capability. The they could just use cell phone data couldn't they, since they already have and already pay for that? You're correct, for many in this situation, the math would favor using the cellphone data bucket. But that assumes that the household member(s) are ok with intermittent access based on the presence of the cellphone - not quite "always on", or the plan permits a fixed device, or a shared plan allows distinct household member(s) to use their own device. It also assumes that the cellphone data plan bucket increment costs are similar to the FreedomPop charges. Versus $10/10Gb, most data plans aren't there yet.
We don't have cellphone data plans, and probably never will. The only data I would ever want would be for very itinerant laptop access; so far, almost all of the options available never made financial sense, though they are improving.
But we would entertain an uber-cheap fixed wireless plan for the house, as a backup to the cable modem service. Unfortunately, we're about the only zipcode in town that doesn't get Clear coverage, so we'll be waiting a while. | |
|
Beans
join:2005-07-16
united state Reviews:
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| mobile phones from pockets I hate the be the bringer of bad news but if this is going to work there is going to need to be a higher cap then just 5 gigs on the cheap, either that or a whole buch of wifi around to be able to do anything for a month, or just give every cent of your hard earned money to the monsters. | |
|
 jjoshuaPremium
join:2001-06-01
Scotch Plains, NJ
kudos:3
 ·Verizon FiOS
| Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) is an idiot I don't need her iJunk becoming a projectile or impeding my exit in case of an emergency.
Also, the FAA isn't going to certify every piece-of-crap electronic device coming from China to ensure that it doesn't cause problems with navigation or control systems.
How about just STFU and enjoy the flight. | |
|
| KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | Re: Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) is an idiot no personal electronic device can impact the modern equipment of a jet airliner.
However its about your first point that is vital. It is so the passengers are attentive during the two high risk points of aircraft operation. That USAir flight that landed on the Hudson did not have high survival just because of a very skilled pilot, but because people did not have their iGadgets going so they could play Angry Birds during takeoff instead of being buckled in and not distracted.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
| | jjoshuaPremium
join:2001-06-01
Scotch Plains, NJ
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) is an idiot said by Kearnstd:no personal electronic device can impact the modern equipment of a jet airliner
That's a pretty bold statement. I'd like to see some proof. | |
|
|
|
