August 09, 2005

• $50? Not a chance. At least around here (Portland, OR, USA... dunno what it's like elsewhere), where I can get stand-alone 1.5Mb/s DSL for that price. Shared connections have their own problems, as well. I could see maybe $20/mo, if it was a good connection and not shared among too many people.
• It depends on where you are, I guess. Free Wifi would be a selling point. If you're increasing the cost by $50 a month, then it's not free. I can get a dedicated DSL line for that much. on preview, what fractalid said.
• sorry, that sounded more abrupt than I intended. Maybe you could look at your business model and see if there was a way to reduce costs for the tenants to the point where it would be a minimal difference, but you were still making money. Or you could offer additional services (like free cable) and roll it up into one? I guess it depends on how many units you have and how long you're willing to float the cost.
• THere is no way I would pay $50 more a month for "free" wifi since a wireless router barely costs $50 and both cable and dsl internet access are cheaper than $50 a month (at least in the US) (not to mention that if you have a full apartment building the cnaces are good that there is at least one perosn who has a wireless router that they haven't secured which ='s free internets.
• Yeah, same here in Seattle. I get free wifi in my little cave but only because the owner lives upstairs and shares it with the 2 tenants. I have to agree that $50 is not a good deal for it tho. Comcast is only $45 a month i think. you have to give them your street address to see the price? wtf is that?
• I think it's a great idea, provided that the 'free' part doesn't increase overall rent too much over standard units with no free wi fi. I've got 'semi-free' wifi using my housemates upstairs service, but I had to spring for the wifi router and hook it up, plus every now and then kick back some spare change for 'beer money'. $50.00 every couple of months or so. . .
• Well, they wouldn't know about the price increase, so it would appear "free". But maybe a better term is "included". It's rare that an apartment here doesn't include basic cable. It's pretty standard, and does affect the price when not included (it aften means the building is old, so pay cable is just one of many reasons why the price is affected). I do think it's a good idea, but I'm not sure how effective it'll be without cable included. This is why it'll be hard to get monkey advice on this, because real estate standards are very different in every location. In some locations, $50 is a huge difference in rent prices. Here in Hawai'i, $50 is not that much of a difference. Studios vary between $400 and $900, so that $50 wouldn't really get noticed. Back in Nevada, that $50 could keep the apartment empty for months. I think that if it's good internet service, you have a dang good chance of keeping the tenant much longer than they would've stayed without the service included. And keeping tenants longer means less time without someone paying rent for an unused place.
• Personally, as a renter (and likely to remain so for a long time), I wouldn't like included things like basic cable or internet, though utilities like heat, electricity, etc are totally different, and having essential utilities included is very high on my list of good things for an apartment. But I want to choose whether I want unnecessary services. I don't have and don't want any cable tv. I don't actually own a tv, though my roommate does - and our five aerial channels are just fine. I do want highspeed internet, but as others have noted, we pay $50 for our own dedicated DSL, and actually got a free wireless router with it.
• Sponsorship. You get some company to sponsor the wifi. Instead of popup ads you could just tack ads to the tenants doors every morning. The carpet in the halls could be replaced with giant ads underfoot. In each toilet you could also place urinal cakes with the companies logo displayed for all to pee see. Sponsorship. When the fridge opens in each apartment, you'll hear the first four drumbeats of New Orders Love Vigilantes thus insuring Factory Records compliations will enjoy strong sales in your neighborhood.
• I would do it out of the goodness of your heart to make the units more attractive to people, but I wouldn't charge for it. I don't know if you own the units outright or are still paying on them (that makes a difference in how much of the money coming in is profit). If you have a good profit rolling in, $1000 is not a huge amount, and it would be a nice perk for your renters. If you do decide to raise the price based on that, $15 or so per month would be more fair. A lot of it depends on the number of units, their condition, and your finances. My feeling is that if you can't afford to do it and give it away, it's not a great idea on either end of the deal. And if you do it, try to make sure the network is at least somewhat secure.
• Speaking as someone who chose his current place of residence (in part) based on the glorious promise of not having to directly interface with the cable company and DSL provider, I'd say go for it... but not at $50 a month extra. Aside from the price point, consider that you're going to be the person everyone starts yelling at when the connection goes down. I've seen the rampaging herds of angry MySpace users in this building when the connection burps, and it's scary.
