Yeah, the PMP320 should only be using 3650-3700, so if nobody else is using CBRS in the area, 3550-3650 would be unused (that's a big if, obviously).
I would definitely consider those 100 subs to be a liability with negative value. On Sat, Nov 30, 2024, 6:16 PM Ken Hohhof <khoh...@kwom.com> wrote: > I think pre-CBRS with an NN license, we could use 3650-3700. That’s what > we did with our 450 gear before CBRS, and our one Purewave WiMax > basestation. > > > > 450i and 450m APs can do 5, 10, 15, 20, 30 or 40 MHz channels although > given CBRS orientation around 10 MHz grants it doesn’t make much sense to > use the channels that don’t align on the standard 10 MHz raster. The > performance is the same as in 5 GHz, all things being the same. There are > no PALs in 3650-3700 so it is permanently GAA. In 3550-3650, the SAS will > kick you to a different channel if a PAL holder goes on the air. > Personally I think it is risky to assume you can get 3 or 4 contiguous CBRS > channels but you can try. There is also the issue of coordinating timing > with any cellular LTE operators since they may use all available GAA > spectrum and will trash your upstream. If you have no other WISPs or > cellular companies in your area using CBRS, life could be good. But if all > your subs are nearby with clear LOS, 6 GHz could be even better. > > > > *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> *On Behalf Of *Dev > *Sent:* Saturday, November 30, 2024 5:50 PM > *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com> > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Valuing obsolete equipment that still works > > > > According to one data sheet for the 320s, they operate normally > between 36140 and 36740 (if I’m reading that right), is there space to run > 450M’s with any speed outside of those frequencies with CBRS GA licenses > anyway? > > > > On Nov 30, 2024, at 2:10 PM, Ken Hohhof <khoh...@kwom.com> wrote: > > > > > Asset sale indeed, very creative accounting I think has been going on, > don’t want that liability. > > > > Reason why not to buy the company is in case they didn’t pay their tower > rent or taxes for years, or they have general liability claims against > them, or other things that could come out of the woodwork and become your > nightmare. > > > > One other thing to watch out for is prepays. If they got most of their > customers to prepay annually, then on average you will be providing 6 > months of service for no revenue. This is a bigger risk if you do a cash > purchase rather than X% of revenue for Y months. > > > > > Is Tarana THAT much better than 450 AP’s in 3.6? > > > > I have no personal knowledge. If you ask Tarana, it has almost magical > abilities. One of those seems to be convincing government agencies handing > out grants that you can deliver 100/20 service without fiber. I’m a > skeptic ever since I got burned on the WiMax hype (not PMP320 though). > Maybe it is magic, who knows, not me. Ask a Tigger, not an Eeyore. > > > > *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> *On Behalf Of *Dev > *Sent:* Saturday, November 30, 2024 2:59 PM > *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com> > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Valuing obsolete equipment that still works > > > > PMP 320 with 10MHz channels, is that still even possibly legal? Don’t know > what throughput you can get from that. I also think that running these > wherever their 10MHz channel would have to cut into the channel widths they > can get on their 3.6 450 APs? > > > > Asset sale indeed, very creative accounting I think has been going on, > don’t want that liability. How much are 450m subs in 3.6 these days? > > > > We’ve already used most of the 5GHz, looking at 6. Is Tarana THAT much > better than 450 AP’s in 3.6? Also, I still might have a channel plan > problem if the old gear is still up. > > > > > On Nov 30, 2024, at 9:14 AM, Ken Hohhof <khoh...@kwom.com> wrote: > > > > PMP320 was WiMax, right? How many years has that been EOL? I suspect the > performance isn’t that great either. Do those customers have no other > choice and that’s why they haven’t switched? Seems like with Starlink and > 5G Home Internet and other WISPs the customer base would be dwindling. > > > > That sounds like the WISP equivalent of a Superfund site. The value of > the equipment is negative by however much it will cost to decommission and > dispose of the equipment. I would ask, if you do a buyout, what exactly > are you buying? Equipment? Customer list? Tower sites? Spectrum > licenses? Fiber feeding the towers? You might find that the value of the > assets is zero or negative, and you’d be doing the seller a favor by taking > it off his hands for $1. > > > > Given there might be other shady things going on, don’t buy the business, > do an asset purchase. Which comes back to the question, are the assets > worth anything? > > > > Could you overbuild him and then come to an agreement where he tells all > the customers the business is closing at X