Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16
  1. #1
    Todd Allcock
    Guest
    "Xohm exec details WiMAX pricing strategy, discusses usage rules"

    http://www.rcrwireless.com/article/2...8/newsletter33


    It looks like the Xohm (WiMax) folks just announced pricing:

    Home service: $35/month ($10 off for the first six months), requires $80
    modem.

    "On the Go" service: $45/month ($10 off the first six months), requires $70
    PC Aircard

    "Pick 2": Buy both the home modem and laptop card and get introductory
    $50/month pricing for life on the two services (regularly $60/month.)

    No usage restrictions or limits yet, but according to the article:

    > As far as capping usage goes, Gude [senior VP of mobile broadband] said
    > that Xohm
    > mobile WiMAX is open and will not restrict usage as long as there's no
    > congestion
    > on the network. However, when congestion appears, that will change.
    >
    > "We have to apply certain rules to protect our customers," he said. "[It's]
    > the rights
    > of many vs. the rights of few."




    Ok, AT&T, Verizon, T-Mo... it's your move! ;-)





    See More: Things just got interesting! (WiMax)




  2. #2
    btek
    Guest

    Re: Things just got interesting! (WiMax)

    A new option... not a game changer... and not a big deal

    "Todd Allcock" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news[email protected]
    > "Xohm exec details WiMAX pricing strategy, discusses usage rules"
    >
    > http://www.rcrwireless.com/article/2...8/newsletter33
    >
    >
    > It looks like the Xohm (WiMax) folks just announced pricing:
    >
    > Home service: $35/month ($10 off for the first six months), requires $80
    > modem.
    >
    > "On the Go" service: $45/month ($10 off the first six months), requires
    > $70 PC Aircard
    >
    > "Pick 2": Buy both the home modem and laptop card and get introductory
    > $50/month pricing for life on the two services (regularly $60/month.)
    >
    > No usage restrictions or limits yet, but according to the article:
    >
    >> As far as capping usage goes, Gude [senior VP of mobile broadband] said
    >> that Xohm
    >> mobile WiMAX is open and will not restrict usage as long as there's no
    >> congestion
    >> on the network. However, when congestion appears, that will change.
    >>
    >> "We have to apply certain rules to protect our customers," he said.
    >> "[It's] the rights
    >> of many vs. the rights of few."

    >
    >
    >
    > Ok, AT&T, Verizon, T-Mo... it's your move! ;-)
    >
    >




  3. #3
    Ron
    Guest

    Re: Things just got interesting! (WiMax)

    On Thu, 2 Oct 2008 14:01:18 -0600, "Todd Allcock"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >"Xohm exec details WiMAX pricing strategy, discusses usage rules"
    >
    >http://www.rcrwireless.com/article/2...8/newsletter33
    >
    >
    >It looks like the Xohm (WiMax) folks just announced pricing:
    >
    >Home service: $35/month ($10 off for the first six months), requires $80
    >modem.
    >
    >"On the Go" service: $45/month ($10 off the first six months), requires $70
    >PC Aircard
    >
    >"Pick 2": Buy both the home modem and laptop card and get introductory
    >$50/month pricing for life on the two services (regularly $60/month.)
    >
    >No usage restrictions or limits yet, but according to the article:
    >
    >> As far as capping usage goes, Gude [senior VP of mobile broadband] said
    >> that Xohm
    >> mobile WiMAX is open and will not restrict usage as long as there's no
    >> congestion
    >> on the network. However, when congestion appears, that will change.
    >>
    >> "We have to apply certain rules to protect our customers," he said. "[It's]
    >> the rights
    >> of many vs. the rights of few."

    >
    >
    >
    >Ok, AT&T, Verizon, T-Mo... it's your move! ;-)
    >



    And the geographic coverage of WiMax currently is......



  4. #4
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    Re: Things just got interesting! (WiMax)

    "btek" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >>
    >> http://www.rcrwireless.com/article/2...8/newsletter33
    >>
    >> Ok, AT&T, Verizon, T-Mo... it's your move! ;-)

    >
    >A new option... not a game changer... and not a big deal


    Not a game changer right away, since WiMax isn't really deployed yet, but it
    may force the cellular carriers to reconsider pricing strategies. If Xohm
    offers "fallback" to Sprint's 2G/3G data network when outside Xohm range
    (unlikely, IMO), it would be both a game changer and a big deal immediately!

