Month: June 2014

FirstNet – Carriers squeeze the market! Old timers stay in the fight!

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment
One thing I remember from my past, that still resonates with me today, was when someone said, “you need to check your equipment before you jump out of the airplane. Once airborne there is no turning back without some major issues”, this same comment holds true today.
The major issue that FirstNet will face in the coming months, years, will be the shortage of available telecom firms to build-out the Public Safety Broadband Network. I spoke about this in an earlier article addressing the shortage of Tower Crews, but in this case that shortage will also include lack of the big guys in the EPC and GEC industry. The catalyst for this shortage is the stereotype of the telecom bust in 2000. When the telecom industry burst back in 2000, all the major telecom players, GECs that is, pulled back from any type of market in telecoms. GEC means general Contractors. EPC means Engineer Procure and Construct.
All the big EPC and GEC players have either eliminated, or tucked their existing telecom units into other, more profitable, industry units. For example: Bechtel used to have Bechtel Telecoms, Parsons used to have Parsons Telecommunications. Bechtel tucked telecoms under Bechtel Power, and Infrastructure.  Parsons tucked theirs under Environmental and Infrastructure, why they did this makes sense. In order to insure the success of ongoing work, and to hedge bets if the industry comes back, these EPCs and GECs want to have some type of expertise they can sell in the field. The market never really recovered so those business groups withered on the vine. It’s hard to compete with such large overheads as the carriers squeezed every last ounce of energy from the mid to low-level players in the field – thus the Turf Contractors.
When a lot of people hear the word “Turf Contractor” they believe it’s related to a geographic assignment, when in reality the term is really used to describe the war’s that go on within a geographic market. These wars enabled the carriers to squeeze lemon from a rock; as of today that rock is now a pebble. The effect of this squeezing process forced the big guys out of the market, what is left are the Turf Contractors. These companies continue to work because they have too, so the carriers continue to enslave them. After all, you can’t blame the Turf Contractors due to the market we are in today, but the Public Safety Broadband will be the game changer.
Like I have stated in the past, if a carrier decides to hold off on a market for a couple of weeks, these smaller guys will fold, or they start laying people off. Worse yet, the Turf Contractors will start looking for crumbs with the new asset holders of Crown Castle or American Tower. The fact is we are in the last vestiges of the commercial broadband market, a market that is being consolidated into 3 major carriers who don’t see a future in selling wireless access, rather they see a future in content and services, thus FiOS, Uverse. The issues that were created from the Turf enslavement process will be transferred to the FirstNet initiative unless we take charge now and setup a big new market.
Without the big players being interested in the market, the chance of FirstNet getting it’s build completed, will be a long time coming. I have witnessed two of these situations first hand. The excitement is easy for those who understand telecommunications, but very sour to those that went through the telecom crash of 2000. Most of those sour-apples now sit on the boards, or hold highly influential roles within these giants, which means, if you say anything that resembles the term “telecommunications”, you will be cast out into the shark invested waters of the telecom turf warzone or face the unpopular position of welfare sustenance.
Even if they manage to muster enough support when a very real opportunity exists, an opportunity that will definitely allow the company to move the bottom line, these firms will only pull back when they look internally for operational support. The reason for the pullback is because of the old withered-out telecom infrastructure support and resources, held together with duck tape, cannot deliver on a promise the company does not fully support. How can you commit to a Billion dollar contract with a State, to build out their PSBN architecture, if all you have is some old remnants of EFI (Engineer, Furnish and Install) services that never really took off in their pursuit of the Turf Markets? How do you use your stalwart resource, which has been with the company since the telephone was invented, and expect the leadership that is needed to push the creativity and drive that is required for such complex technology rollouts? Hell, I know a few guys that still use a telephone to communicate with their subordinates. Without some major leadership changes these companies will not be able to compete. The perception that telecoms is a doomed industry is right, when it comes to the commercial telecom market, but the perception does not hold water against the Public Safety Broadband Market.
