1 / 19

Making the Technology Choice: Commodity vs Proprietary

Making the Technology Choice: Commodity vs Proprietary. Outline. Baseline study characteristics, architecture and methodology Analysis methodology Baseline 802.11b results Sensitivity studies from 802.11b baseline – “The 4 Cs” Coverage Capacity CPE Cost Competition (market share)

gil
Télécharger la présentation

Making the Technology Choice: Commodity vs Proprietary

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Making the Technology Choice:Commodity vs Proprietary

  2. Outline • Baseline study characteristics, architecture and methodology • Analysis methodology • Baseline 802.11b results • Sensitivity studies from 802.11b baseline – “The 4 Cs” • Coverage • Capacity • CPE Cost • Competition (market share) • Technology variants • Additional services • Break-even results • Conclusions

  3. Baseline Study Characteristics • Geographic Areas • 100K population with 2% annual growth • 50 mi2 suburban, 2000 mi2 rural • Market Size and Growth • Fisher-Pry (S-shaped) market growth, with 50% eventual market penetration and 5 year growth to 25% penetration • 25% market share, 10% churn per year • Browsing Service • 1 Mbps asynchronous 5% duty down, 1% duty up • $35 per month 5 sessions/hr 100 seconds each • IP Voice Service • 16 kbps, no voice activity detection • $10 per month 3 calls/hr 180 seconds each • Additional Access Port Site expenses • $20,000 one-time per site • $10,000 per year per site (rental)

  4. ISP CPE AP Router Baseline Architecture & Technology OC3 (155 Mbps) Up to 4 $30,000 + $100/km + OC3 * ($5,000 + $100/mo) 802.11b Wireless Link Avg Throughput 2 Mbps Point-to-Point Wireless 10 Mbps Shared Capacity $10,000 + $100/mo ISP $200/mo for 256 kbps Router 100 Mbps Capacity, 8 Input Ports $10,000 + $100/mo CPE Xmit Pwr = 17 dBm Antenna Gain = 10 dBi $250, $100 connect, $50 Equipment Recovery Access Point Xmit Power = 20 dBm Antenna Gain = 10 dBi $2,000 + $20/mo + Channels * ($500 + $10/mo)

  5. Model Services Model Areas Model Equipment Analysis Methodology • Establish 802.11b Baseline • Investigate Sensitivity to: • Path Loss • Capacity • CPE Cost • Market Share • How about 5.8 GHz? Other technologies? • Add IP Voice? Build for Coverage Expand for Capacity Size and Cost Equipment Generate Business Case Metrics Create Summary Graphs As a function of time Calculations performed using WirelessSWAT for WISPs

  6. Baseline 802.11b Financial Results - Rural • Large initial capital investment required due to low subscriber density – • coverage-limited deployment • No further capital required for 8 years • ROI = 21.2%, NPV of EBITDA = $2.69M

  7. Baseline 802.11b Study Results - Suburban • More incremental capital investment as deployment becomes • capacity-limited • Significantly lower early capital investment than for rural deployment • ROI = 54.7%, NPV of EBITDA = $5.43M

  8. Baseline 802.11b Study ResultsRisk vs Reward • Rural deployment is coverage-limited during most of study, • so takes longer to break even • Same overall capital investment – both deployments serve the • same market size and both are eventually capacity-limited • Break-even period = 5.6 years for suburban, 8.9 years for rural

  9. 802.11b 2.4 GHz Baseline ROI & NPV vs Excess Path Loss (Coverage) suburban rural • Suburban deployment is capacity-limited, rural deployment is • coverage-limited except at low excess path loss values • Successful rural deployment requires relatively unobstructed paths • Suburban ROI is relatively insensitive to excess path loss • ROI and NPV yield equivalent qualitative conclusions

  10. 802.11b 2.4 GHz Baseline ROI & NPV vs Sectors/Access Point (Capacity) suburban rural • Increased capacity at an Access Point is useful in suburban • deployments, but not in rural deployments • Note: 3 or more sectors per Access point not practical at 2.4 GHz, • due to insufficient spectrum

  11. 802.11b 2.4 GHz Baseline ROI vs CPE Cost • Increased CPE cost is a significant contributor to reduced ROI • in all deployments

  12. 802.11b 2.4 GHz Baseline ROI vs Purchased Link Margin suburban rural • CPE cost spent on additional link margin is detrimental in the • capacity-limited suburban environment • ROI is maximized in rural deployments by moderate additional • CPE cost to improve link margin (here around $75)

  13. 802.11b 2.4 GHz Baseline ROI vs Market Share (Competition) suburban rural • Increased market share in suburban deployments increases absolute • returns, but does not significantly increase ROI • Increased market share in rural deployments significantly increases • both absolute returns and ROI • Use of 2 sectors per Access Point significantly increases ROI • except in rural deployments with low market share

  14. General 802.11b Financial Trends • Excess path loss is more detrimental in rural deployments • Additional capacity at an Access Point is more useful in suburban deployments • CPE cost is a significant component of overall business plan • Moderate CPE expenditure to increase link margin is beneficial in rural deployments, but detrimental in suburban deployments • Increased market share improves ROI only in rural environments

  15. 802.11b at 5.8 GHzROI vs Sectors/Access Point • Additional link margin has negative benefit in suburban deployments • (capacity-limited design is unchanged, but costs increase) • 5.8 GHz slightly inferior to 2.4 GHz unless additional capacity per • Access Point is needed

  16. High-Capacity 5.8 GHz TDD TechnologyROI vs Market Share • 7 Mbps in 10 MHz RF bandwidth +17 dBm transmitter powers • +10 dBi antenna gains 6 sectors per Access Point • Optimized for high subscriber densities • Moderate additional antenna gain can protect against low achieved • market penetration

  17. Data Only Add Voice 140 120 100 80 2012 ROI (%) 60 40 20 Adding Voice-over-IP Services 0

  18. Data + Voice Addl for No Voice 10 9 8 7 6 ROI Break-Even (yrs) 5 4 3 2 1 0 ROI Break-Even Period for Voice + Data & Data Only

  19. Conclusions • The viability of 802.11b depends very much on the density of users to which the service is provided • CPE cost can be a controlling parameter but minimizing it is not always the answer. Moderate expenditure to increase link margin is justified in rural environments • Sectorization is more beneficial in areas with higher subscriber density • Use of 5.8 GHz is acceptable where capacity is needed but range is not • IP voice can be a good plan to obtain additional revenues from unused capacity and to reduce break-even period • Proprietary technologies or 802.11b modifications can help to address market and environment variations • Combined engineering and business case analysis should always be done prior to investing money

More Related