paulcardoza wrote:
Obviously, no one is going to convince you otherwise, but the least you could do is respond to my posts accurately. I already said the CG in question has superb access point setup. And yes, at least here in this area, installation fees are generally waived as part of the deal.
Lastly, judging by the grousing heard by many a park guest over the performance of their network, I don't think your "vast majority of guests" claim is accurate. Maybe just wishful thinking, as a way to rationalize not spending any money on your CG???
westernrvparkowner wrote:
paulcardoza wrote:
Sorry, but if the infrastructure for wireless is in place, where does all of this extra cost come from? As I said in my post, we have 200+ served by fiber broadband here in our office for $400/mo. And that's for the highest speed offered right now.
Other than a router to connect the service to the wifi system, where is the huge costs you claim coming from? I'm not sure I'm the one with the myopic viewpoint.......
westernrvparkowner wrote:
Paulcardoza, Your view is a bit myopic. The fact is there is much more expense to convert to an ultra high speed wireless network, even if the backhaul is available. Most people are satisfied with either using their own mifi-type plans or are OK with the current wifi that is provided by many RV parks, you know, the type that are good for surfing the net, accessing e-mail and paying bills online. Only very few really feel the need to stream 100s of gigabytes of video a month. So the cost of that upgrade is really not spread across all the sites in the park, but rather only across the sites that would only be rented if such wifi was available. It doesn't make financial sense to spend hundreds or thousands a month to get three additional monthly renters paying $500 a month. It is the same reason most park cable TV doesn't carry premium movie channels, the cost wouldn't be justified by any additional business. People will stay at the park whether they have HBO or not. Same with or without ultra high speed, high capacity internet capability.
My guess is $400.00 per month is considerably more than the park is currently spending. Installation of that kind of service (commercial) is also generally not a free install, but rather several hundred to several thousand more dollars. More routers and more access point antennas cost more. All this to serve one or two guests who really desire such service. Not worth it. You don't want to pay a couple of hundred a month more in data usage charges to get what you want, why should the park spend a couple of hundred a month more, plus the upfront costs to provide it to you? Again, I am guessing the vast majority of the park's guests have no want or desire for that service. They are doing fine with what the park has to offer or have their own data plan that works for them. If it is otherwise, perhaps you could get all the long term guests who really want that service together and propose to the park management that in exchange for bringing in and providing that service, you will all agree to a rental increase to offset the additional expense.
How can it not be more expensive and yet when parks don't do it for whatever reason, it is because cheapskate owners don't want to spend money on their park?
