Does the Industry Need a Coverage Quotient?

In talking with friends in the industry, I came up with an idea, (which probably exists, I just have never seen it). The idea is to develop a better price comparison index for solutions the industry knows are superior, but not necessarily understood by customers.

The primary example we were discussing was LoRaWAN vs. Wi-Fi, but there are other winners that can be added to the mix, like NB-IOT via Satellite vs MNO LTE.

The idea is that most companies look at the price of a gateway and see the difference in price as a one-off.  Let’s face it, Wi-Fi will win most of the time. But, if you price out a few scenarios with multiple floors and probable dead zones (needing special attention in Wi-Fi) the balance of power changes to the benefit of alternative solutions. 

This probably applies to NB-IoT, which has never gotten a chance to succeed in the U.S., primarily because of geography. However, with the adoption of NB-IoT by some LEO solutions, I suspect the remote monitoring market might show advantages versus LTE.

Now comes the tricky part. How do you display the index?

The first answer is you want a price per footage based on the scenarios – TCO / Square Footage equals $XX.XX.

I am thinking if you did this straight up, you would get the quotient you are looking for that tips in your favor.

In addition, you may want to add a secondary Risk quotient based on the likelihood of full coverage. This can comprise various obstacles to success, such as contention and known dark spots needing supplemental equipment.

For example, let’s say Wi-Fi has a decent chance of covering 90% of the building. That would change the quotient to TCO x (100% - 90% = 10%) / square footage, resulting in our original number $XX.XX + ($XX.XX x 10%) = a higher cost per fq ft., based on the conditions of the deployment (such as an office building with contention on the Wi-Fi or coverage obstacles).

Here is how I would display it in a table.

Scenario (floors of coverage + total sq ft), Coverage Quotient, and the Risk Quotient.

And then each technology would be in rows.

I think this levels the playing field and helps educate the user, but what do you think?