A tad off reflector topic, but of substance nonetheless:
<snip>
The strategy for combatting BPL should be:
1) Regulatory uncertainty
2) Not enough performance to be competitive with other technologies
<snip>
JANUARY 07, 2004 ( IDG NEWS SERVICE ) - Ham radio operators and at least
> one U.S. federal agency contend that the transmission of broadband over
> power lines interferes with their radio signals, and if the radio
> operators have their way, the emerging technology that's meant to give
> Internet users another broadband service choice might not get off the
> ground in the U.S.
<snip>
The arguments from Jim Lux (top) and relayed report by N1SU (second), echo
part of the case against BPL made by Dave Sumner in his recent QST
editorial.
I triggered that piece through private communications with Dave
and Jim Haynie.
We know from marketing theory that only firms holding #1 or #2 market
share will receive reasonable returns on their investment. The firm
in #3 position is in limbo...he either has to be able to implement
technological superiority and move into #2 position, or he will gradually
lose market share to the bigger boys. His returns will be marginal, in any
case. Any firm in #4 or below position will find itself wishing it could get
CD returns on its investment dollar.
Cable and DSL hold dominant shares of market. Satellites are picking up
some. In some markets, there are competing cable systems. What does BPL
bring to the market? Service to those homes which are not presently
served by cable or dsl. i.e. those which cost too bloody much to install
lines to. Some 90+% of the US markets have fiber to the curb already. So
we're talking about BPL's available market as being small rural markets.
Competition is great for the consumer. Prices go down. But where you're
talking about a public utility with major plant infrastructure, there is
precious little room to move prices. Where products become commoditized,
i.e. one is as good as another, you can only compete on price, not
technology.
There is no reason for investment dollars to flow to commoditized markets.
There is no evidence that breaking up AT&T and forcing the RBOC's into
competitive activities lowered phone bills.
The FCC is delusional in its "vision" of digital nirvana.
Grant Gross is ignorant of basic economics.
For anyone who doubts the market share vs. ROI argument, let's have private
communications. This is already more off-topic bandwidth than is deserved.
No flames here, pse. (and I'll msg Gross directly, too.)
Jim Jarvis, N2EA
International Business Development
Salesforce Development Programs
Strategic Marketing Analysis
jimjarvis@comcast.net
_______________________________________________
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather
Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions
and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|