Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kayaker who wrote (109336)	12/7/2001 11:45:17 AM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 152472

What are you going to do, set up an account at 10 different locations (airport, starbucks, mall, etc.)??? it's not really fair to compare an actual service in its infancy (802.11b in Sbux or wherever) to a hypothetical "mature" service that doesn't yet exist (nationwide 3G cellular broadband). there's no reason the 802.11b business model couldn't be consolidated. who knows, the baby bells may try to catch the wave. i think the thing to look at is what the actual deployment costs are. if somebody can deploy in high-traffic areas at low cost compared to 3G, then they have an advantage. the article you linked says the technology isn't ready for prime time, but then again, neither is 3G. but if you can get broadband wireless at any Sbux in SF today for 30 bucks a month, that is a lot better wireless broadband option than what cellular providers offer today. one must suppose that the pricing and availability of this model will evolve as competing products (e.g., "3G") come online. obviously, it would be difficult for 802.11b to have the same "ubiquity" as 3G. but that doesn't mean it can't compete. if 85% of wireless broadband use occurs in high traffic areas, it can compete on price (and speed) in those juicy markets; and let cellular carriers have exclusivity in the 15% areas where deployment is not cost-effective. regardless of the ratio (85/15, 70/30, etc.), there will presumably be high-traffic areas that are the most desirable, and i see no reason why 802.11b cannot be competitive there. competition imho means less pricing power for 3G cellular. incremental loss of pricing power can have effects on business plans. again, the cost of deployment is an important consideration because that is the first hurdle that the user price must exceed.