Jesus H Christ, we have major bridges that you can look though the road deck to the water below, and they want those same people to build and maintain a fiber infrastructure we rely on? At least fiber cant start forrest fires
On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 8:30 AM Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com> wrote: > Not a customer, I can’t reach them. Probably nobody can, other than > mobile or satellite. > > > > Or maybe the govt will get them free fiber by taxing Google and Apple, > like the Labour Party is promising in the UK. Vermin Supreme needs to > update his campaign promises, free ponies are so dated, like Dr. Evil > demanding only 1 million dollars. > > > > Honestly, with mobile carriers promising rural fixed wireless, and SpaceX > and others promising LEO satellite broadband for everyone, I’m thinking we > need to worry less about serving every last house in our service area. And > if a few people have to get their TV the old fashioned way, it’s not the > end of the world (although climate change might be). > > > > And while I’m babbling on, last Sunday the New York Times magazine was a > special feature on the Internet. It had a map of broadband availability, > with broadband defined as 100 Mbps download. Oh, those poor disadvantaged > people with access to a mere 25 or 50 Mbps. They won’t be able to stream > Disney+ and Stadia in 4K on more than 2 or 3 devices at a time. > > > > Oh, and I see that EFF is proposing that Congress should allocate the > money from C-band auctions to building universal fiber infrastructure: > > > https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/11/fcc-about-raise-billions-congress-should-invest-it-fiber-infrastructure > > > > > > > > *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> *On Behalf Of *Kurt Fankhauser > *Sent:* Monday, November 18, 2019 10:24 PM > *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com> > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] tired of entitled streamers > > > > Out of curiosity to the original post'er, how much is that customer paying > monthly for their package that they are expecting to watch 4 TV's on? Maybe > you are not pricing you packages properly? Here is how we do it: > > > > Package A - $49.95 - (advertised as capable of 1 SD video stream) > > Package B - $64.95 - (advertised as capable of 1 HD video stream) *** > most popular package > > Package C - $89.95 - (advertised as capable of 2 HD video stream) > > Package D - $119.95 - (advertised as capable of 3 HD video stream) > > > > We are using Procera to build these packages this way. We tell the > customer right up front about the # of video streams supported on each > package. Never have had a complaint. This pricing model above is very close > to what the household would be paying for DirecTV/Dish to watch 4 TV's at > the same time. So why not YOU get that revenue instead of DirecTV? I > learned 4 years ago that people are willing to pay for the ability to > stream and the # of streams per household. I see the average cost of > service going from the $65/month average now to the $100/month average over > the next 5 years. Start building your networks NOW to support this. PMP450 > is what saved our ass 5 years ago. We tried out EPMP (first generation) and > quickly stayed with the 450 and it was the best decision we ever made. I > have SM's in the the field (original 5ghz 450's) that will still be serving > customers 5 years from now and those radios will be 10 years old. What > other radio can last 10 years of usefulness? (of course we will probably be > running Medusa AP's at that point on the tower side). > > > > We have 4 other WISPS in the area and we are still beating all of them > because we are the only one that can offer 50mbps packages in a rural area. > There is no cable here. DSL is 1mbps. People are paying us $300+ installs > and in some cases $500.00 installs and they are NOT BATTING AN EYE. If you > can get bandwidth to their house they are willing to pay huge prices. Hell > they are paying $1200.00 each for 3-4 smartphones in their house so why > wouldn't they be willing to pay $400 for internet to use that phone to its > potential? > > > > Don't sell yourself short. Charge the big bucks. Money you left at the > table you will never get back.... > > > > On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 10:16 AM dave via AF <af@af.afmug.com> wrote: > > Yeah, I know wut ya mean... > We have 23 sites both rural and urban sites and our heaviest sites sit > both urban and rural > with 2 cable providers and all the other mobile and satellite options in > our area. > We use Medusa on 5 of our largest sites and everything else