Recently in wi-fi Category

SUTUS sells an Office-in-the-box solution for small business. For 25 and under employees, the Sutus Business Central 200 is a file server, email server, router, wireless access point, and phone system. The BC200 has gotten an upgrade. 

• New User Interface: enhanced Flex technology supports seamless installation, management and use of the Business Central 200, onsite and/or remotely.
• Enhanced Desktop Install Tools: enables the set-up of desktops, VPN clients and mail clients in a matter of minutes.
• Enhanced Network Interoperability: the appliance now can seamlessly co-exist within a customer's legacy local area networks; including active directory, hosted exchange, and existing internet routers.
• VoIP Interoperability: ITSP partners added to the VoIP interop menu now include Bandwidth.com, Airespring, Excel and XO Communications.

It's the telephony upgrade that caught my eye: Call park / retrieve and directed pick-up. Older key systems use call park and most Hosted PBX systems cannot emulate that feature. (Aastra has a PBX that can). Other features include:

• Overhead and handset paging
• Open / closed call flows
• Enhanced directory
• Ability to manage Polycom handsets through user interface

SUTUS is distributed by ScanSource and NETX.

It must be confusing to the consumer: 3G, 4G, CDMA, GSM, EVDO, WiMAX, Wi-Fi, LTE. I'm in the Industry but I notice when people confuse the terms. (Seems often like everything is inter-changeable).

Clearwire will be rolling out WiMax for its 4G service, according to a company press release.

"During 2009, we expect to launch our Clear™ branded mobile broadband services in a number of new markets such as Las Vegas, Atlanta, Chicago, Philadelphia and Dallas/Ft. Worth and in our largest existing markets, namely Baltimore, Seattle, Honolulu and Charlotte," Wolff added. "With a robust pipeline of cell sites under development, we are working to significantly extend our wireless 4G network to many more markets, giving us the ability to cover as many as 120 million people with true broadband mobility by the end of 2010, including in major markets such as New York, Boston, Washington D.C., Houston and the San Francisco Bay area to name a few."

Clearwire is stating that it will blow VZW out of the 4G water in 2010 by spending $1.5B in 2009 on its network.

Of course, Clearwire is bleeding money too. Even after a 2008 where it raised $3.2 Billion and merged with Sprint's XOHM/ 4G Assets, which resulted in Clearwire holding the largest mobile wireless spectrum portfolio in the US.

• ARPU rose to $39.70 a month, from $36.09.
• Churn bumped up to 2.8%, from 2.4% a year ago.
• CLWR had 5,000 net subscriber adds in the quarter;  475K total.
• costs per gross add fell to $468, from $550
• has $3.1 billion in cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments.
• posted an adjusted EBITDA loss of $157.3 million
• revenues were less than $60M.  [barrons]

 The accounting is crazy due to the investments by Sprint, Google, Intel, bright House, TWC, and Comcast. According  to the SEC filing of the New Clearwire:

On November 28, 2008, Clearwire, Sprint Nextel Corporation, Comcast Corporation, Time Warner Cable, Inc., Bright House Networks, LLC, Google Inc. and Intel Corporation completed the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Agreement and Plan of Merger (the "Transaction Agreement"), entered into by the parties on May 7, 2008. For accounting purposes, the transactions (the "Transactions") are treated as a "reverse acquisition" with the WiMAX business contributed from Sprint (the "Sprint WiMAX Business") deemed to be the accounting acquirer. As a result, the financial results of the legacy Clearwire Corporation ("Old Clearwire") prior to the consummation of the transactions are not included as part of the Company's financial statements.

Meanwhile MetroPCS and Verizon Wireless are rolling out LTE in 2010 [per the Washington Post].

Small Business wins as Sutus announces new lower pricing for  'Office in a box' technology

All-in-one Telephony and Data Communications vendor announces SOHO-grade pricing for award-winning Business Central device

January 27th, 2009, Vancouver, B.C. Sutus Inc., the company behind the Sutus Business Central™, a unique all-in-one device that combines all the Telephony, data and networking features required to run a modern-day office, today announced pricing that dramatically reduces the TCO (total cost of ownership) for small businesses. The new pricing opens the door for any small business, from start-ups to established, mature companies, to leverage the benefits of enterprise-grade advanced telephony and networking technology.  The pricing, which makes the Business Central the most competitive small business solution on the market, starts from a MSRP of $2199 (USD). 


