[mildlyclassic]

Great question. There's a few reasons. First, It's taken ~20yrs, the Indian government, 15 telecom companies and more than $200B to bring ~600M out of 1B Indians 4G. Broadband deployment is more expensive and currently only 20M Indians have 10mbps or greater 'broadband' connections. Even at Wifi Dabba's dramatically lower deployment cost, the price tag to connect 500M Indians is enormous and we're not willing to wait 20 years. Even if we're insanely successful and we raise a ridiculous amount of capital, the sheer magnitude of capital required is crazy high. Second, The reason net neutrality, censorship and other malaise that ails the internet happens is because of the high deployment cost of broadband networks, this automatically makes ownership of these networks only accessible to nation states and mega large corps. Power becomes centralized. This approach we are taking at Wifi Dabba is one small step in exploring more scalable ownership, deployment and maintainence models. The basic logic is this, as the price of broadband distribution tech goes down, the more number of people that can afford to buy and distribute it and therefore everyone gets connected faster. We'd like to accelerate that process. We have raised venture capital from YC and others and will continue to do so, but we also have a really strong focus on the long view.

[sramam]

> Second, The reason net neutrality, censorship and other malaise that ails the internet happens is because of the high deployment cost of broadband networks, this automatically makes ownership of these networks only accessible to nation states and mega large corps. Power becomes centralized.

But isn't the centralization happening here too? Since the investment capital has term-limited returns, eventually the equity and equipment belong to wifi-dabba.

Why should one expect a different outcome?

[dahdum]

> Even at Wifi Dabba's dramatically lower deployment cost, the price tag to connect 500M Indians is enormous and we're not willing to wait 20 years.

I think I understand, and it's similar to how railways in the US were built. Savvy investors won't cover the tsunami of small region losses you'll need to scale quickly. They'll only want to fund dense, urban markets with the lowest risk.

[Pyramus]

Thank you for the reply.

I do understand your capital requirements in X years down the line.

I also respect your goal of decentralisation and community ownership. (As an aside, what does ownership mean? If illegal things were to happen on my PoP are you saying I am liable?)

Yet, my question stands: Why do you want USD 2M in cash from retail investors today? Why not self-fund the first X PoPs, show it works, then scale?

[tobyjsullivan]

> This approach we are taking at Wifi Dabba is one small step in exploring more scalable ownership, deployment and maintainence models.

It sounds like this $2M raise is an experiment more than the end goal.