• I pay $40/mo for fast DSL, could pay $30 for 1.5 mbit. That is, however, with a one-year commitment, which might be offputting to tenants. Plus, having it work immediately is nice. Still, I wouldn't charge more than $20 if you're splitting it multiple ways. I currently share my line with two tenants, just on an 'included' basis. Everyone's happy, I don't notice much difference, why not?
• Thanks for your advice guys... and I completely understand that I guess I could've been more clear on the matter, so here goes. The monthly rent for one of these units is about $3,750. (NYC, don't ask... I think it's nuts too) I was planning on getting a premium commercial class cable connection, which I believe runs about $200 per month. Split up between the four units, that's $50.... so I guess it "kinda" is free... I guess what I really meant to ask is: Would you choose one apartment over another, at market value, if one had wi-fi and the other didn't?
• With a rental price of $3750 per unit, you're only looking at raising the rental rate by 1.3% to have free wireless internet access. If I were paying that much to rent an apartment, another $50 would be nothing. However, be prepared to have to deal with the inevitable "My internet isn't working" calls from your renters. By providing the service to them, you're going to be the defacto whipping boy when it comes to outages. Whereas if the tenants have their own DSL/cable service, they can call their provider and complain, and you get to sleep in late again on Sunday mornings.
• As more and more people start putting up wifi APs in your building(s), they are going to encounter more and more problems with interference. Most APs default to channel 6 and if you have a dozen APs on the same channel in a relatively small area, wifi will not work well, if at all. Even if you don't install your own, you might wish to work with your tenants to minimize interference; this includes 2.4GHz phones (which I believe is a source of an intermittent problem in my neighborhood). If you set up a system, it would be worth it work with someone with experience setting up larger installations (maybe that's you, in which case this advice would superfluous). It should begin with an environmental scan. I like to leave a good scanner that logs all traffic, including "hidden" APs up for 48-72 hours. Then, if there is a lot of existing traffic, it should be mapped to figure out where the APs are (done with scanning software with GPS tie-ins). Finally, placements should be tested, and optimized based on potential sources of interference, both APs and other sources like reenforced concrete. You will also need policies about use of personal APs and other devices likely to cause interference. The good place to find a person with the right skills might be a local university. Many universities have been dealing with large installations and figuring out where existing installations are.
• What jim_t said. You are now an ISP responsible for customer service. Also have you tested the WiFi from each unit? Depending on the building construction, sometimes the access may be compromised. Also $3750, holy f*cking sh*t! (from someone who lives in a city where a 2 bedroom apartment goes for US$900/month)
• And also, what's $3750 getting you in NY these days? And are you in Manhattan or one of the boroughs?
• Yeah.. I've thought about that jim_t... I've not had a problem with my current cable service since, well, ever, but I have a few issues on the "user" side, b0rked preferences and such, which I was able to troubleshoot and fix myself... and if any potential clients aren't as savvy, I guess they might end up calling me... which would suck, but it's a risk I'm willing to take. alum_root.. thanks for that input. As an owner of only one computer, I never thought about a multiple per unit AP issue. Definitely something I have to look into. I work in IT but am not very familiar with wireless networks since the powers that be are paranoid (some may argue rightly so) and can't move on past the security and trustworthiness of the ethernet cable. I would, however, be calling in someone who is familiar with such a set up to help. (hence the price tag, with labor) finally jim_t... to sate your curiouslity the place is in lower manhattan, near SoHo... and they're 1 and a half bedroom apts.
• Don't forget to stock up on this
• For $3750/month, I would expect at least some kind of "hi-speed" internet service provided for "free." Well, I've been looking into such units for my boss over the past couple of days (he's actually willing to pay up to $6000/month for an apartment in Manhattan that meets his requirments: non-smoking, quiet, and hi-speed internet). Right now, he's looking at taking a place that goes for $4900/month, which does include cable internet access. He's even willing to take it site-unseen! *head spins*
• FOr $3750 a month I would expect all the hookers and blow I could handle...
• I would agree that, for what you're charging in rent, a $50 addition is nothing and the addition of hi-speed for "free" would look very attractive. If you don't want to deal with customer service issues (after you've done everything you can to make sure it works right given what people have said above), make up a little booklet with the right numbers to call and common troubleshooting tips. When people call you, refer them to the booklet. I pay less than US $500 for a 2 bedroom (teeny tiny) *house*. I do *not* belong in the Big City