Oh, well, yeah, the basic circles are losers. I think using due diligence with RF prediction tools would be reasonable.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> To: af@afmug.com Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2016 11:10:48 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Who is using towercoverage.com? There are already FCC cases on the books where both sides did drive testing and the WISP lost. Based on subscription level should be fine. Some wisps just draw a 20 mile arc around each AP and call it good. Those will be challenged. From: Ken Hohhof Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2016 9:34 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Who is using towercoverage.com? Not sure how they would do “drive testing”. You actually have experienced this happening? Or you mean challenges? I thought they were using the lazy method like assuming if no one had ported out a POTS line to you, then you couldn’t possibly have service. But what I do is populate my deployment data from my actual subscription at the block level. So if someone challenges if I can serve that block, I have a pretty good rebuttal because I already have customers there. Then I will only add blocks from RF propagation mapping after a manual check that yes, I could serve that block if someone called, and I have some idea why I don’t have any customers there yet. That can also prod you to do some advertising in those areas where you have deployment but no subscription. From: Chuck McCown Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2016 9:56 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Who is using towercoverage.com? If you claim 100% coverage of a census block or tract and that prevents a telco from getting its welfare check, they will do drive testing of the whole thing. It has already happened and will happen much more in the future as the FCC reduces the unsubsidized competitor coverage percentage that takes away their support. Just sayin, claiming more turf than you truly serve or can serve in 7-10 days with 10 down and 1 up (soon to change to 25 down) can bring grief. There is no upside to claiming more than you can do on a 477 turf wise or speed wise but there is a big downside. From: Cameron Crum Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2016 8:10 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Who is using towercoverage.com? I'm not sure even areas as small as census blocks groups allow you to be surgically accurate. On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Chuck McCown < ch...@wbmfg.com > wrote: I would say that y’all better be getting surgically accurate on your 477 filings. You do sign them under penalty of perjury and there will be telcos challenging your coverage data. From: Dennis Burgess Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2016 7:07 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Who is using towercoverage.com ? We also do the Form 477, i.e. broadband deployment data as well as the broadband sub data if your billing system don’t do that anyways. The new APIs allow almost limitless integration with other applications. I.e. you can do a path profile using our data in about 200ms though the API. Just a matter of the billing/powercode/visp/whatever programming it up .. Dennis Burgess, CTO, Link Technologies, Inc. den...@linktechs.net – 314-735-0270 x103 – www.linktechs.net From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of David Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2016 8:03 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Who is using towercoverage.com ? +1000 for this solution.. Unless you invest the time and effort to build a custom solution like towercoverage I dont complain about the number of customers it has brought to us and the countless times it has saved us on truck rolls for invalid service. Also, the EUS data alone is very helpful when determining new site locations. We have 4 new sites going up this year because of that data. U-Verse is our only real competitor in a couple of these areas. If I could only sell TV i would have it in the bag :) On 02/03/2016 11:26 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: <blockquote> It says it when you log in to towercoverage.com Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Feb 4, 2016 12:19 AM, "CBB - Jay Fuller" < par...@cyberbroadband.net > wrote: <blockquote> Hmmm.....news to me Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE Smartphone ----- Reply message ----- From: "Josh Luthman" < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > To: < af@afmug.com > Subject: [AFMUG] who is using towercoverage.com ? Date: Wed, Feb 3, 2016 10:22 PM Uh you can dude. Been a while since they enabled that. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Feb 3, 2016 11:07 PM, "Jeremy" < jeremysmi...@gmail.com > wrote: <blockquote> This. So much this. Powercode already has the azimuths, downtilt, gps coordinates, and everything. That should really be the next step is pulling this info for integration. I have had an active account for like a year and have never used it. I just don't have the time to add it all. On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:29 PM, CBB - Jay Fuller < par...@cyberbroadband.net > wrote: <blockquote> suggestion - take our antenna plots directly from pokeycode, i mean powercode, and automatically populate all our towers in towercoverage... :) <blockquote> ----- Original Message ----- From: Dennis Burgess To: af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2016 8:51 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] who is using towercoverage.com ? Thanks for all of the kind comments and suggestions. The pricing is the same as since its inception, we have a dedicated staff to answer questions as well as take phone calls if you need assistance. Feel free to call or e-mail. Dennis Burgess, CTO, Link Technologies, Inc. den...@linktechs.net – 314-735-0270 x103 – www.linktechs.net From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of That One Guy /sarcasm Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2016 5:31 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] who is using towercoverage.com ? wow, the pricing is a whole lot more realistic than it used to be, still expensive if you wanted to plot every antenna, but omni will get you the gist of it. hopefully their support is better than a repetitive canned response now On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > wrote: <blockquote> $25/mo is not much. I strongly recommend signing up for it simply for the EUS form. If you get ONE customer out of the purchase, you made money. Any more than that is gravy. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 6:23 PM, Tim Reichhart < timreichh...@hometowncable.net > wrote: <blockquote> Who on this list is using towercoverage.com ? I want to know how accurate it is because I have an account now with them and I am doubt its very accurate to give out an good signal from my tower. Because I really hate spending 25 dollars per month and its not going to be accurate. Tim </blockquote> -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. </blockquote> </blockquote> </blockquote> </blockquote> </blockquote> </blockquote>
