EE grasses on Three UK for its 5G advertising

Three UK has run an ad campaign claiming its 5G network is the only ‘real’ one. Unsurprisingly other 5G providers are unhappy about this and at least one had complained.

The UK Advertising Standards Authority has been forced to take precious resource away from enforcing gender politics dogma to look into Three’s 5G ad campaign. The ASA confirmed to Telecoms.com that it has received six complaints about an ad by Three claiming to provide the only ‘real’ 5G, with one of them coming from BT.

We contacted EE, which provided the following statement: “Three’s claim to be the only real 5G network is entirely false, and deliberately aimed at misleading consumers. Our customers have been using real 5G since we launched the UK’s first 5G network, back in May.”

And, of course, we also spoke to Three UK, which gave us this statement: “Our advert is to inform consumers that we will offer the fastest 5G network, based on Three having three times as much 5G spectrum as any other operator. We are also the only operator to have 100 MHz of contiguous spectrum. ITU considers this the gold standard for 5G, enabling consumers to take full advantage of what 5G has to offer.”

It all seems to come down this 100 MHz contiguous block of spectrum and the value the ITU places on it in the context of 5G. Here’s a slide from a Nokia presentation titled Minimum Technical Performance Requirements for IMT-2020 radio interface(s) [i.e. 5G] that clearly state “The requirement for bandwidth is at least 100 MHz.” However it also states “The bandwidth may be supported by single or multiple RF carriers.”

Nokia IMT 2020 requirements slide

That caveat would appear to undermine Three’s claim that only its contiguous 100 MHz chunk meets the ITU’s minimum requirements. But when we put that to Three their spokesperson countered that, since carrier aggregation isn’t currently supported by 5G chipsets, that stipulation is irrelevant.

Three reckons this complaint is evidence that its competitors are worried about Three’s strong position in 5G spectrum, which is wonderfully ironic when you consider Three has spent a decade moaning about the opposite imbalance in 4G spectrum. Three is presumably OK with the situation now that things have apparently swung in its favour, so much so it was happy to provide us with a few slides.

The first offers a look at the current UK 5G spectrum situation, following the 3.4 GHz spectrum auction last year. Most of Three’s 5G spectrum is in the 3.6-3.8 GHz band, however, and we’re not sure what the ‘future’ bar signifies, but Three does seem to be at a distinct advantage. So much so that its competitors have apparent been moaning to Ofcom too, as quoted in the second Three slide. The last one represents the results of some Three testing, which is designed to show the unique download speed benefits of having 100 MHz of contiguous 5G spectrum.

Thee 5G slide 1

Thee 5G slide 2

Thee 5G slide 3

To be honest we find it hard enough to keep track of who has what spectrum, and why we should care, so we’re certainly not in a position to critique Three’s claims on a technical level. However they do seem to serve as a plausible defense of any claim it might make to have at least the potential to provide greater 5G download speeds than its competitors.

Where we still have some sympathy with the ASA complaint, however, is with the use of the term ‘real’. If Three had simply gone with ‘fastest’, as it did in the above statement, then EE probably wouldn’t have a leg to stand on. But by instead using the term ‘real’ Three seems to inferring rival 5G services are somehow illegitimate.

It will be down to the ASA to sift through the 5G standard, including the above ITU parameters, to determine whether or not only a 5G service that is able to call upon at least 100 MHz of contiguous qualifies. Since the ASA seems more concerned with thought policing these days we have to question whether it has retained the expertise needed to perform its supposedly core function.

Macquarie bags KCOM for £627 million

Macquarie Infrastructure and Real Assets (MIRA) has officially closed the acquisition of KCOM for £627 million.

While KCOM has a limited footprint in comparison to rivals, it has created a remarkable leadership position in the Hull and East Yorkshire region. KCOM has been of interest to a number of different suitors over the last few months, since a major profit warning was made last year, though MIRA wins out after an auction process.

“We are pleased to be partnering with an investor that has deep, global expertise in our industry,” said Graham Sutherland, CEO of KCOM. “We are confident that Macquarie Infrastructure and Real Assets will support our long-term growth ambitions whilst helping us maintain our strong local focus and presence.”

