Re: [WISPA] Municipal Broadband - A Growing Threat (to Telcos)

2006-08-04 Thread Dawn DiPietro

Marlon,

The problem I am seeing with Muni wireless projects is that they are 
mostly focused on the free wifi cloud. There is a problem with this 
logic and I completely agree this is wrong. The purpose of a wireless 
network for municipal is the cost savings every month for services they 
would have anyways. Wireless would be used to as an alternative to save 
money for local government. The funding is only for upfront costs 
capex not ongoing costs opex. The purpose of the wireless network 
would be to drastically reduce opex possibly saving the taxpayers 
money. But it needs to be built in such a way it can support all the 
services need to make this happen.


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro


Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote:

What the government should do is just stay the hell out of the way and 
stop taxing those of us that work our fannies off so that they can 
give it to those that won't.


These projects aren't about access to anyone guys.  They are about 
getting names in the paper.  In the end they will fail.  Most of them 
anyway.  And ALL of the ones that have a free internet component.  
Nothing the government ever does is free.  The closest example I can 
think of to free wifi would be a city park.  But the park doesn't 
require any investment from the user so that probably doesn't fit either.


Marlon
(509) 982-2181   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 1:06 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Municipal Broadband - A Growing Threat (to Telcos)


Thats the big thing government forgets to realize, that the costly 
part of FREE wifi to deliver is End user infrastructure and support, 
not deployment of the transport network.  Thats why I believe many 
Government projects will not be successful. I can give you a perfect 
example.  I almost had some contracts for broadband to street cameras 
in DC, and my intent was going to broadcast FREE wifi from every 
camera location.  The broadband to camera contract revenue would have 
justified the cost for me to pay for the Wireless deployment, and did 
not require the full bandwidth of the radios for the project.  It was 
only going to cost me an extra $110 per site (one time) to add a SR2s 
to layer on top the WiFi capabilty portion.  Where the real cost was, 
was the end user CPE or Outdoor antenna, tech support, and buying 
computers, etc.  The plan was maybe I'd set up a 900 number for the 
support, or pre-paid support hours via the web portal. Politically it 
would have also been good, maybe even press worthly, those annoying 
fines from traffic cameras, now gives back to the commmunity with 
FREE Wifi.


What the government should be doing is providing grants or loans for 
free end user equipment. Then Third Party WISPs would flock in grand 
numbers, to provide the transport network.
Or tax credits for builders thatinclude structure wiring, or allow 
easements for central wireless backhaul to the building. What doesn't 
add up to me on Free Wifi is the Governement tries to find a Internet 
provider to pay for it, through the benefits of advertising or access 
to eye ball traffic. But if a Marketing company were to give PCs to 
the End user, what better way would there be to control eye balls of 
the end user. The ISP doesn't need to control the transport network 
to control the end user, if they control them via the PC.  I think 
they are making the wrong partnerships. There are also many assets 
that  are needed such as assets of the property owners, and that 
isn;t available unless property owners/managers are included in on 
the deal somewhere.


Tom DeReggi




Peter R. wrote:

Most RFP's I have reviewed including Atlanta are hot for someone to 
come in and give away free wi-fi, especially to schools and the 
under-served sections of town.


There are a couple of  problems:
1) How do you monetize that?
2) Most of the under-served don't have computers

The only real threat to the telcos and cablecos is that the cheap 
users will use the free system, so some of their revenues will 
decrease. But so will support costs. And I am sure at some point 
they will stop maintaining and/or upgrading low revenue facilities, 
furthering the Digital Divide. But that won't stop them from 
collecting USF monies.


There are monies available to build these networks if the 
governments could get it together:
Quality of Life grants; Homeland Security funding; USF monies for 
libraries and schools - and those are just the ones off the top of 
my pointed beanie.


It's all coming to a head. Between now and 2009, lots of turbulence 
to come. Much of it hangs on the lame telecom re-write and  how 
much

Re: [WISPA] Municipal Broadband - A Growing Threat (to Telcos)

2006-08-01 Thread Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181
What the government should do is just stay the hell out of the way and stop 
taxing those of us that work our fannies off so that they can give it to 
those that won't.


These projects aren't about access to anyone guys.  They are about getting 
names in the paper.  In the end they will fail.  Most of them anyway.  And 
ALL of the ones that have a free internet component.  Nothing the government 
ever does is free.  The closest example I can think of to free wifi would be 
a city park.  But the park doesn't require any investment from the user so 
that probably doesn't fit either.


