Which is why they only had 3 respondents to the original RFP (Verizon
was one, and declined the winning bid 1 month after it was awarded to
them), and why there are only 3 parks that have been awarded in the
current 6 park RFP, one of which was awarded to Friends of Dag
Hammarskjold and NYCwireless. Friends of... offered the Parks
Department $1 per year for the franchise fee.
Dana Spiegel
Executive Director
NYCwireless
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.NYCwireless.net
+1 917 402 0422
Read the Wireless Community blog: http://www.wirelesscommunity.info
On May 17, 2006, at 4:44 PM, Dustin Goodwin wrote:
So Parks department wants you to pay them an annual fee, share a
cut of any revenue, pay to install the equipment and operate the
network. Is it me or is this going to make it hard for anyone to do
deploy a service?
- Dustin -
Dana Spiegel wrote:
On May 17, 2006, at 2:33 PM, Dustin Goodwin wrote:
I have been reading all the stories around the Parks Dept. plans
and franchise they granted to Wifi Salon etc.
1. I was surprised that the franchise agreement from the city to
the providers set deadline for turning on service. It does not
seems that the light poll franchise has any similar stipulation
as there appears to be zero usage of those franchises. The quote
from Wifi Salon is telling:
"Marshall W. Brown, the owner of Wi-Fi Salon, said: "That's the
timetable set forth by Parks. Let's see if that's attainable."
Later he added, "It's obviously going to be tight, but I'm
confident we'll be able to pull it off.""
Not clear to me the city can do anything to force them to go
into service. Other then revoke the franchise?
That's right. Though truth be told, Marshall has had 2 years to
make this work so far. The current RFP has defined delivery dates
in it to maintain the exclusivity of the franchise. If you miss
the date (presumably without working with the Parks Department),
they have the right to revoke the franchise they've granted you.
This is something they learned from their awful experience with
Marshal. It was mentioned at the hearing that the extension was
so WiFi Salon could purchase more equipment, but I think that's
just Marshall making excuses. Most of the parks should have been
up by now.
Incidentally, WiFi Salon pays a _minimum_ of $30,000 to the parks
department per year. They like that money, and I'm sure that they
believe (rightly so) that if they pulled the contract, they'd
never get as sweet a deal from anyone else. So their interests
are aligned with the service provider, which goes against the
public's interest.
2. Lots of these articles mention free wifi in the parks. I
doubt the parks franchise agreement dictates free.. I am certain
the light poll franchise had nothing similar.
The current RFP requires free end user service. The light pole
franchise had no such requirement because DOITT expected no Wi-Fi
to be deployed, only cell based wireless. Even with Wi-Fi, they
never expected anything except the extension of an existing network.
Dana Spiegel
Executive Director
NYCwireless
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.NYCwireless.net
+1 917 402 0422
Read the Wireless Community blog: http://www.wirelesscommunity.info
--
NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/
Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/
nycwireless/
Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
--
NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/
Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/
Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
