Question : Broadband over powerline equipment costs

I am doing some research on the feasibility of broadband over power lines aka power line communications technology. I cannot find any relevant costs for the equipment online, and I have not got any answers from the equipment manufacturers I approached.

I need information on the prices of the following products or an equivalent system

CT CouplerTM
CT Backhaul-pointTM
CT BridgeTM
Powerline Modems at Premises
CT ViewTM Network Management System

Thanks.

Answer : Broadband over powerline equipment costs

As a note, you could probably simply call Ambient or Bechtel and get the price quotes, or go to their site and get them by request.

I'm waiting to get a response from them on pricing.

Ambient uses a box to "jump" over the transformer, to get around the transformer barrier.  They call their technology "PLC," which is pretty descriptive both of Power Line Communications and how the box must work as a Programmable Logic Controller [the original meaning of 'PLC'].  These are pretty much the same as any telephone distribution repeater or box.  The cost varies between about $2,400.00 and $10,000.00, but can probably be brought down to about $1,000.00 after research & development costs are recouped.

The modems are not much different from telephone and DSL modems, but prices are currently subject to R&D recoup too.  The curve slides down as more are sold, from somewhere around $100.00 down to $29.95, with a manufacturer's cost somewhere between $3.00 [Taiwan] and $10.00 [U.S. and European.  The cost, eventually, is the materials cost, as the manufacturing becomes automated.  Just like most electric and electronic devices.

Ambient has already done a test in Hong Kong, and now they're on to Con Ed and New York, Manhattan.

Their White Paper on deployment is pretty descriptive of their strategic plan, but again, is based on the former meter reader technologies and powergrid management, which is to say, that old Instrumentation and Control applications side of industrial networking.  Which has been around a long time.

Now, they wish to tap the consumer market, and probably rightly so, as power companies also seek to increase revenues without a lot of PUC regulation.

They have a plan of offering competitive pricing within smaller countries and sort of third world countries, which means revenues from World Bank Consortium and foreign aid.

They have been secretive about costs because the R&D does not reflect eventual consumer cost.  To announce such costs is not in their best interests for growth, it always looks negative to the public, which does not see the eventual sliding scale, which always slides downward, like a simple inverse function, and then levels off at a competitive value with other technologies.  This is just an engineering and manufacturing fact.

Nearly all prospectuses are really just best guesses using comparable devices.

So, it is quite legitimate to use the initial costs of existing technologies, get their cost curves, and project them onto a new technology, such as PLC.  It's how most engineers do it until they have factual data sheets.

You could also go over there SEC filings, Annual Reports, etc., and find out how much was spent on development of their patented products.

I think though, that if you contact them, they'd be more than willing to give you some figures, past and projected.  After all, they're in the phase of promoting their revenue cash cow.

As an engineer, I've called many companies in the past about pricing on new development.  Nearly all have sent more information that I asked for, including GE, RCA, National Semiconductor, Bell Labs, AT&T, Intel, Cisco Systems, Western, and many, many more.  These people like to promote what they're trying to do through knowledgeable people.  And all have provided not just technical, but pricing as well as even some proprietary information.  It's amazing what you'll get if you make a telephone call and get on a personal level.

The White Paper from Ambient covers a description of what you're looking for, 1.) the fibre backbone mainframe [almost always], 2.)  Repeaters (or 'jumpers') for the four node types S, X, R, and GW nodes, 3.)  is really the GW layer or node, not much difference in cost from a NID, not referred to as "main power" in Electrics, but as the post-distribution transformer or residential side  4.)  Network Management Systems goes back to the power generating plant and its mainframed grid.

There are other considerations, which is why reading the White Paper is a good idea.  Things like the underground 35kV underground MV couplers are obviously much more expensive than the pole mounted ones.

I did a study, years ago, at British Telecom on this underground construction.  BT knows the most about this I think.  Some of the factors in the U.S. are the regulations regarding the depth of high voltage power line placements.  About 4 feet for a 4600V line, so you can easily see it's probably going to be deeper and better isolated for these extremely lethal values, and consequently to construction cost is going to be exponentially higher.  All of these, in England, are "tunnels," not just buried lines.  Tunnels cost a lot of money; about a thousand times the cost of poles.  But, as you can see, they are mostly restricted to substation power grids.  However, in England, as in most of Europe, even residentials are underground, where they don't "uglify" the landscape as they do in the U.S.  This also lowers the ongoing costs of maintenance, as once the tunnels are built, it doesn't take a truck with a bucket and all kinds of insulation for that truck and bucket to service lines.  Long term costs are hardly considered in the U.S.,which we all feel leads to mistaken cost effectiveness based on short term deployment.

Bechtel and Ambient have something like $43 Billion to play around with.  They'll need it for residential deployment.  But I suspect their budget is well under $1 Billion for the initial rollout.  The return is usually expected to be about 15 times in the first successful year, which they project as being shortly after 2004, 2005 from their White Paper.