Marlon
(509) 982-2181   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message - 
From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 1:06 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Municipal Broadband - A Growing Threat (to Telcos)


Thats the big thing government forgets to realize, that the costly part of 
FREE wifi to deliver is End user infrastructure and support, not 
deployment of the transport network.  Thats why I believe many Government 
projects will not be successful. I can give you a perfect example.  I 
almost had some contracts for broadband to street cameras in DC, and my 
intent was going to broadcast FREE wifi from every camera location.  The 
broadband to camera contract revenue would have justified the cost for me 
to pay for the Wireless deployment, and did not require the full bandwidth 
of the radios for the project.  It was only going to cost me an extra $110 
per site (one time) to add a SR2s to layer on top the WiFi capabilty 
portion.  Where the real cost was, was the end user CPE or Outdoor 
antenna, tech support, and buying computers, etc.  The plan was maybe I'd 
set up a 900 number for the support, or pre-paid support hours via the web 
portal. Politically it would have also been good, maybe even press 
worthly, those annoying fines from traffic cameras, now gives back to the 
commmunity with FREE Wifi.


What the government should be doing is providing grants or loans for free 
end user equipment. Then Third Party WISPs would flock in grand numbers, 
to provide the transport network.
Or tax credits for builders thatinclude structure wiring, or allow 
easements for central wireless backhaul to the building. What doesn't add 
up to me on Free Wifi is the Governement tries to find a Internet provider 
to pay for it, through the benefits of advertising or access to eye ball 
traffic. But if a Marketing company were to give PCs to the End user, what 
better way would there be to control eye balls of the end user. The ISP 
doesn't need to control the transport network to control the end user, if 
they control them via the PC.  I think they are making the wrong 
partnerships. There are also many assets that  are needed such as assets 
of the property owners, and that isn;t available unless property 
owners/managers are included in on the deal somewhere.


Tom DeReggi




Peter R. wrote:

Most RFP's I have reviewed including Atlanta are hot for someone to come 
in and give away free wi-fi, especially to schools and the under-served 
sections of town.


There are a couple of  problems:
1) How do you monetize that?
2) Most of the under-served don't have computers

The only real threat to the telcos and cablecos is that the cheap users 
will use the free system, so some of their revenues will decrease. But 
so will support costs. And I am sure at some point they will stop 
maintaining and/or upgrading low revenue facilities, furthering the 
Digital Divide. But that won't stop them from collecting USF monies.


There are monies available to build these networks if the governments 
could get it together:
Quality of Life grants; Homeland Security funding; USF monies for 
libraries and schools - and those are just the ones off the top of my 
pointed beanie.


It's all coming to a head. Between now and 2009, lots of turbulence to 
come. Much of it hangs on the lame telecom re-write and  how much of a 
push-over Martin will be. If he gets a spine, it could be a great 
economic revival.


- Peter


Dawn DiPietro wrote:


All,

As quoted from the article;

“The competitive impacts of municipal broadband will be especially 
threatening to incumbents to the extent that muni nets can be cost- 
justified
by increased efficiencies, cost savings and other ‘internal’ or social 
benefits captured by local governments, schools, and other public 
institutions,”

the report states.

While some understand the cost savings these networks can bring others 
are still focused on the free wifi cloud for the population in these 
areas. There needs to
be more focus on the fact that there are so many other benefits to 
these municipal networks

Re: [WISPA] Municipal Broadband - A Growing Threat (to Telcos)

2006-07-31 Thread Dawn DiPietro

Peter,

Unfortunately some of these types of funding has as many strings 
attached to it than the RFP's themselves.


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro



Peter R. wrote:

Most RFP's I have reviewed including Atlanta are hot for someone to 
come in and give away free wi-fi, especially to schools and the 
under-served sections of town.


There are a couple of  problems:
1) How do you monetize that?
2) Most of the under-served don't have computers

The only real threat to the telcos and cablecos is that the cheap 
users will use the free system, so some of their revenues will 
decrease. But so will support costs. And I am sure at some point they 
will stop maintaining and/or upgrading low revenue facilities, 
furthering the Digital Divide. But that won't stop them from 
collecting USF monies.


There are monies available to build these networks if the governments 
could get it together:
Quality of Life grants; Homeland Security funding; USF monies for 
libraries and schools - and those are just the ones off the top of my 
pointed beanie.