The Public Safety Broadband Market will enable a new market of players willing to step forward. This will be a major blow for any large EPC who is holding back because of past fears, why? This new market will be defined by the new entrants who will be small, nimble, and quick to respond, and most importantly, very cheap compared to the overheads of the big guys. There still is hope for the big guys.
In order for the big guys to be successful, in this market, will be based on their own willingness to invest in the new creative talent needed to drive it. Just because they come in with inflated overheads for telecoms, protectionism towards change, they will realize that cost is not everything. Some of these States will want to use existing relationships and commit to quality rather than the lowest price, but that means those big EPC/GECs need to resource and market toward the future. As my experience shows me, this will be next to impossible due to the fact that these organizations are infested with those stalwart workers who manage to hold on to work because of old relationships. These players will not rock the boat with the old-timers at the helm, essentially any hint of creativity gets crushed, and thus they are doomed. You can’t blame them, these resources are the last of the old timers who have held the same job for more than 20 years, and they still have fight in them and to them telecom is evil.
The relationships we have today are based on long-term roles of friendships bred from within the market place. I ask you this, if those friendships have been in place for a long time, does that mean those relationships were based on the mindset of the telecom collapse? What happens as these long-term relationships start to retire? We are in the middle of the largest retirement movement in our history – the Baby Boomers. I see this movement as good and bad. Forget about the notion that if you want insurance by playing it safe with old talent – that’s just a fallacy. The network will be built no matter who is in charge of its rollout. The fact of the matter is that it’s all about letting go of the reins and embracing creativity. Creativity is what made the companies in the first place, and creativity is what you set as a goal just after bankruptcy. A word to the wise, these large EPCs and GECs need to avoid the market in its entirety, or grab hold of it and lead the charge. Carpe Diem! Their business may depend on it.   
The thought of having to retire can take a personal toll on anyone, but added with the stereotype of the “telecom bust”, only helps foster resentment to creativity, which means forced change inevitable, and as a result such resentment only forces the “way we have always done business” to defend itself. As the saying goes, there is always a reaction to every action; or every action an inaction. In this case people would say that we must learn from our mistakes, or we are doomed to repeat them; but we must remember the reaction or inaction piece. If we are avoiding issues due to our historical actions, then the opposite must be true as well, that is, we are ignoring future opportunities that we can excel at. In essence we are frozen in time. In the end, the next generation can either sit idly by and wait for those that sit currently in the leadership roles to retire; or they will fight to take over leadership. My suggestion, make it easy on everyone and step aside, let go of those predetermined notions of loss. The markets of yesterday are no longer. Let the new players make their own mistakes, else what have we to learn from? This market will not wait for the next generation, it will just plow over anybody in its way, I recommend that if you are faced with such retirement, just remember, the world will not stop just because you are no longer at the helm. How does a “young guy” like me know this? You can thank my 6 kids for that.
We are our worst enemies, especially, when we are shell-shocked and have built a wall of trepidation to the point that we are frozen in time. Stop worrying about getting hurt, let creativity exhumed as the next generation takes hold and just get out into the market and make an effort. If you don’t then this new market will roll right over you — that new market in telecoms is the Public Safety Broadband Network, a Network that will be twice the size of AT&T and Verizon combined…geographically. The best way to make sure that this next market is a boom is through the Myers Model™ Public Private Partnership…a masterpiece of creativity if I say so myself.
But then again who am I other than…
Just some guy and a blog…..