    Who's going to pay Verizon or AT&T $60-70 for laptop data with a 5GB cap
    when Xohm offers it for $45 and will throw in a second account for home
    access, allowing you to "fire" your current broadband provider, for $5 more?





  5. #5
    btek
    Guest

    Re: Things just got interesting! (WiMax)

    Not much -- just an another option for people who have coverage, not very
    convenient if they want to 'roam' though. This 'announcement' is a mildly
    interesting 'non-event'

    "Ron" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > On Thu, 2 Oct 2008 14:01:18 -0600, "Todd Allcock"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>"Xohm exec details WiMAX pricing strategy, discusses usage rules"
    >>
    >>http://www.rcrwireless.com/article/2...8/newsletter33
    >>
    >>
    >>It looks like the Xohm (WiMax) folks just announced pricing:
    >>
    >>Home service: $35/month ($10 off for the first six months), requires $80
    >>modem.
    >>
    >>"On the Go" service: $45/month ($10 off the first six months), requires
    >>$70
    >>PC Aircard
    >>
    >>"Pick 2": Buy both the home modem and laptop card and get introductory
    >>$50/month pricing for life on the two services (regularly $60/month.)
    >>
    >>No usage restrictions or limits yet, but according to the article:
    >>
    >>> As far as capping usage goes, Gude [senior VP of mobile broadband] said
    >>> that Xohm
    >>> mobile WiMAX is open and will not restrict usage as long as there's no
    >>> congestion
    >>> on the network. However, when congestion appears, that will change.
    >>>
    >>> "We have to apply certain rules to protect our customers," he said.
    >>> "[It's]
    >>> the rights
    >>> of many vs. the rights of few."

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>Ok, AT&T, Verizon, T-Mo... it's your move! ;-)
    >>

    >
    >
    > And the geographic coverage of WiMax currently is......





  6. #6
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    Re: Things just got interesting! (WiMax)

    At 02 Oct 2008 16:32:41 -0500 Ron wrote:

    > >Ok, AT&T, Verizon, T-Mo... it's your move! ;-)
    > >

    >
    >
    > And the geographic coverage of WiMax currently is......



    Baltimore. Period. But they had to start somewhere! ;-)

    Sprint will be selling combo EVDO/WiMax equipment shortly. Again, this
    isn't going to change anything tomorrow, but suspect by the end of 2009,
    we'll see a different cellular data landscape with respect to pricing...





  7. #7
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    Re: Things just got interesting! (WiMax)

    At 02 Oct 2008 15:03:32 -0700 btek wrote:
    > Not much -- just an another option for people who have coverage,
    > not very convenient if they want to 'roam' though. This
    > 'announcement' is a mildly interesting 'non-event'



    Said the horse drawn carriage manufacturer when he saw the Tin Lizzie...






  8. #8
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    Re: Things just got interesting! (WiMax)

    At 02 Oct 2008 23:54:19 +0000 [email protected] wrote:

    > > Who's going to pay Verizon or AT&T $60-70 for laptop data with a
    > > 5GB cap
    > > when Xohm offers it for $45 and will throw in a second account for
    > > home
    > > access, allowing you to "fire" your current broadband provider, for
    >> $5 more?

    >
    >
    > Wait for LTE >_>



    What makes you think Verizon will buildout an LTE network just to sell it
    for less money than they sell EVDO for now, and with no contract, and/or an
    "at home" option?


    Forget the technolgy behind WiMax- for all practical purposes, it's just a
    slightly better cellular data network. What's "new" here, if anything, is
    the sales concept: no-contract wireless data sold on a pay-as-you-go or
    month-to-month basis for a competitive price. That's what interests me- I
    don't care what technology is fueling wireless- I'd be just as content if
    AT&T offered HSDPA or Verizon offered EVDO under those same terms.

    Verizon LTE, IMO, will be sold just as their EVDO is, unless Xohm shakes up
    the game a little.


    P.S. thanks for quoting!