“We are looking forward to working closely with KCOM’s management team and workforce to increase fibre accessibility and reduce digital exclusion in the region,” said Leigh Harrison, Head of MIRA EMEA. “By investing to develop and expand KCOM’s networks, we hope to deliver the infrastructure that will underpin growth and innovation in East Yorkshire.”

Last November, KCOM not only issued a profit warning but also cut dividends and warned debts were 10% higher than during the same period of 2017. The news led to a 36% drop in share price and also peaked the interest of potential acquirers.

Virgin Media was first rumoured to be interested in the purchase, it would offer access to an entirely new market for the telco, though pension fund Universities Superannuation Scheme Ltd (USSL) was the first to table a bid. After MIRA got involved in the financial fracas, The Takeover Panel recommended an auction.

With KCOM entering the MIRA portfolio, the investment fund is bolstering its already healthy telecoms position. Aside from KCOM, MIRA is already an investor in Arqiva, and the owner of Danish telco TDC.

Three goes live with 5G broadband service

UK telco Three has become the latest to join the 5G bonanza with the launch of its 5G Fixed Wireless Access (FWA) service in London.

With plans to launch the service in 25 cities throughout the UK, the FWA proposition looks to be a challenger to traditional broadband services. We have been told the new service will promise speeds of 100 Mbps between the hours of 8pm and 10pm, peak times for streaming in the living room, offering an alternative to fibre broadband for speed hungry customers.

“Three’s 5G is going to revolutionise the home broadband experience,” said Three CEO Dave Dyson. “No more paying for landline rental, no more waiting for engineers, and even a same day delivery option. It really is the straightforward plug and play broadband that customers have been waiting for.

“We’ve taken a simple approach with one single truly unlimited data plan to give customers the opportunity to fully explore 5G and all its exciting possibilities. The ease and immediacy of it all means home broadband using 5G is going to be key to the future of the connected home.”

Looking at the deal offered, there are some interesting elements. Three is promising a ‘plug and play’ experience, meaning customers will no-longer have to wait for an engineer to start the service, while contracts can be taken to new homes if the customer moves. This of course depends on whether Three has launched 5G in the new area, though removing the dependence on physical lines into the home can offer some benefits.

Although this does look like a promising opportunity to disrupt the traditional home broadband market, questions still remain over the long-term viability of FWA as an alternative to the delivery of connectivity over physical infrastructure.

There is a business case for FWA in the remote regions, where the commercial attractiveness of connecting ‘the last mile’ with fibre falls dramatically, though these are not the areas which Three will be targeting to start with.

The launch today is in certain areas of London, while Three is promising to connect 25 towns and cities by the end of the year. These will most likely be the more urbanised areas, this makes commercial sense after all, perhaps targeting regions where fibre penetration is lacking.

As Heavy Reading Analyst Gabriel Brown points out, £35 a month is not overly aggressive pricing, and the 100 Mbps download speeds are very achievable. Users might experience higher speeds during the day, though the proposition might well be more attractive financial and performance wise than many cable services today.

This is where Three could find its appeal. As Brown points out, accessibility to fibre services is a challenge today in the UK. If Three is able to target the regions where Openreach, Virgin Media and the fibre ‘alt-nets’ are missing, there could be a tailored audience for the speedy and reasonably priced 5G FWA service.

Played smartly, Three can drive additional revenues through the business. And while Three does already have 800,000 broadband customers with its 4G FWA service, this could be a notable driver of new revenues for the business. 5G network deployment is going to be an expensive business, therefore sweating the assets in every way possible will be an important factor.

This product opens up a new world for the challenger brand. Over the last few years, subscriber growth in mobile has been relatively flat, though should Three push towards the convergence game, there could be new opportunities to engage new customers with a new message.

Ofcom fines BT for suspect accounting

Ofcom has fined BT £3,727,330 for reporting inaccurate financials to the regulator, leading to the telco paying lower administration fees to the regulator for five years.

One of the ways in which Ofcom funds its activities is to charge certain companies an annual administration fee. This fee is determined by the total revenues generated by the company. As BT reported inaccurate results between 2011 and 2015, it paid lower administration fees throughout this period.

BT has not contested the fine, and the full sum had been paid to Ofcom on July 29.

“BT’s cooperation with Ofcom in relation to this investigation has been extensive and productive,” Ofcom said in the report.