The costs of the equipment, and even most of the salaries, is dwarfed by such industrial development costs.  But this is no surprise.  Original DBS [Direct Broadcast Satellite] investment was $5 Billion in 1986.  The cost of launching rockets and satellites being the biggest cost, followed by developing the necessary "boxes."  That cost was also projected onto about a five year plan ending in deployment.  The cost of the satellite receivers and on-premisis equipment was negligible as it was projected to be recouped from montly fees, with the devices basically "given" to the customer.  The one year Agreement nearly always covers the cost of supplied equipment, along with a profit margin of about 50% of generated revenues.

The same will apply to PLC if it takes off.

And all of that should be "gleanable" from both Bechtel's and Ambient's stockholder reports, etc..  Look under Research & Development Costs.  Which are a big tax deduction and listed as such.

The Con Ed pilot is in Westchester, and is partially state funded, therefore, the contract(s) have to be public records.  You could call Con Ed, or the state offices, and find out more about the costs, or you just as easily take a drive to Westchester and ask a lineman how much the boxes cost and get an idea of his salary, etc..  That's research.

Amperion is up in Andover, Mass.  A call to them, and/or a ride up there to meet them, is worth a lot more than book or Internet research.  I had to travel to London to talk to BT, and stayed there quite a while.  That's the price of valuable and informative research.  Whether it's for Columbia, NYU, or the board of a NYSE corp.

Apparently, Amperion has positioned itself by winning a patent dispute with Sieman's and ABB in Munich.  I don't know how this relates to Bechtel and Ambient, but it seems that some big players have been battling this out.

I think most of my estimates are really quite accurate, based on experience in large environment R&D, rollout, and deployment, certainly within an order of magnitude of the actual figures, of that I'm sure.  I've done all three, design, R&D, and rollout, and have had responsibility for the budgets of all three, in the ranges I mentioned.  Both Ambient and Amperion have either had to build manufacturing plants, or subcontract out for the devices, after they'd successfully built at least prototypes.  Looking for and finding this data usually requires that "personal" approach with the inventors and their companies.  I know, also from experience, that building the prototype goes from about $10,000.00 at home, for a small device, to $1 Billion for a mainframe in the largest of of corporate environments.  The at home project yields something similar to the modem device.  The projected sales price is about $30.00 to $100.00  For the larger venture, the projected sales price is about $10,000,000.00 to possibly $25,000,000.00 each.

Your PLC companies have similar costs.  On a gradient scale with the complexity, size, and function of the device.

Building a plant can cost about $2 Billion to perhaps $5 Billion, with plant, research, and training facilities.

Salaries are from the Department of Labor studies, and the actual cost from the SBA seminars, which are usually run by former, or present, CEO's of some significant corporations.

Their figures are acceptible everywhere.

For the cost analysis of the simple devices produced, as well as the complex ones, it is acceptible to use existing products as the manufacturing, etc., will not vary far from these values.  They can't if they are going to be competitive with existing technology.

The foreseen cost effective savings in PLC would be the "in place" physical network layer; that is what is attracting the major investors.  Certainly, it is cheaper to install a box on a pole, moreso than getting the pole, digging holes for it, stringing lines, etc..

The one downside is the fear of the power line for Internet connectivity.  Residentials don't like being connected to a power line for computer Internet stuff, and the phone companies and cable companies are going to play on that, probably with a lot of hype.  After all, someone is trying to take a bite out of their cash cow.

But, if you consider that the phone company voltage is already near the line voltage, the argument doesn't hold up well under counter attack.  And so, they too are switching, or trying to switch, to full fibre optics communications, a safer and faster method.

Cable simply doesn't know what to do in this market and the satellite market; they're losing marketshare very fast.

Your cost analysis and profitability margin studies can neglect the individual costs of devices, labor, etc., and take them as a summation, rather than accounting for them on an individual basis, as an optimized margin of a simple business model Integral, which you can find at any engineering school or business school, Moore, Wharton, MIT, or Harvard.

A PE [Professional Engineer] in your state offices, an engineering professor or economics professor, can provide the method and formula, as should any CEO be able to.

And you can pretty much take all of this to a professor, stockholders, or a CEO and verify that this is how they do it.  This, and the personal approach to researching a problem.

CEO's and PR for Amperion should be ready, willing, and able to grant you an interview for your research, as it promotes their market.  You can also track them down at shareholder meetings.  That's how reliable research is done.  On a personal level.  Of course it requires a lot more chutzpah, but that is how one gets to the top position in a university, a business, government, or the stock exchange.

Try starting out by contacting the decisionmakers.  Get an interview.  Ask how much these things cost.  I don't know that there are many on EE that know these answers.  If it's that important to you, you'll have to go the traditional route.  If it's not that important, any guess or answer will probably do.

I don't know if I'd bet on PLC's success; perhaps if the CEO's can convince me with the complete plan, but until then I remain skeptical.

I'm keeping this for my book, it looks good to me.