  9. #9
    Dennis Ferguson
    Guest

    Re: Things just got interesting! (WiMax)

    On 2008-10-02, Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:
    > At 02 Oct 2008 16:32:41 -0500 Ron wrote:
    >
    >> >Ok, AT&T, Verizon, T-Mo... it's your move! ;-)
    >> >

    >>
    >>
    >> And the geographic coverage of WiMax currently is......

    >
    > Baltimore. Period. But they had to start somewhere! ;-)


    No roaming? Clearwire operates WiMax networks in about 50 (smaller)
    cities, though they've only just begun deploying the mobile version
    of WiMax and their service terms aren't as nice.

    > Sprint will be selling combo EVDO/WiMax equipment shortly. Again, this
    > isn't going to change anything tomorrow, but suspect by the end of 2009,
    > we'll see a different cellular data landscape with respect to pricing...


    We'll see. I've heard the assertion that while data use has been
    good for increasing the current operators' ARPU they think it is
    costly enough to provide that it hasn't actually helped their bottom
    line profits, which suggests that they're not likely to want to
    make it cheaper. The real money makers are voice and (particularly)
    test messages. It may be that they are telling lies (this view is
    supported by how cheap and conveniently 3G data is sold in the UK)
    and that Sprint's pricing will eventually shake them up, or it may be
    that Sprint's price is unsustainably low, particularly since they've
    left out the currently profitable parts of a wireless network, and that
    this will be yet another Sprint disaster.

    Dennis Ferguson



  10. #10
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    Re: Things just got interesting! (WiMax)

    At 03 Oct 2008 19:30:22 +0000 Dennis Ferguson wrote:

    > >> And the geographic coverage of WiMax currently is......

    > >
    > > Baltimore. Period. But they had to start somewhere! ;-)

    >
    > No roaming?


    Users on 4G boards are saying roaming works in the few test cities so faf.

    > Clearwire operates WiMax networks in about 50 (smaller)
    > cities, though they've only just begun deploying the mobile version
    > of WiMax and their service terms aren't as nice.



    Xohm is the upcoming Sprint/Clearwire partnership that should be in place
    by year-end, so I suspect all the Clearwire areas will be folded into Xohm.

    > > Sprint will be selling combo EVDO/WiMax equipment shortly. Again, this
    > > isn't going to change anything tomorrow, but suspect by the end of 2009,
    > > we'll see a different cellular data landscape with respect to pricing...

    >
    > We'll see. I've heard the assertion that while data use has been
    > good for increasing the current operators' ARPU they think it is
    > costly enough to provide that it hasn't actually helped their bottom
    > line profits, which suggests that they're not likely to want to
    > make it cheaper. The real money makers are voice and (particularly)
    > test messages. It may be that they are telling lies (this view is
    > supported by how cheap and conveniently 3G data is sold in the UK)
    > and that Sprint's pricing will eventually shake them up, or it may be
    > that Sprint's price is unsustainably low, particularly since they've
    > left out the currently profitable parts of a wireless network, and that
    > this will be yet another Sprint disaster.



    Either scenario is certainly possible!





  11. #11
    Bill Kearney
    Guest

    Re: Things just got interesting! (WiMax)

    > And the geographic coverage of WiMax currently is......

    As we used to say back in the 90's... Sprint, where packets go to die.



  12. #12
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    Re: Things just got interesting! (WiMax)


    "Pegleg" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > On Thu, 2 Oct 2008 15:32:51 -0600, "Todd Allcock"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>Not a game changer right away, since WiMax isn't really deployed yet,

    >
    > That's the key! All these
    > "new" promises that come from these companies about what they plan to do
    > but it takes years before any of it really happens on a wide spread
    > basis if it happens at all.


    I meant to say "fully deployed"- WiMax is alive and being sold in Baltimore
    as we speak, and will roll out in a dozen cities or so by year-end, most
    likely. Certainly not as mature or ubiquitous as 3G, but they'll get there,
    or run out of money trying! ;-)

    > The US is sooooooooo far behind the rest of the world with cell
    > technology!


    Perhaps, but that's caused by three things, IMO. First, our government
    places a lot of value on "backwards compatibility" which is how we've been
    stuck with outdated tech like NTSC TV and analog cellular for so long. (I'm
    not saying I disagree with that philosophy, but it's a factor.)

