Wireless Tech Chat

Yet another big-city wireless network falls by the wayside. AT&T has informed St. Louis city officials that they are killing their plans to develop and deploy a muni WiFi network that was supposed to roll out over the next two years.

According to the company, high costs and technical issues were behind their decision. The plan, as described by AT&T, was to mount transmitters on the city’s 51,000 streetlights, but the problem was that many of them are not powered during the day. Other methods of bringing network signals to the masses were considered, such as mounting them on various infrastructure spread througout the area, but all of them were too costly for both the city and AT&T to commit to, so the decision was made to scrap the whole thing.

Just like other major cities including San Francisco and Chicago, the path to muni WiFi, which was once on an upward swing, is now struggling to stay afloat. As discussed in an earlier post, the Corpus Christi, Texas network model may be the one to simulate by cities big and small moving forward, but all eyes will also be on Philadelphia as mass roll out of its own wireless network which, ironically, is being built and managed by EarthLink, the poster child for the roller-coaster ride that is citywide wireless, will get underway by the end of this year into next year. If the Philly network can prove effective, then maybe, just maybe, muni WiFi can get back on its feet.

[Via NetworkWorld]

Well, things aren’t ALL bad for wireless networks. The Springfield, Missouri city council announced this week that the downtown wireless network will continue to be funded, despite opposition by one councilman.

The network, which was developed and is currently managed by City Utilities, allows for free web access for users who are in the core area of downtown Springfield. The netowrk has been in place since 2005, and the city and the county (Greene County, to be exact) are sharing the annual operating cost of slightly over $10,000 with two other Springfield community groups.

Although the $10,000 annual cost is a mere pittance to most municipalities when it comes to operating a wireless network, Councilman Doug Burlison, who voted against the funding, says that the city should not be into the business of funding wireless networks with tax dollars.

Burlison would have a stronger argument if the annual cost was $1,000,000, but quibbling over $10,000 seems a bit petty. But, he is not alone when it comes to voicing a concern over cities getting too financially tied to the development and deployment of a muni WiFi network. The model that calls for providing free access with the expectation that advertisers will flock to the network to sell their goods and services is pretty much a failure–of course, there are some exceptions, but not enough of them to warrant a reversal of opinion.

Cities are also being cautious about becoming anchor tenants in these networks, so the wireless providers AND the cities who give them the opportunity to bid on a project must at the outset make it plain to the potential user base that this initiative is going to cost money, and the way to recoup those costs is to charge a monthly access fee.

Although users may object, the fact remains that purchasing access to a citywide wireless network is a choice, NOT a requirement. If you can prefer to access the wireless internet at a Starbucks or anyplace else that offers it, you certainly have the right to do so.

[Via News-Leader.com]

The proposed wireless network for the city of Sacramento, California has hit another brick wall with the announcement that Sacramento Metro Connect LLC, the vendor chosed by the city council, that it has not secured enough funding to start building the network.

Estimates were that between $7 million and $9 million would be needed to fund the project, which was supposed to be up and running by October 2009.

It wasn’t that long ago that the city backed out of a deal with MobilePro Inc. because the city did not want to become an anchor
tenant of the network, thereby not putting itself into a situation where they would be financially responsible for the network to remain afloat.

Sacramento certainly has tried everything to establish a wireless network for its citizens, but financial concerns as well as the lack of a stable business model has pretty much rendered the concept null and void, at least for the forseeable future.

Unless a few businesses decide to invest in the network, or if there is a major change in philosophy by a majority of city officials, it appears that muni WiFi is a dead issue in this city.

The Bay Area and Northern California have not been having an easy go of it this year when it comes to muni WiFi. The San Francisco network has been in a state of flux since EarthLink pulled out of the project, the Silicon Valley network is also under a great deal of scrutiny, and now with Sacramento added to the mix, the supposed technology bellwether region of the United States has not lived up to its reputation, as far as muni WiFi is concerned.

[Via SFGate.com]

The proposed wireless network for Grand Rapids, Michigan, which is being based on WiMax technology, is not likely to be up and running until around the middle of next year, says a city official.

Clearwire inked a deal with the city to have a network up by the end of this year, but they are running behind schedule, although there are no specifics as to why the city and the potential user base have to wait until mid-2008. There have been some indications that Clearwire’s technology partners, Motorola and Intel, are not developing the equipment necessary to handle WiMax signals fast enough to satisfy the original deadline, but as the project manager, Clearwire takes ultimate responsibility for what happens with regard to the network.