date and recommends they contact > this new WISP (you)? What he gets is a few more months revenue and doesn’t > have angry customers at his door with torches and pitchforks. > > > > And is there a reason why it needs to be done in 3 GHz and not 5 or 6 > GHz? If there is a valid reason why only 3 GHz is suitable, I guess > Cambium 450 maybe makes sense if you are looking to temporarily collocate > sectors using 5 ms frame. But otherwise, you could also look at Tarana or > LTE. Of course those would be even more expensive. > > > > Since they never switched to CBRS, I won’t ask if they bought any PALs. > > > > *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> *On Behalf Of *Jeff Broadwick - Lists > *Sent:* Saturday, November 30, 2024 9:08 AM > *To:* af@af.afmug.com > *Cc:* af@af.afmug.com > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Valuing obsolete equipment that still works > > > > Ugh is right. > > > > Yes, they are not operating legally in CBRS. > > > > Regards, > > > > Jeff > > > > Jeff Broadwick > > CTIconnect > > 312-205-2519 Office > > 574-220-7826 Cell > > jbroadw...@cticonnect.com > > > > > > On Nov 29, 2024, at 9:46 PM, Dev <d...@logicalwebhost.com> wrote: > > So they have around 100 old 3.6 subs sitting out there, even if you did > a swap to 450 subs in the 3.6 that’s still around $30K in swaps plus labor, > ugh, assuming you have enough 450 APs to handle all the subs. > > > > Did someone say liability? Oh, also, if anyone complains they’d have to > come off the air right away, no? > > > > > > On Nov 23, 2024, at 9:34 AM, <ch...@go-mtc.com> <ch...@go-mtc.com> wrote: > > > > Wow, access servers. Now that takes me back. Maybe 1991. I decided to > use a MC68360 mcu to receive a T1 and some kind of Rockwell DSP to receive > the data stream and be a modem. It would have been a 24 circuit dial up > modem fed with a T1, the 360 was the first MCI I knew of with a native > hardware ethernet port. I shelved it in favor of building some fax spy > hardware (using the same chips but converting to E1) for some French semi > intelligence related outfit to be used in Northern Africa and the middle > ease. I loved the project. But I should have finished the modem. Others > eventually did the same thing and were very successful. > > > > *From:* Ken Hohhof > > *Sent:* Saturday, November 23, 2024 10:23 AM > > *To:* 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' > > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Valuing obsolete equipment that still works > > > > Regarding dialup, we had 3 or 4 Ascend MAX4000 servers in Chicago and one > in our WISP service area. We kept that one for awhile and gave free > accounts to WISP customers as a backup in case of an outage, but abandoned > that plan because nobody used it. 56 kbps was considered so slow as to be > useless, people would drive into town and use WiFi at a coffee shop rather > than use dialup. > > > > It’s getting that way now if one of our licensed backhauls goes down or > has rain fade, it doesn’t make sense to fall back to a 5 GHz backup link > with less capacity. If people can’t stream, in their view they have no > Internet. Almost better not to use the backup link. Plus of course > everybody starts running speedtests and making things worse. > > > > *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> *On Behalf Of *castarritt > *Sent:* Saturday, November 23, 2024 9:32 AM > *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com> > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Valuing obsolete equipment that still works > > > > Yeah, 50 subs on a 900 and 100+ on a 2.4 FSK was perfectly fine, then > Netflix decided to change their business model from mailing DVDs to > streaming. > > > > On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 8:02 PM Ken Hohhof <khoh...@kwom.com> wrote: > > I hope they were doing wholesale dialup, not running their own access > servers. We dumped dialup in 2009. It was a race to the bottom, the going > price I think was $6.95/mo and if you were at $6.96 you got no customers. > And you had to spend half your revenue on Google ads to get the customers. > > I think we still have 2 900 MHz customers on one Cambium AP. I can't > believe WISPs used to have like 50 subs per 900 MHz AP, at like $50/mo > ARPU. And those weren't even the 450i APs, they were FSK or Ubiquiti. > Well, smartgrid took care of that. > > -----Original Message----- > From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> On Behalf Of Dev > Sent: Friday, November 22, 2024 6:05 PM > To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Valuing obsolete equipment that still works > > The good news is they recently retired the two last dial-up customers! I > didn’t know that still existed. > > They finally migrated the last customer off their 900MHz, I think. > > The rest of the diligence should be a fun-filled mystery I’m guessing. > > > On Nov 22, 2024, at 3:59 PM, t...