At least there are some that try and take a stand for
their customer and not just hand over the keys to the
palace when the good ole boys ask.
What I find particularly troubling is this image of the govt paying
for these surveillances. The price seemed to be from around $325 for
an install plus $10 to $750 install and $500/mo.
Now, let's not drop right into the easy and trite "don't they deserve
to be reimbursed" right off. Sure, they/we do.
But was this reimbursement, or profitable?
The troubling image that goes like this:
ISP VP #1: Any revenue ideas?
ISP VP #2: I hear XYZ is being paid pretty good money for surveillances.
ISP VP #1: How much?
#2: Word is Verizon is getting $775/install and $500/mo.
#1: How many of these are they handling?
#2: I don't know, maybe millions of them?
#1: Millions? You're talking half a bilion a month?
#2: Well, that's VZ.
#1: Still...what's the COGS?
#2: Not much, sunk cost mostly, some netadmin labor, might need a
few extra hands to form a team if it scales up, billing, sales,
some PR and contract management.
#1: Wow, how do we get a piece of this?
#2: Let me make a few calls and get back to you...
Accurate? Plausible? Nonsense?
or
What I find particularly troubling is this image of the govt paying
for these surveillances. The price seemed to be from around $325 for
an install plus $10 to $750 install and $500/mo.Now, let's not drop right into the easy and trite "don't they deserve
to be reimbursed" right off. Sure, they/we do.But was this reimbursement, or profitable?
IMHO surveillance is not a profit center. Most don't get enough
requests for critical mass and the efficiency to allow for that. The costs
referenced in the article are not entirely unreasonable either if you think
about the process from service to execution, end/end.
The fact that there are associated fees at all is a positive in terms of a
deterrent to "some" abuses and act as one level of accountability. Expenses
require justification even in the government. The actual cost for the
government to operate a surveillance end to end and depending upon where in
the ladder it is can be significant, to the tune of tens of thousands of
dollars a week. That usually translates into what matters e.g. surveillance
of parking offenders vs. terrorists.
From the capex perspective, it can be high and complex for most based on
the lack of significant volume. That's where the surveillance managed
services come into play, to help to cut the expense.
Standard offering:
Shaping the expense picture:
The troubling image that goes like this:
ISP VP #1: Any revenue ideas?
[ clip ]
Accurate? Plausible? Nonsense?
I'd go with the latter. You'd need volume and that kind critical mass, at
least last I knew, was limited.
Here's the last askCALEA congressional report(s) I can find that contain
some numbers around that:
http://askcalea.fbi.gov/reports/docs/2009wiretap.pdf
[ Anyone know if there is anything later or newer? This transparency is
important ]
I'm not quitting my online collaboration tools just yet.
YMMV, and Best,
-M<
[ clip ]