When the network is finally ready to roll, there are some interesting aspects to it that may spur other municipalities to copy what Grand Rapids and Clearwire are looking to do with it. For example, Clearwire will establish WiFi hotspots at various locations throughout the city for those users who choose not to upgrade their computers to work in the WiMax network environment.

In addition, the local government plans to leverage the netowrk to allow emergency responders to access information while positioned throughout the city. The contract also will allow Clearwire to access local infrastructure, including water towers, to position equipment.

The company also says it will provide discounted network service for qualified low-income residents, so the concept of “bridging the digital divide” still lives on, at least in this particular scenario.

[Via MLive.com]

A new report by the Heartland Institute may be the salve that muni WiFi supporters will need to heal the cuts and bruises they have been subjected to over the last few months with regard to the decline of citywide wireless projects across the country.

According to the report, the city of Corpus Christi, Texas seems to be going about it the right way and could end up being the model for future AND current muni WiFi projects. There are quite a few projects going on right now that have been sputtering–most notably, San Francisco–and it might be a good idea for project champions to analyze what Corpus Christi (pop. 300,000) is doing and base their own efforts from that model.

Some highlights, along with my own interpretations, of the report include:

• Cities and municipalities need to take a more “measured approach” in developing and deploying a wireless network. If you promise much, you have to deliver more.
• Focus on what you can provide–if your goal is to streamline government services, then do what you can to achieve that goal. Concepts such as providing universal access and “bridging the digital divide” are just too lofty to reach at the outset. Providing mobile access for local authorities to access information is a great place to start.
• If you’re going to issue an RFP, make sure that what you ask for is realistic. Remember that providers are in it for profit (why wouldn’t they be?), so they will be more than likely to say “yes” to most or all of your requests without question. Being skeptical would be helpful in this case.
• Both parties–local governments and providers–need to be upfront and honest as to how much building the network will cost, and who exactly is going to pay for it. The free access concept just isn’t feasible–users are more than willing to pay for it if they know what they’re going to get.

If muni WiFi is going to survive, it has to undergo a behavioral change and forget about how “cool” it is and get down to basics.

The recent departure of Sprint Nextel’s chairman and CEO Gary Forsee may end up putting a major snag in the company’s plan to build a national WiMax network, which is said to be valued at around $5 billion.

Many wireless companies like Sprint are looking for new revenue streams to augment their traditional cellphone service businesses, so a a natural progression would be to turn to providing broadband wireless service, either through WiFi or, in this case, WiMax. It was only a few months ago that Sprint took the plunge into WiMax, and now things may get a little dicey.

In the immediate term, a wireless network being built by both Sprint and Motorola for the city of Chicago may be affected by the boardroom turmoil, although spokespeople from both companies say that work is still ongoing and on schedule. However, if a major corporation is going to be spending a good deal of time seeking new executive leadership, how much attention is going to be paid to this one single project?

There has been talk that Sprint may spin off its WiMax development business unit, Xohm, into a separate company, which on the surface should keep the people and projects associated with it away from the corporate shenanigans, but inevitably spin-offs nearly always get distracted by the parent company at one time or another. Why would this situation be any different?

However, this is all just speculation when you get right down to it. Sprint may just decide to forge ahead with their WiMax plans because “traditional” citywide wireless networks are struggling and the market opportunity is definitely there for the taking.

[Via Chicago Tribune]

The rapid decline of enthusiasm for citywide wireless networks continues to draw (unwanted) attention with reports indicating this week that MetroFi Inc. has told the city of Portland, Oregon that it plans to stop work on the build-out of the city’s network unless there is more money to fund it, provided either by the city or the company’s investors.

In the best-case scenario, MetroFi would want the city to be an anchor tenant but, like most city governments are doing, the mayor and other local government leaders are questioning whether it would be wise to make that kind of financial commitment without the guarantee of wide usage by residents and businesses.

It truly is amazing how far and how fast the concept of muni WiFi has fallen. You can attribute it to a number of factors, including the decline of Earthlink, who was THE major player in the development and deployment of said networks; the subsequent collapse of the San Francisco wireless network; and pointed questions as to how these networks are going to be financed, particularly if local governments balk at becoming anchor tenants or giving the thumbs-up to providers to apply usage fees.

Although many people would say that the citywide wireless network idea should just fade out and that public-access WiFi should grow through independent hotspots, there still is a chance the concept will work. However, there really needs to be a coming together of industry experts, technology supporters, and government and business leaders to sit down and come up with a workable model that municipalities of all sizes can support. It’s either that, or say goodnight to muni WiFi.