falls within > 450i or epmp operations. > The smallest backhall is a Force200 link where everything else is all > ptp670 or 11ghz 1Gb > I think we have a few ptp550 links in there somewhere. > > We just put our best foot forward on performance,quality and reliability > as well as local support. > > > On 11/17/19 9:25 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote: > > If that’s all it costs you, kudos. > > > > But we’re running out of spectrum at many towers (there are other WISPs > throughout our service area), plus we also have to add backhaul capacity, > and all that uses power so we need more batteries. We’re having to run > backhauls in licensed spectrum, even to micropops. And we’re having to add > “small cells” to get closer to customers. Because with all the streaming > we can’t have customers at low modulations, and to reach those customers > who move to a low spot surrounded by trees, and to deal with spectrum > exhaustion. All this costs a lot more than $300. > > > > We have 3.65GHz sites fed via 11 GHz with 10 subscribers. The only way > that makes money is averaging over all our sites. And still we can’t build > enough micropops to get LOS to everyone who chooses to live down by a creek > surrounded by trees. Yesterday I checked photos from 3 of our towers to a > prospective customer and the only thing we could see was a little of the > peak of a 40 ft barn with big gaping holes in the roof that would be unsafe > to walk on, and that was on an old micropop where we’re out of backhaul > capacity to sell 20+ Mbps speeds (it’s actually fed via an SM from another > tower, something we don’t do anymore). They apparently bought the house > from an elderly couple, at their previous house they had gigabit Metronet > fiber. Well, that was pretty sweet, maybe you shouldn’t have moved. > > > > Honestly, I think the only real, long-term solution to rural broadband is > FTTH. The problem of course is money. And with several companies > launching thousands of LEO satellites promising broadband for everyone, I > think that will suppress even further any large investments in rural > broadband. Investors would also have to weigh how serious the mobile > carriers are about rural fixed wireless, is it just marketing hype and > lobbying to regulators as it has been in the past? > > > > I do find it ironic that we have low flush toilets, energy efficient > appliances, LED light bulbs, alternate day lawn watering, and mandated fuel > efficiency for vehicles, yet conspicuous consumption of Internet bandwidth > seems to be our patriotic duty. With all the content moving to streaming > services like Disney+ and content being priced high to cable companies but > disruptively low for streaming, it’s clear there won’t be a choice, > traditional broadcast and cable TV is dying and everyone will have to get > their TV via the Internet. It’s like having to get a cellphone because > there aren’t any payphones anymore, the train is leaving and you either buy > a ticket or get left behind. For awhile though, people do have a choice, > you can still put up a TV antenna or get satellite TV. It’s becoming 500 > channels of crap though. > > > > Still, if you have gigabit fiber where you live now, maybe don’t move to > Green Acres unless you really like doing country stuff. Or at least cut > down some of the damn trees. Sheesh, miles and miles of open fields, and > then 75 foot trees all around your house. > > > > > > *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> *On Behalf > Of *Matt Hoppes > *Sent:* Sunday, November 17, 2019 8:43 AM > *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com> <af@af.afmug.com> > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] tired of entitled streamers > > > > I get that. But my point is - if this is truly a rural environment it > costs maybe $300 to add another access point for capacity. > > > > I just don’t see the point in penalizing customers when the cost to add > capacity is so low. > > > On Nov 17, 2019, at 8:55 AM, Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I would say it more nicely, but IMO there's a very valid point here. > Having been at both a 100% rural WISP and an urban WISP running side by > side with cable I can say that it's less stressful for you if the > unsatisfied customers have a real option to leave. It forces you to stay > on top of your game, but also allows a pressure valve to release the > customers you can never satisfy. And wouldn't we all like to have only the > low to median usage and non-complaining customers? I don't see anything > wrong with trying to strategically dis-incentivize the ones you don't want. > > In Darin's shoes the thing I'd try to remember is that