    Secondly, the US has a challenging geography due to it's size- it's a LOT
    easier, for example, to deploy a wireless technology over, say, 98% of the
    population of Japan, Great Britain, or Iceland, for example, than 98% of the
    US!

    Lastly, we have a very fragmented market with the duopoly of CDMA and GSM.
    If we'd settled on (or were mandated by the Feds to use) just one
    technology, we'd see better phones, since manufacturers wouldn't have to
    re-develop their phones for a second technology, and we'd probably see a lot
    more (and better) cross-roaming agreements in less populated areas.

    As it stands now, the 800-lb gorillas (Verizon and AT&T) see less practical
    advantage to roaming agreements, because "Podunk Cellular" in East Cupcake,
    Nebraska needs AT&T or Verizon to provide them with a "national footprint"
    more than Verizon or AT&T needs them to provide great backwater Nebraska
    coverage. With a single technology, the small fry, who are now splintered
    between two technologies) could cross-license with each other to battle the
    big guys (like T-Mobile and regional GSM providers try to do, in an attempt
    to rival AT&T coverage), and even the big guys, like AT&T and Verizon, could
    develop shared areas of less import (i.e. one operates the network in rural
    Montana, the other takes rural Idaho and "shares" the systems, like Cingular
    and T-Mobile used to share Cingular's California and T-Mo's New York
    networks before each had their own.) The less money everyone spends on
    redundant little-used networks, is the more money they'd have to deploy new
    technologies and services.





  13. #13
    Diamond Dave
    Guest

    Re: Things just got interesting! (WiMax)

    On Fri, 3 Oct 2008 23:57:27 -0400, "Bill Kearney"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >> And the geographic coverage of WiMax currently is......

    >
    >As we used to say back in the 90's... Sprint, where packets go to die.


    They still do





  14. #14
    Michael N. Paris
    Guest

    Re: Things just got interesting! (WiMax)

    Todd,
    Excellent and truthful post.



  15. #15
    Dennis Ferguson
    Guest

    Re: Things just got interesting! (WiMax)

    On 2008-10-07, Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:
    > As it stands now, the 800-lb gorillas (Verizon and AT&T) see less practical
    > advantage to roaming agreements, because "Podunk Cellular" in East Cupcake,
    > Nebraska needs AT&T or Verizon to provide them with a "national footprint"
    > more than Verizon or AT&T needs them to provide great backwater Nebraska
    > coverage.


    I don't know, but if you look at these

    http://www.wireless.att.com/coverageviewer/
    http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/C...atorController

    comparing prepaid to postpaid coverage it becomes clear that
    almost half of the nationwide coverage Verizon and AT&T make
    a big deal of selling (measured by land area, at least) comes
    from roaming agreements which are almost certainly reciprocal.
    Since nationwide coverage and those near-complete coverage maps
    are what the big guys sell, while rural carriers do a lot more
    business with regional plans, I'd argue that the big guys have
    at least as great an interest in cheap roaming as the little
    guys do.

    > networks before each had their own.) The less money everyone spends on
    > redundant little-used networks, is the more money they'd have to deploy new
    > technologies and services.


    I don't think anyone builds redundant networks in rural areas much
    at all any more. What happens instead is that rural carriers build
    out the infrastructure and customer base in their licensed area until
    one of the big carriers decides they'd like to offer service in that
    area, at which point there's an acquisition and the owners of the rural
    carrier have their payday. Eventually there will only be a few big
    nationwide carriers, the rural carriers which exist now are the farm
    teams for the big guys.

    As an example of how it goes, at one point I'm pretty sure Verizon
    thought they'd build a network in west Texas since they spent a
    fair bit of cash buying 30 MHz PCS licenses there. Note from
    the map above, however, that Verizon did nothing with these, which
    turned out to be pretty smart since their acquisition of Alltel
    instead gives them coverage in the same place in nice cellular
    spectrum, customers included.

    Having little carriers band together to form bigger, nationwide
    carriers might somehow advance the interests of consumers but
    I think the carriers themselves, both big and small, are pretty
    well taken care of by the current system. Oligopolies can be
    profitable.

    Dennis Ferguson



  • Similar Threads




  • Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast