No likely to succeed
I do understand the model where femtocells or nanocells are used to extend in-building coverage in businesses or public places such as shopping malls, or the underground. If this provides coverage where there wouldn’t otherwise be any then clearly this is beneficial to the both the user and the network operator (=more revenue). However I don’t yet get the model where femtocells are to be deployed in people’s homes. The main benefit is to the network operator, not the home user. It saves them from spending £400k ea on more basestations. With a DSL connection the home user already has the means to make the call, or to use broadband.
Currently I get 3g coverage in my home so I have no need for a femtocell. If I lived in a poor coverage area and I deployed one of these in my home then I would want a corresponding reduction in tariff. How are they going to sell this to the public? There will need to be good value incentives. What would motivate anyone to have a femtocell in their home to help the operator when the mobile charges are already exorbitant.
Noboby would use their tiny screened pda for broadband when a dsl connection and wifi is already available in the home. Nor would anyone feel compelled to make a 3g telephone call instead of a landline (remember you need to have DSL, so you already have a landline), or even a standard GSM call.
Don’t get it.