“Upon discovery of its error, BT informed Ofcom and committed to remedying the consequences of its error. BT has also undertaken extensive work to ensure that its final resubmitted turnover is complete and accurate; had Ofcom had to carry out this work itself, it is likely to have required significant resource and time to complete.”

Although BT does not have the most glimmering record when it comes to accounting in recent years, the telco did own up to the error rather than Ofcom being informed by a whistle-blower.

The error seems to have been identified by BT Group CFO Simon Lowth, who had only been in the role for a year at the time. In September 2017, documents were submitted to Lowth to review the submission of annual turnover for 2016. Upon reviewing the document, Lowth ordered an investigation into the previous submissions dating back to the original General Demand for Information in 2011.

BT believes the oversight was down to human error, an employee misunderstanding the data sources used, though it still does not the most complementary light on the accounting practices of the business.

Aside from this oversight, BT is still reeling from the Italian accounting scandal which was unearthed in 2016. The fraud cost the company more than £530 million, with £8 billion being wiped off the telcos market value in a single day. US investors, represented by law firm Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd, have recently announced a lawsuit to recover some of the losses.

The £3,727,330 fine might be considered a relatively lenient one, though generally regulators are kinder to the guilty party if it admits to wrong-doing without prompt. The sum was calculated by adding the deficit to interest payments. The Bank of England base interest rate during the 2011-15 period was increased by 1% to get the total.

It is difficult to blame the current management team and workforce for this error, it would have been prior to the tenure of many employees, though it does not reflect well on a company which is attempting to prove it is a successful business.

UK Gov launches Round Three of cyber security skills initiative

The Department of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) has launched a new campaign to attract a broader array of talent into the work of cyber security.

This is the third-round of funding for the Cyber Skills Immediate Impact Fund (CSIIF), with training providers able to access up-to £100,000 of government funding to work with employers and design training programmes which retrain a diverse range of individuals for a career in cyber security.

“This latest round of funding demonstrates our commitment to make sure the UK’s cyber security industry has a skilled and diverse workforce and, through our new Cyber Security Council, there are clear paths for those wishing to join the profession,” said Cyber Security Minister Nigel Adams.

“It’s fundamental that cyber security is seen as a nationally recognised and established profession with clear career pathways,” said Simon Edwards, IET Director of Governance and External Engagement.

“With cyber skills shortages already emerging at every level, we are committed to working with the Government and the National Cyber Security Centre on delivering the rapid, yet capable development of specialist cyber skills to meet the growing needs of the industry, manage risk and secure the next generation of talent.”

Alongside this funding, the Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET) has been selected to help design and deliver new UK Cyber Security Council to coordinate the existing professional landscape. The aim will be to create an accessible career path, which is appealing to those entering the workforce.

This is the challenge which the UK is facing; a shortage of skilled workers to address specialised tasks which are emerging in the digital economy. While cyber security might not be a new concept, though as it is one which has been ignored by industry for years, this under-preparedness has been passed onto the workforce.

Recent research from DCMS suggest 54% of businesses in the UK have a basic technical cyber security skills gap. The biggest areas seem to be forensic analysis, penetration testing, security architecture and using threat analysis insight.

Interestingly enough, while this is a promising initiative to retrain workers and provide a boost to the workforce, some of the building blocks are still missing; the UK education system and the national curriculum is still to focused on traditional and classical topics, and not on skills and vocations which will create the workforce of tomorrow which is needed today.

Take coding as an example. There are schools where ICT, where coding is an element, is a compulsory topic at GCSE, but these are not the majority. The workplace of the future is going to be increasingly digital, and if the UK Government envisions a continued shortage of competent digital employees, surely reforming the curriculum would be a good step-forward. Perhaps these subjects which drive potential employees towards data science, software engineering and cybersecurity, should be make compulsory by default.

This is a positive step-forward, though retraining schemes like this are reactive. A long-term, sustainable solution to the skills shortage would be to address the challenge at the root.

UK Transport Committee questions safety of hands-free

A UK Department of Transport Committee has released a report demanding the use of mobile phones, including hands-free features, be banned while driving.

Quoting research which suggests traffic collisions where mobile phones contributed resulted in 773 casualties, including 43 deaths, in 2017, the Committee is calling for tighter rules and regulations for mobile devices while driving. Hands-free features have also been targeted, with the Committee claiming the safety benefits are misleading.

