Following my post about the West African conference on Satellite broadband, and the recent launch of Nigeria’s first satellite, where I looked at the aims of the conference, the main one being that satellite broadband is apparently considered more cost-effective than other forms, I have just read this post by David Muwanga on AfricanLoft regarding broadband infrastructure development for East Africa via an undersea cable. In the article, a member of IPS, the Industrial Promotion Services, one of the backers of the project, states:

‘The estimated cost of satellite bandwidth on a monthly lease ranges from $1,700 to $6,000 per megabit/second per month. The same bandwidth on the SEACOM cable will be approximately 20% of current costs.’

Now, clearly this contradicts the information that supports the satellite conference which is be taking place today.

What concerns me is not really that I don’t know the answer as to which is going to be cheaper, but that there is such apparent confusion (or disagreement, or lack of communication…) about the matter within the companies who are developing these projects.

Clearly, there is no immediate problem with having both modes operating at once, but which one is going to be cheaper? Not just in terms of immediate cost, but in terms of long-term costs, with issues such as maintenance, further development and speed considered?

This entry was posted on Friday, November 23rd, 2007 at 8:13 pm and is filed under development, future, internet. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.