The Sutus Business Central™ has been developed specifically for businesses of up to 25 employees and comprises a wide array of advanced telephony, data and networking functions.  It includes a business-class phone system, file server, email server, router, firewall, wireless access point, VPN remote access server, and automated backups. It has the ability to simultaneously support both standard phone line and VoIP connections and comes with an array of business productivity features.

Shawn Chute, EVP of Sutus, said, "Now more than ever, small businesses need an affordable, reliable solution that meets their IT and communication requirements and can grow with them.  Sutus has always been the "all-in-one" solution that is easy to install, use and manage, added to these advantages now is the fact that we have the most affordable all-in-one IT and communications product available for small businesses."

The Business Central also performs the tasks of a gateway or edge device, enabling both Sutus and its business partners to seamlessly deliver a wide range of turnkey hosted services, such as remote device management, VoIP, back-up and disaster recovery.

Sometimes known as an 'office-in-a-box', the Business Central is a Multi-service Business Gateway.  InStat qualifies Multi-service Business Gateways (MSBG) as hardware which combines phone systems with other mission-critical components like routers and servers, and has estimated the market at US$615 million in 2007 and projected to rocket to US$2.6 billion by 2010.

SUTUS is looking for Agents and VAR's to offer its product to small business. Do you understand that the Business Central box handles all of the functions of a pile of blue boxes and services? See SUTUS at the Miami IT EXPO EAST next week. Or contact Mike Cassidy at SUTUS at 925.274.1380

So on Linkedin, Neal Lachman, asked if the $100 Triple Play was Viable in today's economic molasses. Neal writes:

Bundling voice, video, data services for a higher ARPU was an obvious, great move when broadband services and advanced digital services were first introducded......  However, the market is moving more towards a lower ARPU for the triple play services. This is especially going to play a big role in future operations. The time of high ARPUs is going, and soon it will be history.

I believe operators have to lower their ARPU estimates from 2010 onward, simply because the customer won't be willing to pay as much. Today operators generate $100+ revenue per month on their triple play services. In 2010 and later, they should be happy if they can reach ARPU of $50. One example is the FTTH service in Holland, where people do not even want to pay more than €50 for their triple play bundle.

My thoughts on it are here:

Telcos like AT&T and Verizon are actually losing money on triple-play. Think about the fact that they were getting $35 for a phone line and $35 for DSL (averages for consumers 2 years ago). Now they have to upgrade the network to offer TV, which is the least profitable service. And do that for $30.

Install and maintain the network that they will be capping. Install home equipment like ONT and STB. To give it away for $100. Now usually the telcos will add taxes and fees on that to increase their profit.  But its the MSO's who are making out. They went from the least profitable service (TV) to the more profitable services of phone and Internet.

With all of the CAPEX for DOCSIS upgrades as well as FTTx and WiMax build-outs, these companies won't be able to lower ARPU for triple play.

The cost of TV content is increasing. Must carry TV channels are now asking for a bite of the pie. You have seen the battle that NFL Network and the other sports networks are having to get carried by the systems -- and to be carried in the most popular packages.

I can see how the MSO's and telcos would have to lower ARPU averages in the face of the economic tsunami we are experiencing, but they won't be offering triple play for $50.

Remember that for the Bells, RGU's include security, cellular, and now tech support. Cablevision rolled out a $350M wi-fi network in NY. The duopoly knows that to keep churn down, they have to get sticky with ubiquitous Internet Access and to get close to a quad-play. Surprisingly, while Verizon has the quad play in my town (Tampa) - FiOS TV, Internet, phone and Cell - that is not the package that they advertise to my house Every Single Day.

 The cost of customer acquisition, retention, advertising, tech support, customer care, bad debt, security, upgrades, and maintenance are too high for the triple play ARPU to drop below $99.

Well, AT&T wanted to be known as a wireless company, so that explains AT&T buying Wayport today for approximately $275 million in cash.  Wi-Fi is the new battle ground between Sprint and the Pivot posse and the RBOC's.  Wayport manages about 12,000 hotpsots including McDonald's.

