*Robert, the ROI on a DS-0 is high, relative to the equivalent contribution of bandwidth in a larger flow which is represented by an integral component of 64 kb/s.*
My models are simple. I have found that the more complicated I make them, the less accurate they are over time. I have proven this to myself through extensive time spent on econometric projects.
Regarding your exquisite post Mr. Coluccio, I broke quoted bandwidth down into DSOs. The same occurred with my bandwidth rate survey. Some of the responses were in E1s, 155Mbps, STM-1, DS3s, OCwhatevers, etc . . . I have merely deferred to what the industry seemingly has defaulted to . . . 64Kbps circuits.
Per Mr. Gilder (what a resource – he digs up information like no one I have ever seen) there are some pretty exciting manipulations of bandwidth coming that merely require the swapping of equipment to implement. I am certain that five years from now “X”bps will not even be the correct notation for measurement. We probably will have derived a whole new set of definitions (you spoke of lambdas) for measuring capacity by then. For now we are stuck with generalizations looking out two years or so.
The really exciting implications of Mr. Coluccio's post is that my “maximum” estimated revenue capacity could be even higher than the $100+BB (yes, it sounds high, but simple numbers don't lie). If GBLX is successful in even coming close to filling its pipes, this company is one of the cheapest and overlooked of all time.
*Also, and in some ways ironically, a better argument might be made in GBLX's favor by demonstrating that they actually do not wish to sell DS-0s, in the first place, but instead would rather sell the massive flows to other carriers who would in turn use them to their best advantage... increasingly away from the DS-0 regime.*
Agreed. |
