Ball Peen: Your post #7 leave this thread with the thought that this technology is not going to "fly". The WR web site clarifies some of the points you raise. waverider.ca
I would like to address these points individutally:
1. <<reid is right. metricom is founded on this concept of wireless ISP.
its *not* cheap. eliminating the cost of a local loop and replacing
it with something *more* expensive is not an answer. the ISP has
to install its own base stations and distribute its own wireless
modems, all expensive equipment.>>
My investigation of MCOM tells me that indeed Metricom has a wireless system, it is indeed not cheap. Their marketing is heading down a road to end users whereas they might be more successful if they would sell their systems to ISP's. They are targeting very large metro areas and are not having the penetration required to recover capital and gain market share in time.....before the next wave of competition, IMO. MCOM indeed appears to have replaced the telco loop ISP systems with something more expensive. MCOM will fail IMO because they do not have the speed required to fend of the coming competition. You state that this is all expensive equipment
This is perhaps true for MCOM, but not so for WAVC. This is precisely why this company interests me. WAVC has a solution which has been tested and works, they are ramping up. WAVC systems are not expensive when you consider that one system can handle 3,072 end users at a minimum speed of 40.9 Kbps. Incidently, this speed can be increased to 500 for specialty users. Tell me that MCOM will be successful against this technology. Sure, you doubt, but if you are wrong, and don't do all the Due Diligence required to prove this out, you will be "outside the loop". pun intended. Loaded up, one WAVC
system has a payback of under one year - for the benefit of the ISP! I do not have all of the numbers to detail this payback that I have just claimed, however, do the math yourself, use the lowest ISP pricing out there for telco loop systems and you will soon see that the cash flow is there for the ISP. This is precisely why I am turned on with the prospects of this company.
It has occured to me that some of the nay saying may be coming from the current establishment. Is this so? Time will prove out what I am saying. The WAVC web site is clear on what they say they have. The first sites that are set up and running successfully will prove to the many ISP's showing interest (from their literature and direct questioning on my part over the past two weeks) that this techology works! Look at the stock making its moves in the last week, relatively small volumes and it has moved up 40% from the previous .47 to .51 to the now .70US.
2. <<further, its not even a convincing technology (despite the fact
that it works quite well); witness ricochet's *6000* subscribers.
the company stock is reflecting their poor market penetration.>>
Of course, your statement refers to MCOM's Ricochet product. In fact, they have announced 15,000 subscribers. This is woefully under any kind of break-even economics. Take a look at MCOM's financial results: Year ended 12/31/96 Sales US$7.2 million and Net Losses US$39.3 million. With the speed issue 28.8 Kbps and performance at even this level sometimes in doubt and the economic issue (lack of sales penetration - we agree) MCOM is a disaster for its shareholders. One could grasp at a "future thought" that it will get better, losses are needed to tie up the market, etc etc. One must be careful with these type of rationalizations as the economics are dictating something else, failure IMO of the MCOM system.
When you make the statement: its not even a convincing technology I am sure that you mean MCOM. It is not a valid statement to assume that because MCOM's systems are not successful, that other systems using spread spectrum cannot make it work. The two biggest reasons why WAVC is not already $3 or higher is 1. The nay sayers to spread spectrum techology and 2. WAVC's still to come actual setup of a working system. In my discussions with them, they stated (and this is in the literature) that they are ramping up to production of their equipment with C-Mac, then they will be setting up a couple of sites. Proof will be in the putting up and operating of the sites! This of course is a risky thing for little investors but that is the name of the game, invest, high risk = high rewards. WAVC has done their work, has had the technology audited and venture capitalists have put up their cash to get this off of the ground. That being fact in my mind caused me to take the high risk move and buy some stock. Of course, your DD is your business, ignore what I am saying but by all means, do your own DD. Contact the company as I have, get their prospectus as I have. Investigate the competitive market place as I am doing. Then, make up your own mind as to what the probabilities are.
I am not hyping this stock, only taking a very intense interest. I would like this exercise more if the factors involved would take a more scientific bent as opposed to an emotional/suspicious bent.
3. <<not to mention that starting an ISP at this late stage is suicidal.
thats like trying to get into the PC market now. its a saturated
field where hardly anyone is making money. doing it wireless is
especially difficult because of the enormous starting cost of
installing the infrastructure.>>
You must have read some of the other posts. WAVC is in the business of replacing ISP equipment with the most modern concepts. Without these concepts working in an ISP's site he will surely die a slow death. Competition is great and I believe that WAVC breakthrough technology is about to form a new level of competition. Anyone who ignores the signposts in any business is going to get flamed by the new economics. WAVC costs are not enormous, do some math and you will soon see that when launched, the ISP will find a new and prosperous life.......but only if the ISP's costs are comparable to what is being offered in the WAVC or comparable package.
4. <<this is going to fly as far as the challenger spacecraft...>>
Well, the "challenger spacecraft" analogy is likely true for MCOM IMO. Sadly, many get burned because they don't do their DD. MCOM is clearly going to have BIG problems with speed, costs, marketing strategies. They must hate it when these matters are discussed, however, show me why these conclusions are not right on.
WAVC is using the spread spectrum technology in an innovative way. They are looking way down the road and have made THEIR system design compatible with future change probabilities, speed requirements, encryption requirements, economical delivery design and so on. Incidently, don't dismiss the security of these wireless systems lightly. Recently a VISA code was broken. From my discussions with the president of WR, he tells me that the encryption is top end. I don't really understand enough about encryption techniques, but understand that the WR encryption techniques are many times greater than the VISA codes. If MCOM is having trouble defining their encryption levels, beware, as this is the very essence of future internet transaction traffic.
It will be interesting to hear from you again.
Best Regards,
Ron E |