“Despite the real risk of catastrophic consequences for themselves, their passengers and other road users, far too many drivers continue to break the law by using hand-held mobile phones,” said Chair of the Transport Select Committee, Lilian Greenwood.

“There is also a misleading impression that hands-free use is safe. The reality is that any use of a phone distracts from a driver’s ability to pay full attention and the Government should consider extending the ban to reflect this.”

Although it is quite clearly more dangerous to use a mobile device while driving, a bit of common sense needs to be applied here. If a driver is using the full hands-free capabilities of the phone, in the sense said driver only interacts with the device using the voice interface, exceptions should be written into any rule changes.

Looking at the hands-free features of the phone, is this anymore distracting that listening to the radio or having a conversation with the person in the passenger seat? Perhaps an enforceable screen-lock should be introduced to ensure the driver is not tempted to make use of other features while in the car, but banning voice interactions with the device should surely mean the driver should be banned from having a conversation with passengers?

This is perhaps what the misleading nature of hands-free is; users are not making use of the entire suite of features. If the user has to tap the screen to accept a call or scroll through contacts to make a phone call, if is clearly distracting. However, there is no reason the user would have to take their eyes off the road if all hands-free features are being used.

Interestingly enough, your correspondent did a quite test to see how easy it was to do to operate hands-free.

Davies: OK Google, send a text to Dad

Google Assistant: For that, you’ll need to unlock your phone

Davies: OK Google, search for directions to Cardiff Castle

Google Assistant: The best way to Cardiff Castle is…

This is where the issue might lie. If unlocking the phone is a requirement to make use of hands-free features, it pretty much undermines the benefits. It’s not every feature which requires the device to be unlocked, however these are communication devices. This is quite an oversight, and while there will be changes to the settings which can be made, it is not the promise which has been relayed to the consumer through advertising.

The Committee is absolutely correct that rules have to be tightened up. Two weeks ago, a White Van Man managed to argue against a traffic violation as he was reportedly using the video function on the phone while driving. To break the rules today, data has to be sent or received from the phone while driving. This is a grey area which of course should be corrected.

However, an outright ban on smartphone usage, which is being called for here, is an incorrect approach to future-proofing rules and regulations for the digital economy.

Speaking to BBC Radio Two, Greenwood has suggested the best approach would be to put a mobile phone in the boot prior to beginning driving. However, this would be incredibly difficult for those who rely on a smartphone for work. Take delivery drivers, for example, who need to find out about the next job, or taxi drivers who need accurate navigation applications. What about paramedics or police who have to be engaged with a radio constantly?

A spokesperson from the RAC has countered Greenwood’s point, suggesting police should focus on enforcing current laws instead of creating new ones. Research suggests enforcement of laws focused on using mobile devices has dropped by two-thirds since 2017. The RAC spokesperson suggests these new laws are going too far.

In reality both are correct. Greenwood is right in suggesting current laws are not stringent enough, they were largely written in 2003 when a mobile device was a completely different product, though banning devices completely is unreasonable. There are considerable benefits to using a smartphone while driving, assuming the user is making proper use of hands-free features and engaged with the road.

What you have to consider here, and we suspect Greenwood has not, is the ‘law of unintended consequences’. Mobile nurses won’t be able to do their jobs properly and surely if talking to someone on the phone using hands-free is dangerous, singing along to the radio or talking to a passenger is exactly the same? The law has to be consistent. It is still a distraction, but no-one is considering banning having children in the backseat.

If people use the hands-free features correctly, there is no difference from the distractions people face today. Perhaps the focus should be on tackling misleading claims, introducing screen locks while driving, forcing drivers to make use of built-in Bluetooth features and improving the application of the voice interface.

Regulation for the sake of regulation is always a dangerous game to play, but it is often the outcome when technology-illiterate individuals, with little understanding or consideration of the future, are in-charge of making the rules.

US Security Advisor lands to rub shoulders with BoJo

US National Security Advisor John Bolton has landed in the UK over the weekend to attend various meetings over the next two days, and its not difficult to imagine what is on the agenda.

Bolton has been a regularly featured name in Republican Presidential administrations since the early 80s and is credited with being one of the more hawkish members of the current ruling mob. With Brexit a key concern for many parties around the world, the up-coming deadline is likely to feature in many conversations, though with the newly-appointed Prime Minister available for coaxing, China and Iran will also feature heavily.