@3dsc.co wrote: > > > > Yeah almost all the 450 except some of the very first versions are CBRs > capable. If they still have pmp320s install there is a small chance that it > is running legaly, but not likely I had a customer that had an extended > grandfatherd license that was allowed to continue for a period of time > while they were transitioning. However its not likely. > > > > In this situation I would typicaly value these customers as negative for > asuming the liability or at least they would be removed from the valuation > I would recomend requireing them to be disabled before closing the deal. > > > > > > On 11/22/24 5:48 PM, Mathew Howard <mhoward...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I'm fairly certain that all 450 hardware is CBRS capable, so that's > just going to be a matter of upgrading firmware and getting everything > properly configured and registered. > >> I don't think any wimax gear is CBRS capable. > >> At least some (probably most) LTE stuff can be upgraded to CBRS. > >> If it's a couple of old wimax APs with a small number of customers, > it's probably not that big of a deal, if it's hundreds of customers... > yikes. > >> On Fri, Nov 22, 2024, 3:57 PM Ken Hohhof < > khoh...@kwom.com <mailto:khoh...@kwom.com>> wrote: > >> If it is Cambium 450, we switched all of ours from Part 90 / NN to > >> CBRS and I don't remember having to change any hardware. Other 3.65 > >> equipment like a Purewave WIMAX system and some Ubiquiti stuff and > >> another brand I don't recall, those were forklift upgrades. > >> That was like 5 years ago though. I know because my CPI cert is > >> about to expire. > >> ---- Original Message ---- > >> From: "Dev" __ > >> Sent: 11/22/2024 3:35:58 PM > >> To: "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" __ > >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Valuing obsolete equipment that still works > >> Also, we’d have to figure out how long it would take to swap them, > >> trying to get a count of how much of a job this might be, i.e. how > >> many subs. > >> > On Nov 22, 2024, at 1:31?PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists > >> > <jeffl...@att.net <mailto:jeffl...@att.net>> wrote: > >> > > >> > If it’s 3.65 that isn’t SAS capable, you are buying a large legal > >> > liability. > >> > > >> > Regards, > >> > > >> > Jeff > >> > > >> > Jeff Broadwick > >> > CTIconnect > >> > 312-205-2519 Office > >> > 574-220-7826 Cell > >> > jbroadw...@cticonnect.com <mailto:jbroadw...@cticonnect.com > <jbroadw...@cticonnect.com>> > >> > > >> >> On Nov 22, 2024, at 4:26?PM, Dev <d...@logicalwebhost.com > <d...@logicalwebhost.com%0b>>> >> <mailto:d...@logicalwebhost.com > <d...@logicalwebhost.com>>> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> ?I think some may be in the old 3.6GHz, which is more of an issue > >> >> because it gets in the way of the new 450 3.6GHz radio channel > >> >> plan, so hoping not too many subs out there. > >> >> > >> >>> On Nov 22, 2024, at 12:11?PM, Steve Jones > >> >>> <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com <mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>> > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> 0 value on equipment > >> >>> acquisition value on customer > >> >>> cost of doing business on swap > >> >>> > >> >>> On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 12:32?PM Dev <d...@logicalwebhost.com > <d...@logicalwebhost.com%0b>>> >>> <mailto:d...@logicalwebhost.com > <d...@logicalwebhost.com>>> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> Looking at purchasing a WISP that has old wireless equipment > >> >>> that’s no longer supported but happy customers connected to > >> >>> it. How do you set a value on a customer you know you’re > >> >>> going to have to swap client radios on and point to a > >> >>> different AP, hopefully on the same tower? > >> >>> -- >>> AF mailing list > >> >>> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com <AF@af.afmug.com>> > >> >>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/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 <AF@af.afmug.com>> > >> >>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com <http:// > <http://%0b/>>> >>> af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com> > >> >> > >> >> -- >> AF mailing list > >> >> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com <AF@af.afmug.com>> > >> >> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com <http:// > <http://%0b/>>> >> af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com> > >> > -- > AF mailing list > >> > AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com <AF@af.afmug.com>> > >> > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com <http:// > <http://%0b/>>> > af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com> > >> -- AF mailing list > >> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com <AF@af.afmug.com>> > >> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com <http:// > <http://%0b/>>> 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 > > -- > 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