[Via The Oregonian]

Following on the heels of EarthLink’s recent crash and burn, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, a HUGE supporter of the proposed citywide network that would have been managed by EarthLink and Google, is looking to see if anyone else can pick up the pieces and get the effort up and running again.

At this point, it looks like the city will issue another RFP and see what shakes out. In addition, the Board of Supervisors, who had expressed misgivings about the proposed network, will certainly feel even more empowered to scrutinize any new potential muni WiFi deals.

It appears that any new potential suitors will have to detail the finanical parameters of the network to the nth degree as well as ensure that it will be paid for with a minimum of local government involvement. That’ll be tough to accomplish, but there still is an opportunity here that vendors may wish to exploit.

[Via New York Times]

Just came across an interesting story from the Wired website about how far the muni WiFi concept, and a number of big-city projects, have fallen in the recent weeks and months.

Most of the decline is being attributed to economic factors–providers didn’t realize how much it would cost to actually provide service to cities such as San Francisco and Chicago, and at the eleventh hour they were scrambling to persuade local governments to sign on (and pay for) the network as anchor tenants. Cities responded by saying that for the most part their budgets were tight and ponying up funds for a service not deemed essential was just not fiscally wise or prudent.

In addition, there really is no concrete financial plan in place to support these networks. Is it advertising and sponsorships? Is it monthly user fees? Would the local government support it as part of their portfolio of services that citizens pay taxes for?

And let’s not forget that many telecoms and cable companies have turned away from lobbying legislatures from not allowing ISPs to offer wireless access to offering their own service packages, and people are going for them in increasing numbers. If a cable TV customer already pays for TV service, how difficult would it be to have internet service (wireless or not) from their cable TV company and just added to their monthly bill? Apparently, it’s not difficult at all.

However, I still say that it is premature to nail the coffin on muni WiFi. A solid business model will eventually be developed, and then we should see deployments, mostly in the smaller- and middle-sized cities, begin to proliferate.

[Via Wired.com]

This, of course, is no surprise, but according to a spokesperson from San Franciso Mayor Gavin Newsom’s office, EarthLink has pulled out of the negotiations to build a citywide wireless network with Google. EarthLink earlier this week announced a massive restructuring including the layoffs of nearly half of its workforce, and a number of citywide wireless projects they were involved in will either be shelved completely or managed by another vendor.

The San Francisco network is still very much up in the air, and Google may partner with someone else to offer a proposal.

In any event, the staggering downfall of what once was the standard bearer of muni WiFi continues to amaze those of us who pay particular attention to the subject. Although it would be premature to say that this portends the death-knell of muni WiFi, the pale-looking guy in the long black coat with a shovel in his hand is beginning to peer around the corner…

[Via San Jose Mercury News]

Despite all of the bad press muni WiFi has gotten lately (including this very blog), 10 cities in the Front Range area of Colorado are planning to build a shared wireless network.

The communities–Arvada, Boulder, Broomfield, Golden, Lakewood, Louisville, Northglenn, Superior, Thornton and Wheat Ridge–have signed a letter of intent with C-Com Affinity Telecom. BelAir Networks will be providing the equipment necessary to build the infrastructure.

The network will cover roughly 137 square miles and the respective cities say they will support the network. Whether that means they will act as anchor tenants is unclear, but that certainly seems like the logical next step.

As mentioned in the linked story, this could be the type of network plan that could drive muni WiFi in the future. It appears that building networks in the larger cities comes with too much baggage, bureaucracy, and red tape, whereby smaller communities, whether acting along or in concert with neighboring towns, can address the issue more directly and can work out the details in a much more streamlined fashion.

[Via Rocky Mountain News]

By now you’ve undoubtedly read and heard about EarthLink’s announcement of a major restructuring which will include the elimination of 900 jobs–about half of its total workforce–and the shuttering of four regional offices. CEO Rolla Huff said that although the company will expect to lose up to $109 million this year, it will not abandon it’s pursuit of the muni WiFi marketplace.

Despite the difficulties, Earthlink says it remains committed to building the wireless networks in Philadelphia, Anaheim, and other cities it has already won the bids for, but other projects in Houston, Chicago, and possibly San Francisco are likely to fall by the wayside.

In addition, Huff said that the company will work on developing a new business model for muni WiFi, which will likely involve local governments assuming more of the financial risk as well as committing to becoming anchor tenants for the networks.

