WE ARE CURRENTLY LOOKING FOR PARTNERS WHO CAN MARKET AND RESELLER OUR BANDWITH SEGEMENTS AND IDIRECT MODEMS IN AFRICA.

BENEFITS OF PARTNERS ARE AS FOLLOWS

-10 PERCENT BANDWITH DISCOUNT FOR RESELLER ON
MONTHLY BASIS

-10 percent Discount for resellers on IDIRECT INFINITY 3100 SERIES MODEM COST.

FREE IDIRECT INFINITY 3100 SERIES MODEM ON DEDICATED 256/256 kbps

IDIRECT MODEMS COST N200, 000 each (5% vat excluded)

DEDICATED      price
64/64             110, 000
64/128             165, 000
128/256             325, 000
256/256             435, 000
           
DEDICATED      
64/128                     165, 000
128/256                     325, 000
256/512                     675, 000
512/1024                 1, 250, 000
512/1024                 2, 500, 000
512/1024                 4, 250, 000

FOR ENQUIRIES CONTACT
Engr Lukmon
SVD CONSULTING
2ND FLOOR LEFTWING AWOLOWO HOUSE
AWOLOWO WAY,
IKEJA.
LAGOS.
Tell: 2348056363230
email:- olukmon@svdconsulting.com, info@svdconsulting.com
website: www.svdconsulting.com

This is your opportuniy to become a millioniare being a svd partner/reseller

=====
Forum admin:  All prices above for shared service have been removed due to failure to specify sharing ratio.

My post does not perhaps belong here and the Forum admin should perhaps move it to different discussion panel.  

I wanted to comment on the statement made by the Forum Admin:  "All prices above for shared service have been removed due to failure to specify sharing ratio."

Frankly I think it would be better if all pricing was kept off the forum, but that's just me.  My issue is the requirement to specify a sharing ratio.  

In my experience, "sharing ratios" are mostly marketing hype.  A sharing ratio or contention ratio only has meaning if a specific number and type of devices and applications are being used for a given service.  For example; if 10 sites share 1Mbps of bandwidth (10:1 ratio), and each of those 10 sites has 10 PCs and performs only basic Internet access (browsing, email); that's 100 PCs sharing 1Mbps, and that service quality might be OK.  However what if the 10 sites each have 50 PCs, and what if half of them run VoIP and the other half run webcams?  That service will be very poor, and highly oversubscribed - yet both advertise a 10:1 sharing ratio.    

Sharing ratios, in my experience are useful for designing a new network when the operator makes some basic assumptions about their "typical" customer and they take into account the expected number of PCs and the 'heavy bandwidth' applications that will use the service.  A sharing ratio gives the network operator a rough guideline for bandwidth needed to begin their new service.

Once it's launched however, all bets are off.  If you end up selling to large sites and there is a lot of real-time traffic such as voice or video, then that 10:1 sharing ratio that sounded so good when you started, may provide service similar to a 40:1 service that was designed right from the start to deliver an oversubscribed residential or small office/home office service.  

Unfortunately there are no objective benchmarks to compare one service provider's service with another.  New services often start out great and quickly degrade as sites are added; as the provider's business model doesn't allow purchase of more bandwidth until "N" sites are installed.  

The best thing customers can do is look for longevity, experience and low churn rate.  As with most things in life, you tend to get what you pay for.

Pat

Happy Christmas everyone !

Pat, you make a good point about sharing.  I am hoping that service providers will use fair access policies that give each site a share proportional to their monthly payment.  For example, you might have a 1300k/300k service with sixteen VSAT sites; eight at 32:1, four at 16:1 and four at 8:1 ratio, paying prices like $250, $500 and $1000 per month.

I don't mind people giving their pricing and featuring their services, as long as it is in moderation.   I am however now deleting any prices which relate to shared service unless the sharing ratio is specified to avoid giving misleading expectations.  A 128k/64k service at $100 per month is not that same as a 128k/64k service as a $960 per month.   What is missing in the previous sentence and what are the implications if you want to use such a service for a 2 PC plus one VoIP phone internet cafe ?

A new visitor to this web might be seriously misled in their expectations about price paid and service received.  I want to avoid this, so please, no more prices for  shared services without the ratio being stated.

I welcome suggestions about how services can be described so customers might compare services.

The problem is that different systems uses different fair access policies and terminology.

Even dedicated services vary, some use header compression, payload compression and QoS so that such a service gives perhaps two or three times as much useful throughput as a plain bit stream.

Best regards, Eric.

Hi Sir,

Would you mind to ome back to me giving prices in US$ as I am not familiar with Niara.
I am in Libreville, GABON and I shall be interested to partner with you.

I should prefer to resell CIR bandwidth to professionals and cybercafes.

Visit us at : www.alphasystems.4t.com