the GB values are > going to be a moving target trending ever upwards. You'll have to evaluate > and probably raise those GB allowances every year to keep the median > customers satisfied and maintain that balance. > > -Adam > > > > On 11/16/2019 3:07 PM, Darin Steffl wrote: > > Matt, > > > > You can simply go away. We have competitor wisp's and many have poor > reviews. We simply do it best and have the highest Facebook ratings of any > ISP. > > > > We simply want to make heavy users pay more. Why should we raise prices > for all customers when only a small percentage are the ones driving us to > upgrade things? I'll take 5 average customers at 200gb per month over one > customer using 1TB. > > > > You may be a tech guy but not understand business very well. The point of > this is to drive away bad customers and keep good ones. Good customers will > not be penalized with these plans. Fewer customers with the same amount of > revenue means higher profit, plain and simple. > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 16, 2019, 1:52 PM Matt Hoppes < > mattli...@rivervalleyinternet.net> wrote: > > Wow. Yikes. If I was in your area you’d be driving me to start a competing > ISP with you. > > > > You’ll drive your users away. > > > > Seriously. It doesn’t cost that much to upgrade a tower or backhaul to > support more capacity. > > > On Nov 16, 2019, at 2:18 PM, Darin Steffl <darin.ste...@mnwifi.com> wrote: > > We're moving away from "truly unlimited" plans and going to unlimited with > X amount of high-speed data between noon and midnight. > > > > For example, we'll have plans with high-speed data amounts of 65, 300, > 600, 900, 1200, 1800GB a month with that data only being counted 12 hours > each day. Outside noon to midnight, the data will not count to encourage > them to shift large downloads to our off peak times. If they insist on > streaming on 4 devices during peak and using 100GB per day like some homes, > their bill will be well over $250 a month. Here is our rural pricing for > these proposed plans. Once they hit their threshold, they slow down to 1 > mbps. We will never have overage charges so they're in full control of > their cost. Either they lower their usage or pay more to continue the high > usage. > > > > What I call abusive usage continues to increase and I feel we need to have > plans like these to make heavy users pay for the cost of us upgrading our > gear earlier than planned for. These plans are also still way better than > any satellite plan in terms of caps and latency. > > > > > > 35 Meg/65GB - $65 > > 25 Meg/300GB - $90 35 Meg/600GB - $110 > > 45 Meg/900GB - $130 > > 55 Meg/1,200GB - $150 > > 55-100 Meg/1,800GB - $200 > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 16, 2019, 11:50 AM Nate Burke <n...@blastcomm.com> wrote: > > Give them what you sell them. If they call in more than 3 times > complaining then say 'you obviously can't provide them the experience > they're expecting, and that you'll be out in a few days to remove the > equipment.' That should either silence them, or push them to hughesnet and > they can see what being rural really means. > > On 11/16/2019 11:31 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote: > > Anybody else losing their patience with streamers? > > > > The people who just moved from somewhere they had gigabit fiber to the > middle of nowhere in a low spot surrounded by tons of trees, and say they > stream all their TV on 3-4 screens at the same time. > > > > I want to yell at them, if you had affordable blazing fast Internet, and > it’s that important to you, why did you move? And if you had to move, why > didn’t you move to a nice suburb with fiber or at least cable? And why do > you have to stream everything? You could get satellite TV. Yes, it’s > expensive, get over it. You could put up a TV antenna. You could get DVDs > by mail. Or if moving to the country was so important, you could go out on > the ATV or horse or snowmobile, or go hunting, or feed the chickens and > mini goats. If they’re streaming all the time, I have to suspect the > reason for moving to Green Acres was to save on property taxes, and the > reason for streaming is to avoid paying $200/month to DirecTV or DISH. > > > > It’s gotten so bad, a significant number of prospective customers say > they only want Internet to stream, anything else they can do on their > phone. And when a streaming subscription is sub $10 (or free with Amazon > Prime), they’re thinking Internet is like shipping, it shouldn’t cost more > than the item being delivered. > > > > I know, “OK boomer”. > > > > > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > > > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
