State of Ohio Point-to-Multipoint 「「 PMP」」 Building a successful monetary future through innovative services. Increasing network data traffic caused by smartphones, tablets and new technologies such as mobile-to-mobile (M2M), demands service providers invest in expanding their network capacity and coverage. Cost and performance are factors in running and launching new services. Service providers run mobile backhaul for the lower cost and rapid time to market to satisfy customer demand and grow revenues. PMP: Provides Consistent Service, Maintains Revenue and Increases Profit WHY PMP? Service providers will achieve a higher return on investment (ROI) at a lower cost per bit, all while improving spectral efficiency. "Tower sharing allows operators to reduce their capital and operating expenditures [Capex and Opex] by amortizing the costs of infrastructure across their combined subscriber bases."¹ This can provide a 1.8x higher ROI over point-to-point (PTP).² ³ 01 If the service providers are in an area that prefers to remain in leased fiber, PMP may not be the right fit. Fiber relies on high Opex and low Capex with equipment being low cost due to lease. With fiber, service providers will pay for terminal equipment fees to set up the service. PMP is more Capex-intense than fiber, but the service provider will be the owner once deployed. WHY NOT? 02 Cost Effective Widely Available Line of Sight Within 7 out of the 10 largest global operator groups. Private and Municipal Services Corporate Offices ACROSS 41 COUNTRIES CONSIDER BUILDING 03 FOUND: Set for ≙$500M in rapid growth by 2017. PMP contains the potential to enable an internet service provider (ISP) to connect 67% more customers. African mobile operators are the world leaders in PMP. In 2016, Verizon bought out XO Communications for $1.8B including their PMP technology.⁴ Fiber is slow to deploy. Requires permitting, right- of-way and installation. Costs can range or exceed from $50,000-$100,000 per km, depending on the area of deployment. Difficult for mobile operators to justify building their own fiber backhaul network due to costs. VS PMP AND FIBER 04 PMP is perfect for urban backhaul, requiring short and mid-range links of <1 to 5 km. No need to re-visit additional sites after original deployment, making it 50% quicker to deploy than point-to-point (PTP). URBAN SAVINGS 05 ¹ Naylon, John PhD. “Backhaul and Beyond”. 05 of November 2015. Retrieved 26 of June 2016. SOURCE ² Real Wireless. “New study finds latest PMP can deliver almost twice the ROI for MNOs and ISPs compared to traditional last-mile infrastructure”. 19 of January 2016. Retrieved 26 of June 2016. ³ Paolini, Monica. “Crucial economics for mobile data backhaul”. © 2011. Retrieved 26 of June 2016. ⁴ Wilson, Carol. “Verizon Bags XO for $1.8B”. 22 of February 2016. Retrieved 26 of June 2016. CBNL. “A quick guide: modern point-to-multipoint microwave networks”. 18 of February 2014. Retrieved 25 of June 2016. Naylon, John PhD. “Backhaul and Beyond”. 05 of November 2015. Retrieved 26 of June 2016. Saunders, Jake. “Pushing the Envelope of Mobile Carrier Profitability”. 08 of October 2013. Retrieved 26 of June 2016.

PMP Point-to-Multipoint State of Ohio · State of Ohio Point-to-Multipoint 「PMP」 Building a successful monetary future through innovative services. Increasing network data traffic

Download PDF Report

Upload
others
View
10
Download
1

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

State of OhioPoint-to-Multipoint

「「PMP」」Building a successful monetary future

through innovative services.

Increasing network data traffic caused by smartphones, tablets andnew technologies such as mobile-to-mobile (M2M), demands serviceproviders invest in expanding their network capacity and coverage.Cost and performance are factors in running and launching newservices. Service providers run mobile backhaul for the lower cost andrapid time to market to satisfy customer demand and grow revenues.

PMP: Provides Consistent Service,Maintains Revenue and Increases Profit

WHY PMP?

Service providers will achieve a higher return oninvestment (ROI) at a lower cost per bit, all whileimproving spectral efficiency. "Tower sharingallows operators to reduce their capital andoperating expenditures [Capex and Opex] byamortizing the costs of infrastructure across theircombined subscriber bases."¹ This can provide a1.8x higher ROI over point-to-point (PTP).² ³

If the service providers are in an area that prefers toremain in leased fiber, PMP may not be the right fit.Fiber relies on high Opex and low Capex withequipment being low cost due to lease. With fiber,service providers will pay for terminal equipment feesto set up the service. PMP is more Capex-intense thanfiber, but the service provider will be the owner oncedeployed.

WHY NOT?02

Cost Effective Widely Available Line of Sight

Within 7 out of the 10 largest global operator groups.

Private andMunicipal Services

CorporateOffices

ACROSS 41 COUNTRIES

CONSIDER BUILDING03

FOUND:

Set for ≙$500M in rapidgrowth by 2017.

PMP contains the potential toenable an internet serviceprovider (ISP) to connect67% more customers.

African mobile operators arethe world leaders in PMP.

In 2016, Verizon bought outXO Communications for$1.8B including their PMPtechnology.⁴

Fiber is slow to deploy.

Requires permitting, right-of-way and installation.

Costs can range or exceedfrom $50,000-$100,000 perkm, depending on the areaof deployment.

Difficult for mobileoperators to justify buildingtheir own fiber backhaulnetwork due to costs.

PMP AND FIBER04

PMP is perfect for urban backhaul, requiring short and mid-range links of <1 to 5 km.

No need to re-visit additional sites after original deployment,making it 50% quicker to deploy than point-to-point (PTP).

URBAN SAVINGS05

¹ Naylon, John PhD. “Backhaul and Beyond”. 05 of November 2015. Retrieved 26 of June 2016.

SOURCE² Real Wireless. “New study finds latest PMP can deliver almost twice the ROI for MNOs and ISPs compared to traditional last-mile infrastructure”. 19 of January 2016. Retrieved 26 of June 2016.

⁴ Wilson, Carol. “Verizon Bags XO for $1.8B”. 22 of February 2016. Retrieved 26 of June 2016.

CBNL. “A quick guide: modern point-to-multipoint microwave networks”. 18 of February 2014. Retrieved 25 of June 2016.

Naylon, John PhD. “Backhaul and Beyond”. 05 of November 2015. Retrieved 26 of June 2016.

Saunders, Jake. “Pushing the Envelope of Mobile Carrier Profitability”. 08 of October 2013. Retrieved 26 of June 2016.

http://cbnl.com/infocast

http://www.realwireless.biz/2016/01/19/new-study-finds-latest-pmp-can-deliver-almost-twice-the-roi-for-mnos-and-isps-compared-to-traditional-last-mile-infrastructure/

http://smallcells.com/SenzaFili_BackhaulTCO.pdf

http://www.lightreading.com/data-center/cloud-strategies/verizon-bags-xo-for-$18b/d/d-id/721252

http://cbnl.com/resources/quick-guide-modern-point-multipoint-microwave-networks

http://cbnl.com/infocast

https://www.abiresearch.com/blogs/pushing-envelope-mobile-carrier-profitability/