Prime Minister Boris John is somewhat of an unknown entity in recent months. BoJo has never been far away from Brexit headlines, but after an exit from the Foreign Department in 2018, other comments have been largely immaterial. During the Conservative Leadership campaign, BoJo was kept under control by the PR gurus, with many assuming public engagements would likely do more damage than good to leadership ambitions. This does create somewhat of a void when it comes to the stance against China.

This is an area where BoJo has remained relatively quiet. Of course, there has been the odd outburst and political PR plug, but the relationship with China during the Johnson leadership is still relatively undefined. This could be seen though the latest update on the on-going Supply Chain Review.

During the Supply Chain Review update last month, then-Secretary of State Jeremy Wright gave little-to-no details on the Government stance. Legislative updates were promised, and homages paid to the value of increased supply chain diversity, but no decision, or suggestion of, on the role of Huawei in the UK were offered. Reading between the lines, Wright did not want to stick his neck out when a new PM was on the verge of being appointed.

Where BoJo sits is an unknown entity.

BoJo has made some big promises on the campaign trail for the leadership position, while he still has to deliver on the big Brexit claims made three years ago. Some of these were built around the idea trade negotiations would be simpler outside of the European Union, suggesting China would play a role in the post-Brexit future of the UK. This contradicts the US relationship however.

The Trump administration is very anti-China, with Huawei absorbing the largest damage in this prolonged trade-conflict. BoJo is somewhat of a pet favourite of President Donald Trump, however it will be interesting to see whether the ego-stroking with be returned from Number 10. Downing Street.

With Bolton in town, it is not difficult to imagine how the conversations with evolve. Bolton is a constant critic of the European Union, labelling the bureaucrats ‘EUroids’ in one of his books. His aggressive stance against China has been clear over the last few months, and we suspect this will continue through discussions over the next couple of days.

The decision on Huawei in the UK is still hanging in the balance. Bolton is very well-placed to nudge the UK towards a more strident position against China, though how healthy this is for the UK remains to be seen. The next couple of days might offer some interesting insight to the BoJo administration and the UK’s position in the international conflict which has dominated headlines for months.

The UK is turning to VoD – Ofcom

Half of UK homes now subscribe to TV Streaming services, reveals a new Ofcom report, as the country increasingly opts for video-on-demand.

The precise proportion is 47%, which is lower than some might expect given the apparent ubiquity of Netflix, Amazon Prime, etc, but still a significant jump from 39% just a year earlier. Furthermore, since many people have more than one service, the total number of subscriptions increased by 25%. If this keeps up it won’t be long before nearly all of us spend our evenings consuming copious amounts of VoD.

This is the headline finding from Ofcom’s latest Media Nations Report, which takes a deep look at the country’s media consumption habits. Any parent won’t be at all surprised to hear that younger people far prefer on-demand video over traditional broadcast and, as a result, consumption of the latter is in rapid decline. Thanks to the oldies broadcast telly is still the most popular form of video consumption, but not for long.

ofcom media nation all video

ofcom media nation all video 16-34

ofcom media nation all video change

ofcom media nation all video change 16-34

“The way we watch TV is changing faster than ever before,” said Yih-Choung Teh, Strategy and Research Group Director at Ofcom. “In the space of seven years, streaming services have grown from nothing to reach nearly half of British homes. But traditional broadcasters still have a vital role to play, producing the kind of brilliant UK programmes that overseas tech giants struggle to match. We want to sustain that content for future generations, so we’re leading a nationwide debate on the future of public service broadcasting.”

The UK state seems to be in a mild panic about the decline in viewership of what it considers to be public service broadcasting, which means any old rubbish that’s publicly-funded. It’s highly debatable how much of the content produced by the BBC provides any kind of public service other than distracting us for a few minutes, but Ofcom seems to still think it’s really important.

This last table is especially illustrative of the current state of play, with younger adults all about YouTube and Netflix. If Ofcom had surveyed teenagers we suspect that bias would have been even more pronounced and as these trends continue the TV license fee is going to become increasingly hard to justify.

ofcom media nation all video minutes

Disney complicates video streaming market with $13 per month bundle

Content giant Disney has unveiled what it presumably hopes will be a Netflix-busting bundle of Disney+ ESPN+ and Hulu in the US.

