Brazil's carrier map is dense in the cities and stops abruptly. Most of the country is past the end of it. In the metropolitan regions you choose between routes. Two hundred kilometres out you find one route or none, and the answer stops being a purchase and becomes a design. The realistic ladder is fibre where it exists, licensed fixed wireless to bridge the gap to the nearest served point, and satellite where neither reaches — with the honest note that each rung costs more per Mbps than the one below it.
We map what exists at the coordinate rather than at the nearest city, and deliver the whole set under one contract with one SLA basis, including for companies with no Brazilian entity yet.
These get treated as one category and they are not. A secondary city usually has carriers — just few of them, with long lead times and an SLA that reads well and is backed by one technician covering a large area. The problem there is choice and enforcement, not existence.
A genuinely remote site has no carrier at all, and the problem is construction. Confusing the two is how a project ends up with a four-month fibre quote for a site that needed a radio link in three weeks, or with a satellite contract for an address that had fibre across the road.
The address list, or the coordinates where there is no address. What comes back is what actually exists at each one — the routes available, price, lead time and SLA — normally within two business hours, and with a straight answer where the honest recommendation is the cheaper option rather than the bigger one.
For companies still setting up in Brazil, we contract on your behalf so none of this waits for the CNPJ.
In order: check whether fibre genuinely reaches the gate rather than the coverage map; then licensed fixed wireless if there is line of sight to a served point, which delivers in weeks rather than months; then satellite where neither reaches or where the site must be live before either can be built.
A serious option, and the rung most projects skip. Where line of sight exists it is delivered in weeks, it shares no duct with the fibre, and it is frequently the most practical second path at sites where a diverse fibre route does not exist at any price.
A secondary city has carriers, just few of them, with long lead times and thin field coverage — the problem is choice and enforcement. A remote site has no carrier at all and the problem is construction. Treating them as one category produces the wrong design and the wrong budget.
Normally within two business hours we come back with the routes available at that address, with price, lead time and SLA. For coordinates with no address we check what can physically be built to them.
Yes. We contract on your behalf so ordering and delivery are not blocked by the CNPJ, and we remain the local counterpart in Brazil for support and escalation afterwards.
Related: satellite connectivity in Brazil · mining and energy sites · last mile in secondary cities · wireless versus fibre for last mile
Dedicated IPLC and Ethernet private line between Portugal and Brazil, with presence in Lisbon, Madrid, Milan and Frankfurt through the operators in our group and partner networks. Contractual SLA, 24/7 NOC, 100 Mbps to 10 Gbps+. We accept payment in USD and EUR.
Group network: AS14840 (5–10 Tbps, 60 Hudson and Equinix Miami) and AS269311 (100 Gbps at IX.br Rio, at the Globenet cable landing station). Both on PeeringDB.
RFQ by email: [email protected] · NOC 24/7: [email protected]
Send us the address. We check which carriers can actually deliver there and reply with price, lead time and SLA. Reply within 2 business hours.