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 : Broadband Wireless Access [WCII, NXLK, WCOM, satellite..] -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SteveG who wrote (137)	5/4/1999 12:58:00 PM
From: SteveG	Respond to of 1860

(out till this evening. Chase up WCII and ARTT!)

To: SteveG who wrote (137)	5/4/1999 9:56:00 PM
From: wonk	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1860

Steve: ...Do you really think there will be significant differences in take rates for two seemingly comparable data exchange technologies (presumably transparent to end users with differential and comparable QoSs)? Seems assuming near term availability in both technologies, the differences will be in ROI, and could easily be quantified and compared.... Hypothetically, top line revenues for both alternatives would remain the same. My purpose would be to model operating expenses, depreciation and tax shielding, and incremental capx. The MMDS alternative would have lower upfront buildout cost and hence operating cost (fewer sites => less rent, interconnect cost, smaller engineering staff, etc.) However, at even modest take-rates MMDS would be forced into a cell splitting scenario. At some point in time, capx and operating costs would meet, then exceed, the LMDS or 38 GHz operators' costs since they have a much larger spectrum allocation. Depending on the take rate, the 28 or 38 GHz operator may never have to deploy additional sites after initial coverage of the targeted geographic area is achieved. If one presumed a start-up situation for both alternatives, the NPV for each would be the value of the spectrum and hence the difference in NPV would represent the premium - or lack thereof - for a lesser amount of lower frequency spectrum. ww p.s One would have to weave those pesky ITFS leases into the analysis somewhere <g>.