Disney+, the core streaming service for Disney movies and other video content, had previously been announced at a cost of $7 per month. Disney also owns the majority of sports content network ESPN, and general TV content service Hulu, so it’s bundling them together with Disney+ for a grand total monthly cost of $13 – five bucks less then they cost individually and coincidently exactly the same as regular Netflix costs in the US.

“I’m pleased to announce that in the United States, consumers will be able to subscribe to a bundle of Disney+, ESPN+ and ad-supported Hulu for $12.99 a month,” said Disney CEO Bob Iger on the company’s recent earnings call. “The bundle will be available on our November 12 launch date.”

Commentary on this seems to be universally positive, with many observing that it’s very good value for money.

“The move throws down the gauntlet to Netflix and other rival services,” said Tech, Media and Telco Analyst Paolo Pescatore. “For sure it is competitively priced and seeks to reduce fragmentation. Initially, it seems that Disney is looking for scale but will need to increase revenue to recoup the significant investment. Consumers have some tough decisions ahead as they can’t sign up to all the streaming services.”

FWA is starting to gather momentum in UK

The idea of Fixed Wireless Access (FWA) has been belittled in the past, but it is moving beyond ‘flash in the pan’ territory and becoming a genuine alternative across the UK.

Some have been harping on about the benefits of FWA for years, while others have snubbed the concept for more traditional means of broadband connectivity, but there is growing interest in the technology throughout 2019. The latest to join the hype is Macquarie Capital, yet another private investment company looking to capitalise on the sluggish telco segment. Here, the team is backing the rollout of FWA solutions in rural communities.

“The roll-out of superfast and ultrafast broadband has too often focused on the UK’s urban centres – leaving untapped investment requirements in the UK’s rural communities,” said Oliver Bradley of Macquarie Capital.

“We believe that using Macquarie Capital’s unique principal investment and development expertise there is a significant opportunity to work with Voneus to accelerate the deployment of UK rural broadband, this will help unlock significant economic and social benefits for the UK.”

Working alongside emerging ‘alt-net’ Voneus, Macquarie Capital will invest £10 million initially and an additional £30 million through various different build-out phases. FWA will be the tip of the spear, as Voneus looks to focus on 900,000 homes across the UK countryside who still don’t have access to Superfast broadband services.

“Macquarie Capital’s backing is a huge endorsement of Voneus’ business model and vision, as well as an indication of how much work still needs to be done to connect the many homes and business across the UK that still do not have access to decent broadband services,” said Steve Leighton, CEO of Voneus.

While the only option for genuine 100% future-proofed broadband connectivity is fibre, the FWA revolution does offer considerable benefits. Firstly, it is faster to deploy as last-mile connectivity is over-the-air, removing the complications of civil engineering. Secondly, it is cheaper to deploy raising the interests of the telcos. And finally, it satisfies the need for the moment.

FWA could be viewed as half-way house on the road to full-fibre deployment as it offers the connectivity speeds which are required today. Some Government targets for broadband infrastructure are non-sensical as they focus on technology not the desired outcome. If the immediate desire is to deliver relevant download speeds in the home, this can be done through FWA solutions. There is no reason why FWA can’t address the immediate challenge, assuming of course there are on-going plans to rollout fibre infrastructure over a reasonable period of time simultaneously.

This is what Voneus is proposing. It will deliver FWA connectivity in areas which have largely been ignored by the traditional providers, while also working the business case to deploy full-fibre broadband in the future.

This approach might irritate some of the traditional telcos in the UK, but there are cases around the world where it has been proven a success. Over in the US, Starry is a FWA ISP which is rapidly expanding. Although it is focused on multi-dwelling units in major cities, the theoretical business model, and customer appetite has been proven.

Closer to home, Three and Vodafone have also launched their own FWA propositions for 5G. It will be interesting to see how these convergence strategies play out, but Three already has 800,000 home broadband subscribers through its acquisition of UK Broadband. This is an area of great potential for these two broadband challengers, especially should the reliability of FWA be proven as 5G rolls out across the country.

The idea of a fibre spine and wireless wings is not a new one, but it is certainly one which has merit. Here, Voneus could certainly gain traction in areas which have been neglected by the traditional player because of the high-cost of deploying infrastructure. FWA can be a good idea, just as long as its not the final goal for the ISP in question.