<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 3/Jan/20 15:56, Shane Ronan wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAJ_LqoGBqyBMCa0HE57WT81vCvYhtyJoi9H2tTtMoKX7JOptyA@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="auto">In locations with high population densities, there
is nothing you can do to LTE to provide adequate service.</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
But doesn't it, then, follow that high-density locations tend to
have plenty of wi-fi? Public and private?<br>
<br>
For me, the risk I see to MNO's is that the kids don't want to pay
for data. Data is the limiting factor for kids that don't understand
why they should be limited when they are not in their homes, or
friends' homes.<br>
<br>
In my mind, rather than spend more cash on 4G or 5G (in 2020), MNO's
might do better to deploy SP Wi-Fi so that they can do two things:<br>
<ul>
<li>Offload traffic from valuable GSM spectrum and on to wi-fi.</li>
<li>Be in a position to offer unlimited services more effectively,
which is what the kids really want.<br>
</li>
</ul>
<p>Looking at where things are going right now, the current MNO
model is not sustainable, given the amount of capex that is
constantly required, the declining margins, the change in the
kids' online behaviour and the constant (or even rising) equipment
costs from vendors.</p>
<p>If the MNO model of pure infrastructure play is how they intend
to keep doing business in an age where transformation away from it
is forcing networking businesses to re-think the (true) value they
offer to customers, SP Wi-Fi seems like the logical way to
maintain said business model. Either that or pull an Amazon and go
from selling books to... well, you know the rest :-).<br>
</p>
Mark.<br>
</body>
</html>