I agree with your comments on satellite and it can easily be seen why HM gov is going down that route. "Satellite covers everywhere" so it is an easy tick box tick when trying to cover up the extensive funding of FTTC/P that has missed so many out,
The unsuitability of Satellite for anything real time is not something they understand or care for i suspect. Headline speed is.
Fixed Wireless is a fast growing technology and can fulfil the demand in the final 5% or whatever buzzword they like to use currently. We have been doing it for over 10 Years here.
Your Orbital example is a good one, as you say it may not be cheap but it is effective. Unfortunately a lot of business estates/units here want to pay "talk talk" prices and gain "leased line" service in our experience then moan because we do not rush to provide this.
I am unsure why you think Kijoma does not communicate effectively? If it is based on the handful of non customer gripes on this Forum over the last 10 years of Kijoma service then I think you are being less than fair/balanced.
Kijoma provides service to areas in 5 counties, West Sussex being the largest. We look after existing customers first and connect new ones accordingly. We as an early adopter of the technology have had to replace some of our networks and client aerials three times in order to keep up to date with technology and performance. This take time and precedence over new demand.
The cost to the end customer has not risen as a result and it also means we do not have a deluge of complaints from existing customers on here. Kijoma receive ZERO public funding so we have no contractual obligation to rush to any particular area or meet the demands of impatient people.
We are not blaming the councils/gov/Bduk as they are not directly affecting our business at present, what we are pointing out is the uncertainty / market distortion that has taken place as a result of the process.
It is one thing to have a state funded competitor, but the situation worsens when the Local Authority plan/strategy seeks to demonise the existence of our service in order to promote the further funding/support of the state aided competitor.
Where is the justification in funding the miles of overhead/ducted FIbre (FTTP) to two remote domestic properties for example when they already haver a 30Mbps+ service ?
Equally for another hamlet of 3 houses and a pub , also all with the same incumbent service and none of the residents demanding anything else?
There is a fast growing list of inordinate expenditure within areas of the county of West Sussex where a commercial service already exists and meets the objective.
Likewise there is an equally growing list of areas where there are no commercial high speed services available. Here the residents and businesses are being told by the LA that they are not eligible for a BDUK funded solution.
One reason they often give is "Because Kijoma cover the area" , which they stick to even if we declare we do not cover that particular location. This means they are using us as an invalid excuse when it is convenient but happy to FTTP overbuild areas with 100% take up.
If you or others do not think Kijoma should raise these issues then that is your view, I however feel there is some seriously fraudulent mis-use of public funds here.
State aid is to be used to resolve otherwise commercially unresolvable issues, not to fund competitive solutions from companies that can easily afford to do this off their own back but refused to historically as it "wasn't profitable/viable".
I, like you will watch with interest as the latest satellite fiasco unfolds.. The 100 Mbps target they recently set will be another "vote winner" bit of vapourware to watch too.
Bill Lewis - MD
Fixed wireless ISP - ISPA/CISAS/RIPE member