We offer two different sets of rate plans in different areas of our network based on the equipment we have on those towers. We offer our "standard" service everywhere and where we have overbuilt with 5Ghz APs we also offer a "5G" service which is faster speeds at the middle and higher tier prices. So for $50 in some areas you can get 3/256 and others you get 5/1. We do not clearly define this as geographic boundaries but more along the lines of whether or not the customer has clear LOS to a tower with 5Ghz APs on it. Overall it's been well received, only a little friction from people angry that they can only get the slower speeds because of their location.
We have thought about trying to do different plans by area (mainly to compete more on price with cable/DSL) and came to the conclusion that we might do it via a promotion that is only run in one area, but not by adding permanent cheaper service plans in town - that just didn't seem fair. On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 10:51 PM, Phil Curnutt <pcurn...@gmail.com> wrote: > Granted that our model is way different then yours, we are a non-profit > member owned, volunteer operated, coop, but we give everybody 2 up and 2 > down (now that we have an AirFiber backhaul) and are still scrambling to > keep up with the members usage (400 members covering 600 square miles). > And, they always want more. > > Charging $30 a month. Of course we only have one paid employee. The > folks here in NM are happy to get that as their only alternative is dial-up > or satellite. When CenturyLink finally moves into a neighborhood we > actually encourage new inquires to go with them as we still have tons of > folks with no options other then us. > > It cost us about $30K every time we have to upgrade the backbone and back > haul and APs, but luckily we have enough time between upgrades to bank the > funds. > > I don't know how you guys can make a profit. > > Phil > > > On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 8:00 PM, Matt Hoppes > <mhop...@indigowireless.com>wrote: > >> It's cut down in confusion. Oh yeah. 5 meg is x in town a but y in town >> b. >> >> And we don't do the upto game. So if you want 5 and can only get 3 we >> won't install you unless you'll take 3. We don't charge for packages folks >> can't get. >> >> Likewise this keeps our network happy since most links are pretty clean. >> >> On Dec 30, 2013, at 21:48, "CBB - Jay Fuller" <par...@cyberbroadband.net> >> wrote: >> >> >> That is a good idea >> >> Sent from my waaaaaaaay too expensive android mobile vzw 4gish device..... >> >> ----- Reply message ----- >> From: "Matt Hoppes" <mhop...@indigowireless.com> >> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> >> Cc: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> >> Subject: [WISPA] Internet Packages regarding geography >> Date: Mon, Dec 30, 2013 9:34 PM >> >> >> What we have done is offer the same packages across the board. If you >> can't get at least the package you want we don't install you. >> >> On Dec 30, 2013, at 21:11, "heith petersen" <wi...@mncomm.com> wrote: >> >> We are getting to the point in a lot of our markets that we need to >> offer different speed packages. Issue being some markets, being 900 or >> slightly sub-par infrastructure, we wouldn’t be able to promote these >> packages across the board. Was curious if others are offering packages to >> different areas that would not be possible in some? And if so, do you get >> any backlash from those who cannot get those packages? Is it appropriate to >> offer extended packages to users on one tower when another tower down the >> road wouldn’t be capable of these packages? Its bad but we just offer a >> residential rate, no matter if that customer can get 1 meg down via Canopy >> 900 or close to 10 meg on a UBNT SM. I have caught a little heat in an area >> where we fired up 900 about 4 years ago to a market that had only >> satellite. Then we hooked up a tower in a small town 4 miles away with UBNT >> M2 and news spread like wild fire. We went from 40 900 subs to about a >> dozen, and a pile of radios I don’t want to deploy again. Shame on me for >> not offering the extended packages at that time for those wanting more >> bandwidth. >> >> I also have the area outside my home town that Century Link offers what >> they claim is 12 meg service, but it never gets close. I am constantly >> adding more sectors in these areas, Im getting to the point where I am >> adding UBNT to offload Canopy, then adding more UBNT to offload the UBNT >> that was offloading the Canopy, it gets to be a vicious circle. I am >> already $20 per month more than CL, not sure if a lot of customers would >> stay if I were to charge them more for what they are getting now. Once >> again shame on me. The bosses think the prices should be the same across >> the board, but technically performances cannot be matched across the board, >> plus Im running ragged satisfying existing customers when I should be >> looking at new areas, and start the vicious circle all over again LOL. >> >> thanks >> heith >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wireless mailing list >> Wireless@wispa.org >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wireless mailing list >> Wireless@wispa.org >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wireless mailing list >> Wireless@wispa.org >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >
_______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