FirstNet – an expert that wants to help. Try and ignore it only makes it stronger in its pursuit.

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment
People often ask, “what’s in it for me?” or “what do I gain from knowing what I know and applying it the way I apply it?” The answer is quite simple, and it took me a lifetime to understand it.
I had a friend once say “when you die the Hearse that is taking to your grave never has a U-Haul behind it.” So what is it then? Why have I been so enthralled in the telecommunications field for the last 27 years? Was it because society told me I needed to do it? Or was it because I just really liked doing it? All I can tell you is that doing something for 27 years you better like what you are doing, or your life is just giant blob of misery.
I believe that everyone has a gift that was bestowed upon him or her. Those gifts were emblazoned with passion and fulfillment of doing something we love to do. All you have to do is ask yourself — what is it that you just know you are really good at? Is it healing the sick? Is it building the best phone? Is it the ability to understand and decipher the great mysteries of the Universe? Is it playing Basketball? Or is it knowing everything there is to know about building telecommunication networks? I believe there are only two people who really know the answer to those questions and one of them is reading this blog entry.  
The gifts that we are given are what we sharpen and try to perfect, not because society says we must, but rather because it just brings us joy and happiness. Why is it we find such happiness in these things that may not conform to “what we are suppose to be doing” just because society says we must? What would have happen is George Thorogood heeded the advice “get a haircut and get a real job”? As Mr Thorogood has done himself, those gifts need to be spread to anyone that will listen, because what good are those gifts if you don’t have anyone to share them with? Plus what happens when the day comes where we will be challenged as to whether or not we used those gifts for what they were intended and designed to do?
Maybe its because I’m in my forties; maybe it’s because this is all I have to offer everyone; or maybe because I had a near death experience; over the years I have come to realize that the secret to our happiness is already inside of us, we just need to accept what those gifts are and what it is they are designed to do – that is exactly what I have done with the now titled, “Myers Model”.  
My gift over the years was my love for telecommunications and computers. I know it sounds awkward, nerdy and sometimes corny, but it’s true. I don’t know why I’ve always been drawn to knowing what I know with such passion, maybe it’s a curse, or, maybe I’ve accepted something that was off quilt from the start? It wasn’t until these last few years that I have come to realize that by letting go of the notion that I need to conform to a set of standards only delays the ability to accept what we know is our strong suit and just concentrate on delivering what it is we are impassioned about. It’s like George Thorogood playing “Bad to the Bone” and seeing all those people dancing, shouting and singing the combination of words he created, do you think he just did that because it was a real job? (pun intended)
I don’t know why I picked the topic of advancing telecommunications using the Myers Model Public Private Partnership — it’s definitely not as interesting as “Bad to the Bone”. I don’t know why I started this journey right after 9-11. I don’t know why that all I can think about is telecommunications when it comes to work – I just do. It is what it is and all I can tell you is that I have accepted this gift and I want to share it with everyone that will listen.
To me it is clear as day as to what needs to happen to build the National Public Safety Broadband Network, it’s like I was designed to fulfill this role. Whether you believe me or not, maybe it’s our inability to accept something greater than ourselves, it’s all irrelevant to the fact that this is what I know and understand, and I truly believe my task is to let everyone know about it, because in the end, when I am getting a ride in that Hearse, the U-Haul will be picked clean, but the gifts I was able to share will endure for as long as it is needed.
If by constructing the biggest Public Safety telecommunications network ever built, using a model that my gifts developed, and if that is what makes the Nation feel safer, then maybe this is what I am suppose to do. These were gifts given to me, I don’t own them, and I surely can’t take the rewards of its fruit with me when I die. All I can do is concentrate on what I know, and I preach it to as many people as I can, which as of today, has been to more than 37 States making up more than half the Nation – literally thousands of people now. I don’t believe these gifts were given to me to create my own personal monetary gain, why would it, I’m just the messenger. What will I take with me when I need to pack that U-Haul when I die? This is why I have preached on the topic of a model I dedicated 12 years of my life too – a public private partnership model that I know will work — a model that is not tied to a vendor product, or a consulting firms success, nor is it tied to any managed service offering that will generate millions of dollars, I am just talking about a model that will enable our great Nation to construct a vital part of securing our ability to bring care to those in need. In the end it’s just a model, like a radio is just a radio, what good is it is if nobody uses it? Whether you are a conservative, liberal, Muslim American, Native Indian, or just some old white dude, we all benefit from what this model can do. 
We have many within the Federal Government, the States and the commercial industries that all have great intentions for building this Public Safety Broadband Network, what I see as a major issue is the inability to get above the fray of the political scene; the lack of understanding of telecom business models; and the lack of just what telecommunications means. We can get caught staring into the eyes of Kaa all day long, but, if we don’t concentrate on the “bear necessities” we will never get out of the jungle. We need to start by focusing on a small piece first. Pick a State, any State, and allow the Myers Model™ to be tested. In the end what have we to lose? Isn’t it the same network anyway? Plus, the taxpayer-funded model can always be the fallback option. What really gets me upset is people trying to take pieces of the 20-Mhz of spectrum that was clearly given to Public Safety. Whether you believe 20-Mhz is too much doesn’t matter, because in the end only the Public Safety folks have the say…or the President…. or Congress who wrote the Act…. regardless it is not owned by the commercial industry. Plus, my understanding of telecommunications tells me that this 20-Mhz of spectrum will be used completely…trust me. There are a lot of users for this network and with some simply knowledge transfer everyone will be able to understand.
Just some guy and a blog…

