You guys are cheap: WiMAX service for no more than $20 per month
I don’t know if the survey results on Muniwireless are representative of people (in general) who would buy WiMAX service, or if my readers in particular have been reduced to a penurious state by the slowdown in the municipal wireless market, but I am surprised to see that 57 percent will not pay more than $20 per month for WiMAX service and 33 percent will not pay more than $40 per month (results taken as of 25 May 2008, 51 votes). The results are posted on the front page of Muniwireless and you can still fill out the survey. I realize that 51 votes aren’t much but still, I expected more people to go for the $40 to $80 range.
What would you pay for WiMAX service? How do these service providers come up with a price? They need to cover the cost of deploying WiMAX but at the same time, they cannot set the price too high because they are competing with HSUPA (souped up 3G) and Wi-Fi.
Personally I would not pay more than $20 per month and I’d do it only if it were available in places I visit regularly: San Francisco, Amsterdam, Barcelona, Paris, Berlin, New York, London, the Balearic islands. In addition, I’d be more likely to go for the service if it were truly mobile WiMAX, not fixed WiMAX because what would be the point of that if I already have Internet access at home and Wi-Fi access in most places where I work.
UPDATE: I spoke to a friend this afternoon who is an expert in mobile telecoms pricing and he had the following comments:
(1) The way I framed the survey question was all wrong. I could have put in an option for $0 per month and people would have gone for it. So my survey is actually a misleading way to find out how much people will pay.
(2) When figuring out what to charge for fixed WiMAX service, the WiMAX operators have to determine if the service will be an add on or a replacement. So if it is a replacement for fixed Internet access, they can’t charge more than what the fixed Internet service provider is charging. If, however, there is no broadband alternative in the area, for example, in a rural region, then the WiMAX operator can charge much more. As for mobile WiMAX, my friend does not believe that it will ever come to pass. Why? In areas where people have money to spend on mobile data services (big cities, wealthier countries), the cellular operators are rolling out HSDPA data service and offering flat rates (although you have to beware of the fine print - most limit you to 2 Gigabytes per month). So there is no reason for someone in a big city like Paris to get mobile WiMAX since he or she probably already has a fast cheap fixed Internet connection (fiber, DSL or cable) and has a relatively cheap voice/data subscription from the cellular operator.
What do you all think? Post your comments below.
_2.gif)
I think that mobile will actually be attractive in big cities — but maybe more on a per-day use like Wi-Fi plans. I’d be interested to see another poll about whether people would get more use out of local vs. national or international roaming. Sprint has said local is a bigger user base, but is that true?
Paul,
If the WiMAX operator sells hourly and daily subscriptions, as the Wi-Fi operators do, then I am more inclined to purchase access. Of course by that time, I hope the iPhone and Macbook Pro has a WiMAX chip. There are rumors that Apple will put WiMAX in their devices very soon.