For a long time EarthLink was essentially the “Big Man on Campus” when it came to muni WiFi, and their recent actions certainly will not put a good light on the concept of citywide wireless networks. It remains to be seen if the company can pick up the shattered pieces and start anew, or this really is the beginning of the end, both for them as well as muni WiFi. There is an opportunity for other providers to zoom in and provide wireless services, but they’re going to have to do it in a way that will have to be financially and technologically prudent. Time will tell if this will come to fruition.

[Via InformationWeek]

I’ve been swimming against the tide by saying that despite many concerns about municipal WiFi, mainly because the business model has yet to be truly defined, that the concept will survive and eventually thrive. Now I’m not so sure.

Chicago city officials are shelving plans to build a citywide wireless network after negotiations with EarthLink and AT&T, the two suitors for the bid, failed to materialize into a finalized contract. At the time when the city’s intentions to build a network were annnounced early last year, it looked like the Second City was going about it the right way. They issued a nearly flawless RFP document that lined out in specifics what was expected from the network, what the winning bidder would be responsible for, and what the city would do and could provide to help the process move forward. Everything looked good, and many of us who blogged about it thought this network would be the industry standard.

Cut to August 2007, and things have changed drastically. Chicago specifically pointed out to its suitors that the city would not lay out any funds to build the network, plus it would not commit to being an anchor tenant, either. As a result, the parties have backed away from the table, and a citywide wireless network is unlikely to happen anytime soon.

Plus, as the linked article suggests, the price of Internet access is coming down, especially with cable companies offering triple play packages (cable TV, phone, Internet) for less than $100 a month, and it is proving to be a winning combination in more and more households. In addition, free public WiFi access is becoming more prevalent, especially in the bigger cities, so the scramble to get into the muni WiFi game is waning, at least for the time being.

Things could certainly change, however, for Chicago and other cities big, medium, and small once somebody comes up with a business model that nearly everyone can live with. What probably needs to happen is that a meeting of some of the execs of the major muni WiFi players–EarthLink, MetroFi, ePath Communications, etc.–as well as industry gurus like Craig Settles should take place and they work to hammer out a business template that all parties can agree upon and enact.

Something like that needs to happen, or muni WiFi’s slide into oblivion will come about sooner than any of us ever expected.

[Via Chicago Tribune]

With the recent announcement of Long Island’s Suffolk and Nassau counties awarding their muni WiFi project to e-Path Communications comes the serious thinking about what this network will do for residents and businesses.

At this point, officials from both counties are looking at ways to leverage the wireless network, with thoughts ranging from data being sent from electric meters through a router to the utility, wireless surveillance cameras being monitored by local and county police officers, and various government services being completed by workers while away from their offices.

As we’ve discussed here before, the muni WiFi concept has been taking its fair share of hits lately, and it might be wise for the Long Island project to find usage in the aforementioned areas before network supporters begin making their pitches to the consumer sector. Plus, with Long Island being such a large area and one of the most heavily taxed areas in the U.S., the time to start talking about user fees may be in the future. However, the project is expected to cost around $150 million, so it will be important to have both county governments and larger institutions (universities, hospitals, etc.) get on-board as paying anchor tenants so the project isn’t left wanting for funds as build-out progresses.

It’s not going to be an easy sell, but we are definitely in the midst of a paradigm shift in the muni WiFi world, and relying on just the “coolness factor” of the technology is not going to cut it anymore.

[Via Newsday]

Trenton, New Jersey, the state’s capitol, is looking at possibly developing and deploying a citywide wireless network.

After issuing an RFP back in the spring, the only company that responded to its specs was e-Path Communications of Tampa, Florida. At this point, the city and the company are working out details on how the plan could be accomplished.

It would be interesting to find out if any other companies responded to the RFP and, if so, what excluded them from being considered. There is talk of issuing another RFP to gain further interest, but whether that idea gets off the ground remains to be seen.

Although New Jersey’s capitol city, Trenton continues to have its share of problems, including economic issues as well as a high crime rate. However, city officials believe that a wireless network could be leveraged by the police department for surveillance as well as accessing data while on patrol.

In addition, e-Path would likely look for the city to be an anchor tenant and have government workers use the network to streamline services. E-Path offers a basic wireless network service for users at about $20 a month, but because Trenton has more than its fair share of economically challenged residents, some sort of tiered-service platform would most definitely have to be worked out.

[Via NJ.com]