It's all coming to a head. Between now and 2009, lots of turbulence to 
come. Much of it hangs on the lame telecom re-write and  how much of a 
push-over Martin will be. If he gets a spine, it could be a great 
economic revival.


- Peter


Dawn DiPietro wrote:


All,

As quoted from the article;

“The competitive impacts of municipal broadband will be especially 
threatening to incumbents to the extent that muni nets can be cost- 
justified
by increased efficiencies, cost savings and other ‘internal’ or 
social benefits captured by local governments, schools, and other 
public institutions,”

the report states.

While some understand the cost savings these networks can bring 
others are still focused on the free wifi cloud for the population 
in these areas. There needs to
be more focus on the fact that there are so many other benefits to 
these municipal networks such as water meter reading, public safety 
communications etc. For
these applications to work a robust network has to be built with the 
following in mind low latency, 9 reliability, high capacity, and 
so on. Cost savings for
local government, businesses and residential should also be factored 
into the equation for services such as telecommunications times X 
number of phone lines just
for government offices and broadband access for all schools. I 
understand that this is only the tip of the ice burg and there are so 
many other applications and cost savings for these networks. My point 
is that the network has to be built robust enough to be able to 
support it all including a wifi cloud.


Thanks to Jack for bringing this article to the list. :-)

Regards,
Dawn DiPietro

http://www.telecommagazine.com/newsglobe/article.asp?HH_ID=AR_2244



---
---

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] Municipal Broadband - A Growing Threat (to Telcos)

2006-07-31 Thread Tom DeReggi
Thats the big thing government forgets to realize, that the costly part of 
FREE wifi to deliver is End user infrastructure and support, not deployment 
of the transport network.  Thats why I believe many Government projects will 
not be successful. I can give you a perfect example.  I almost had some 
contracts for broadband to street cameras in DC, and my intent was going to 
broadcast FREE wifi from every camera location.  The broadband to camera 
contract revenue would have justified the cost for me to pay for the 
Wireless deployment, and did not require the full bandwidth of the radios 
for the project.  It was only going to cost me an extra $110 per site (one 
time) to add a SR2s to layer on top the WiFi capabilty portion.  Where the 
real cost was, was the end user CPE or Outdoor antenna, tech support, and 
buying computers, etc.  The plan was maybe I'd set up a 900 number for the 
support, or pre-paid support hours via the web portal. Politically it would 
have also been good, maybe even press worthly, those annoying fines from 
traffic cameras, now gives back to the commmunity with FREE Wifi.


What the government should be doing is providing grants or loans for free 
end user equipment. Then Third Party WISPs would flock in grand numbers, to 
provide the transport network.
Or tax credits for builders thatinclude structure wiring, or allow easements 
for central wireless backhaul to the building. What doesn't add up to me on 
Free Wifi is the Governement tries to find a Internet provider to pay for 
it, through the benefits of advertising or access to eye ball traffic. But 
if a Marketing company were to give PCs to the End user, what better way 
would there be to control eye balls of the end user. The ISP doesn't need to 
control the transport network to control the end user, if they control them 
via the PC.  I think they are making the wrong partnerships. There are also 
many assets that  are needed such as assets of the property owners, and that 
isn;t available unless property owners/managers are included in on the deal 
somewhere.


Tom DeReggi




Peter R. wrote:

Most RFP's I have reviewed including Atlanta are hot for someone to come 
in and give away free wi-fi, especially to schools and the under-served 
sections of town.


There are a couple of  problems:
1) How do you monetize that?
2) Most of the under-served don't have computers

The only real threat to the telcos and cablecos is that the cheap users 
will use the free system, so some of their revenues will decrease. But so 
will support costs. And I am sure at some point they will stop 
maintaining and/or upgrading low revenue facilities, furthering the 
Digital Divide. But that won't stop them from collecting USF monies.


There are monies available to build these networks if the governments 
could get it together:
Quality of Life grants; Homeland Security funding; USF monies for 
libraries and schools - and those are just the ones off the top of my 
pointed beanie.


It's all coming to a head. Between now and 2009, lots of turbulence to 
come. Much of it hangs on the lame telecom re-write and  how much of a 
push-over Martin will be. If he gets a spine, it could be a great 
economic revival.


- Peter


Dawn DiPietro wrote:


All,

As quoted from the article;

“The competitive impacts of municipal broadband will be especially 
threatening to incumbents to the extent that muni nets can be cost- 
justified
by increased efficiencies, cost savings and other ‘internal’ or social 
benefits captured by local governments, schools, and other public 
institutions,”

the report states.

