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 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, 99999 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:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
---
---
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
