Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reasonto document and map your network coverage ever
How can this be good?IT IS A PER-CUSTOMER TAX ON OUR SERVICE AND GAURANTEED TO NEVER HELP SMALL PROVIDERS. Cripes, this is good? There's ONE good plan. USF go byebye. ++ Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy 541-969-8200 509-386-4589 ++ From: St. Louis Broadband Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 9:59 AM To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com ; 'WISPA General List' ; memb...@wispa.org ; motor...@afmug.com Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reasonto document and map your network coverage ever - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where at least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a competitive provider that does not receive support Ø Now the way I read the above statement is that if a WISP covers 75% of a current USF recipients service area, there will no longer be eligibility to receive USF funds. Remember if they have broadband they also have access to many VOIP providers even if you do not provide VOIP services. Vonage and Skype come to mind, not to mention cellular coverage. This would be a huge factor in leveling the playing field for WISP's in rural markets! That is the way I see it too! Victoria Proffer www.ShowMeBroadband.com www.StLouisBroadband.com 314-974-5600 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Brian Webster Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 11:37 AM To: memb...@wispa.org; 'WISPA General List'; motor...@afmug.com Subject: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason to document and map your network coverage ever Importance: High Steve Coran just posted the message below to the WISPA FCC committee list. I took particular note to the following statement: - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where at least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a competitive provider that does not receive support Now the way I read the above statement is that if a WISP covers 75% of a current USF recipients service area, there will no longer be eligibility to receive USF funds. Remember if they have broadband they also have access to many VOIP providers even if you do not provide VOIP services. Vonage and Skype come to mind, not to mention cellular coverage. This would be a huge factor in leveling the playing field for WISP's in rural markets! I cannot see a more compelling reason to document and map your networks than this. Not only will it prevent yet another subsidized competitor from coming in to your service area, but it will also erode funding for any Telco who currently receives USF in your markets. This would bring wireless as a delivery method to the forefront because there are then no artificial revenue streams subsidizing the cost to deliver last mile service. We all know that wireless has the least cost per household passed in low density markets. There are many ways to document and map your coverage areas. First and foremost though is that you should file the Form 477 as required. Next one should map their network with an accurate service area where you would confidently offer service. This can be done many ways (including paying me to do it). This also shows a very important reason to be participating in your state broadband mapping efforts. I would expect that those state maps will become one of the major verification sources to establish the 75% coverage. The FCC 477 database will probably become another verification source. If you are listed in both of them it would be very hard for someone to say you don't exist and don't offer coverage in their areas. One of the downsides to this bill is that all broadband providers will be required to contribute to the fund. My gut feeling though is that if WISP's were accurately mapped and documented it would show so much less of the US is unserved by broadband and thus the required funding through USF to get it there will be much less. Brian -- Last week, Reps. Boucher (D-VA) and Terry (R-NE) introduced legislation that would reform the Universal Service Fund. The Press Release, Overview, Section by Section summary and text of the bill are available at this link: http://www.boucher.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1579&Itemid=122 I have not read these documents, but plan to do so soon. A few highlights that the trade press has noted: - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where at least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a competitive provider that does not receive support - FCC would create cost model that includes broadband in figuring support models - competitive bidding among wireless carriers for USF support - no m
Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reasonto document and map your network coverage ever
Except today based on GAO reports, Rural America had something like 34% unserved and Urban America had something like 25% unserved on average. I think Brian's data suggested that the USA was something like 24% unserved on average. My point here is that USF is already going to areas that are suggested to be less than 75% served, in the broad scale of things. Obviously, this point of view may not be accurate based on how "area" is defined. But most importantly I doubt that most pre-existing USF areas have 75% of their areas served by competitors, because there is little incintive to compete against subsidized entities, so again, it would be likely that most monies would go to pre-existing USF recipients. I dont predict that this requirement will help us. But it may depend on what the scoring criteria is to define eligibilty and priority in an award. I'm guessing that the law would become law BEFORE the scoring criteria was defined, therefore putting industry at risk to a scoring criteria that would be disadvantageous to smaller emergining providers. I just cant stomach the government picking the winners and losers. I simply believe that that is something best picked by consumers and the market. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: St. Louis Broadband To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com ; 'WISPA General List' ; memb...@wispa.org ; motor...@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 12:59 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reasonto document and map your network coverage ever - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where at least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a competitive provider that does not receive support Ø Now the way I read the above statement is that if a WISP covers 75% of a current USF recipients service area, there will no longer be eligibility to receive USF funds. Remember if they have broadband they also have access to many VOIP providers even if you do not provide VOIP services. Vonage and Skype come to mind, not to mention cellular coverage. This would be a huge factor in leveling the playing field for WISP's in rural markets! That is the way I see it too! Victoria Proffer www.ShowMeBroadband.com www.StLouisBroadband.com 314-974-5600 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Brian Webster Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 11:37 AM To: memb...@wispa.org; 'WISPA General List'; motor...@afmug.com Subject: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason to document and map your network coverage ever Importance: High Steve Coran just posted the message below to the WISPA FCC committee list. I took particular note to the following statement: - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where at least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a competitive provider that does not receive support Now the way I read the above statement is that if a WISP covers 75% of a current USF recipients service area, there will no longer be eligibility to receive USF funds. Remember if they have broadband they also have access to many VOIP providers even if you do not provide VOIP services. Vonage and Skype come to mind, not to mention cellular coverage. This would be a huge factor in leveling the playing field for WISP's in rural markets! I cannot see a more compelling reason to document and map your networks than this. Not only will it prevent yet another subsidized competitor from coming in to your service area, but it will also erode funding for any Telco who currently receives USF in your markets. This would bring wireless as a delivery method to the forefront because there are then no artificial revenue streams subsidizing the cost to deliver last mile service. We all know that wireless has the least cost per household passed in low density markets. There are many ways to document and map your coverage areas. First and foremost though is that you should file the Form 477 as required. Next one should map their network with an accurate service area where you would confidently offer service. This can be done many ways (including paying me to do it). This also shows a very important reason to be participating in your state broadband mapping efforts. I would expect that those state maps will become one of the major verification sources to establish the 75% coverage. The FCC 477 database will probably become another verification source. If you are listed in both of them it would be very hard for someone to say you don't exist and don't offer coverage in their areas. One of the downsides to this bill is that all broadband providers will be requ