While some understand the cost savings these networks can bring others 
are still focused on the free wifi cloud for the population in these 
areas. There needs to
be more focus on the fact that there are so many other benefits to these 
municipal networks such as water meter reading, public safety 
communications etc. For
these applications to work a robust network has to be built with the 
following in mind low latency, 9 reliability, high capacity, and so 
on. Cost savings for
local government, businesses and residential should also be factored 
into the equation for services such as telecommunications times X number 
of phone lines just
for government offices and broadband access for all schools. I 
understand that this is only the tip of the ice burg and there are so 
many other applications and cost savings for these networks. My point is 
that the network has to be built robust enough to be able to support it 
all including a wifi cloud.


Thanks to Jack for bringing this article to the list. :-)

Regards,
Dawn DiPietro

http://www.telecommagazine.com/newsglobe/article.asp?HH_ID=AR_2244



---
---

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:

Re: [WISPA] Municipal Broadband - A Growing Threat (to Telcos)

2006-07-27 Thread Dawn DiPietro

All,

As quoted from the article;

“The competitive impacts of municipal broadband will be especially 
threatening to incumbents to the extent that muni nets can be cost- 
justified
by increased efficiencies, cost savings and other ‘internal’ or social 
benefits captured by local governments, schools, and other public 
institutions,”

the report states.

While some understand the cost savings these networks can bring others 
are still focused on the free wifi cloud for the population in these 
areas. There needs to
be more focus on the fact that there are so many other benefits to these 
municipal networks such as water meter reading, public safety 
communications etc. For
these applications to work a robust network has to be built with the 
following in mind low latency, 9 reliability, high capacity, and so 
on. Cost savings for
local government, businesses and residential should also be factored 
into the equation for services such as telecommunications times X number 
of phone lines just
for government offices and broadband access for all schools. I 
understand that this is only the tip of the ice burg and there are so 
many other applications and cost savings for these networks. My point is 
that the network has to be built robust enough to be able to support it 
all including a wifi cloud.


Thanks to Jack for bringing this article to the list. :-)

Regards,
Dawn DiPietro


Jack Unger wrote:



http://www.telecommagazine.com/newsglobe/article.asp?HH_ID=AR_2244




---
---

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] Municipal Broadband - A Growing Threat (to Telcos)

2006-07-27 Thread Peter R.
Most RFP's I have reviewed including Atlanta are hot for someone to come 
in and give away free wi-fi, especially to schools and the under-served 
sections of town.


There are a couple of  problems:
1) How do you monetize that?
2) Most of the under-served don't have computers

The only real threat to the telcos and cablecos is that the cheap users 
will use the free system, so some of their revenues will decrease. But 
so will support costs. And I am sure at some point they will stop 
maintaining and/or upgrading low revenue facilities, furthering the 
Digital Divide. But that won't stop them from collecting USF monies.


There are monies available to build these networks if the governments 
could get it together:
Quality of Life grants; Homeland Security funding; USF monies for 
libraries and schools - and those are just the ones off the top of my 
pointed beanie.


It's all coming to a head. Between now and 2009, lots of turbulence to 
come. Much of it hangs on the lame telecom re-write and  how much of a 
push-over Martin will be. If he gets a spine, it could be a great 
economic revival.


- Peter


Dawn DiPietro wrote:


All,

As quoted from the article;

“The competitive impacts of municipal broadband will be especially 
threatening to incumbents to the extent that muni nets can be cost- 
justified
by increased efficiencies, cost savings and other ‘internal’ or social 
benefits captured by local governments, schools, and other public 
institutions,”

the report states.

While some understand the cost savings these networks can bring others 
are still focused on the free wifi cloud for the population in these 
areas. There needs to
be more focus on the fact that there are so many other benefits to 
these municipal networks such as water meter reading, public safety 
communications etc. For
these applications to work a robust network has to be built with the 
following in mind low latency, 9 reliability, high capacity, and 
so on. Cost savings for
local government, businesses and residential should also be factored 
into the equation for services such as telecommunications times X 
number of phone lines just
for government offices and broadband access for all schools. I 
understand that this is only the tip of the ice burg and there are so 
many other applications and cost savings for these networks. My point 
is that the network has to be built robust enough to be able to 
support it all including a wifi cloud.


Thanks to Jack for bringing this article to the list. :-)

Regards,
Dawn DiPietro

http://www.telecommagazine.com/newsglobe/article.asp?HH_ID=AR_2244


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/