I’m sticking with my 85% number, and I have the customers and data to prove it.
Mark > On Apr 15, 2020, at 9:48 AM, Matt Hoppes <mattli...@rivervalleyinternet.net> > wrote: > > That also is what we have found. > > I was actually going to say 35% take rate -- but since I've gotten shot down > on previous e-mails where I've sent out "crazy" and "ridiculous" statistics, > I figured I'd send the higher end of the spectrum :) > > On 4/15/20 9:12 AM, Lewis Bergman wrote: >> I second the 50% rate. Probably 35% if you have some other competition other >> than satellite. At either one of those rates, you should have enough >> neighbor referrals that anything other than a yard sign would be a waste. >> On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 6:36 AM Matt Hoppes >> <mattli...@rivervalleyinternet.net >> <mailto:mattli...@rivervalleyinternet.net>> wrote: >> We see about 50% take rate even when we are the only option. >> > On Apr 15, 2020, at 6:26 AM, Mark Radabaugh <m...@amplex.net >> <mailto:m...@amplex.net>> wrote: >> > >> > I’m thinking around 85%. Some depends on your market. We have >> a few areas where I think about 5% of the housing is abandoned. Take >> another 10% that are not interested. There is an older >> population that just isn’t interested or that their needs are met by >> iPads and cellular. >> > >> > That 85% number seems consistent for us on both wireless and >> fiber routes. >> > >> > Mark >> > >> >> On Apr 15, 2020, at 12:29 AM, Steve Jones >> <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com <mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> >> >> What percentage of rural customers would you all consider saturated? >> >> >> >> I have access to some new datasets and it disturbing. It's good >> disturbing, but unanticipated. >> >> >> >> May be bad. >> >> >> >> Is there a rural percentage of capture that is considered >> saturated as a standard? 100 percent is what we all want. But there >> are customers who dont want, or simply cannot afford internet >> access. There has to be some numbers out there. >> >> >> >> I doubt government numbers count, since government is dumb. >> Where does a simpleton such as myself go to find out what is >> considered saturated? >> >> >> >> Say I touch 1000 households. What is the percentage of capture >> that marketing is no longer recommended? If I have 500 of them, I'd >> think that's pretty good, maybe even saturated between lack of need, >> want, or ability and offset by whatever percentage per terrain would >> be co sided unservicable. I'd assume my midwest flatlands >> unservicable would be different than Johnny paychecks Arkansas hills >> unservicable. >> >> >> >> These numbers have to be somewhere >> >> -- >> >> AF mailing list >> >> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> >> >> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >> > >> > >> > -- >> > AF mailing list >> > AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> >> > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >> -- AF mailing list >> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> >> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >> -- >> Lewis Bergman >> 325-439-0533 Cell > > -- > 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