AT&T figures with millions of devices utilizing a wi-fi signal, they should own that transit. Before cable does or Sprint/Clearwire/Xohm does. 

If you want the snarky post about this, go here.

The FCC is holding a meeting on Nov. 4. On the agenda: Inter-Carrier Compensation, Alltel-VZ merger, Clearwire-Sprint merger, and a vote of White Spaces. Lots of heavy lifting on this agenda. Martin wants to give his pals at VZ one more gift before he goes.

The VZ-Alltel merger is big, but the topic that can really rock telecom is the Inter-carrier Comp issue, which has been a stagnant FCC docket for years.

If companies can show high costs, they will continue to benefit from the subsidy program. Martin also wants to eliminate wireless providers' right to claim government subsidies for offering service in hard-to-reach areas. Martin wants all companies, wireless included, to show they have incurred losses in providing rural service before they can collect the subsidy. Without those changes, Martin worries that the subsidy fund will collapse of its own weight and rates will go up anyhow. [CNN]

It depends want the Compromise looks like -- and it will be a large compromise. Democrats want one thing. Republicans another. Cellcos versus Wireline. Rural versus Urban. Inter-Carrier Comp even bleeds into the USF issue. How? Because rural carriers count on both Universal Service Fund subsidies AND rather high call termination charges to keep afloat.

Why now? The ISP inter-carrier comp rule has been in court for six years. Earlier this year, the DC Court ruled that the FCC had to get off the pot:

The court set the deadline for an order from the FCC at November 5, 2008, six months from the date of oral argument, stated it will not grant an extension and warned that if an appropriate order is not timely issued, it will vacate the interim inter-carrier compensation rules.

Consumer groups are against another largess for the monopolies at the expense of the ratepayers.

The head of the Federal Communications Commission wants a massive overhaul of the fees that phone companies pay each other when they connect calls. Supporters say the reforms will help fund improved broadband Internet access for rural America, but consumer advocates question how much the plan will raise people's phone bills. "This could be potentially a billion-dollar giveaway to phone monopolies, paid for out of consumers' pocketbooks," said Chris Murray, an attorney with Consumers Union. [AP]

Intercarrier comp is how the various phone companies pay each other for traffic. VoIP providers and cellular carriers, especially Sprint, would like a fairer shake. The old RBOCs would like the Rural LEC's to stop getting so much money. (see Free Conference services not getting paid by RBOCs).

The National Telecommunications Cooperative Association, which represents small phone carriers, told FCC officials earlier this month that a new rate of $0.0007 per minute puts many of their members' livelihoods at risk.

And then there is the White Spaces issue. When broadcasters make the DTV transition in 1Q09, there will be unused spectrum that the Wireless World would like to use for its own bandwidth needs. However, due to bleed over (interference) with cordless microphones and other broadcasting devices, the NAB is opposed. [see dailywireless]

All of this is at one meeting while America votes.

In-Stat's study on hotspot revenue, according to Communications Direct:

The number of hotspots providing public wireless LAN access continues to grow globally and more people are using them, reports In-Stat. But access revenues do not appear to be keeping up with the growth in use, the high-tech market research firm says.

My favorite part is the summary that makes some obvious conclusions, as we see here:

1. According to an In-Stat consumer survey, people are increasingly using hotspots for personal reasons.
2. Survey respondents are showing an increased reluctance to pay for hotspot access. Nearly 50% of respondents said they would only use a free hotspot.
3. Access revenues will start to decline due to increased competition and users' reluctance to pay.

So no one wants to pay for wi-fi access. This is what EarthLink learned in its Muni Wi-Fi experiments. Consumers will pay for EVDO, though. On blogs and at conferences, people complain about the daily rate for Internet Access, even though they know it is expensive to provide. It makes no sense to me, but I would like it if it was included in some room rates or I could trade reward points for free access. It used to be $9.95 a day, but in Boston at the Westin Seaport it was $12.95 per day. That's why people don't buy it. Under $10, sure. Over $10, wait! What?!

But if no one wants to pay, then revenue WILL drop. Duh!