FirstNet — too much data is not healthy…. cut the fat and stop farming crap, I mean data.

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment

If there is one thing that the Federal Government does better than the commercial carriers is the collection of information. You can get any kind of map demonstrating coverage based scenarios, to include the social impacts on manure haulers. Maybe we can create a map that demonstrates the broadband necessities of manure haulers in order to convey the amount of manure in transit; this could provide the local Police Chief with some much needed information so that he/she can be fully prepared for a full load of crap he has to take care of — then I’m sure the fact that the Feds can go way “down into the grass to paint the pants on the ants” in data analytics, which by the way should bring comfort to the local citizens as to who will clean up all that crap, will be justified. No pun intended – or was it? Brings back bad memories of research and statistical analysis classes in school; those classes also produce a lot of manure to the point we were stumped on what, if any, decision we really needed to make.

The thing is, there isn’t a perfect answer, so stop looking for it in the way of more data. Lets just deal with the crap we already have — sorry I meant manure…I mean data. One thing a Federal worker is good at is making work for work sake as a means to convince themselves that their job has meaning, we all do that, just the Feds do it much better. Nothing better than collecting a whole lot of data and not understanding why, or for what, is a way of life for them. In the commercial world we call that fat; fat was the enemy and we are always on a diet…still are. I think what’s needed is a better understanding on how a commercial model for LTE is implemented. We don’t need to know how the technology works other than what we  can gain with more profitable services, or how much better their already installed base of assets can “fit so perfectly”, what we need to understand, and accept, is the fact that we have to build a new infrastructure solely dedicated to the primary purpose of public safety; it just so happens that this new infrastructure may also be the supporting platform for even those same carries in the future.

I understand the need to collect information to start the process of building a business model, but you must execute your strategy based on a more realistic assumption that you can’t shotgun the entire bus barn and not expect to be covered in the manure from inside — I mean data. We don’t need that much data to provide us with an appropriate model to move forward with. In fact, the more data collected, the more convoluted and undefinable the answer will be. For a commercial carrier its quite simple; you have a product (LTE), you need a user base to concentrate on (subscribers), number of subscribers dictate revenue (ARPU), you run a cost analysis on the capitla required and match it against your revenue (ROI); if the revenue allows you to outpace your cost to build, then you make the decision to go after the market. If you decide to go after the market, then you start your deep dive into the analytics for the purpose of refining your cost models. The key is to gather just enough data to make your first decision, there will be many. This is the decision process for building a business case in telecoms.

This decision process is a check-and-balance to insure we stay on track with our business model – in this case our ROI is greater than the capital needed to build and maintain. What happens if you don’t? What happens when you don’t have a business plan? Well we are front and center to what happens when you don’t have an agreed upon plan.

If you don’t address a simplistic view, your ROI will be askew to the point where you are simply paying more money to build and sustain than your revenue can account for. In collecting so much data you will also convolute your decision process. All we need is a small portion of the data to provide a rough order of magnitude so that we can get to the decision point; that decision point will be a refinement of our original business plan – in this case Option A (FirstNet carrier model), Option B (State Out-out), or Option C (FirstNet Opting In for a State implementation of the Myers Model™). In the end this is what the States want to see. Most States really do want to work with FirstNet, but, they also want FirstNet to do it on their terms and based on a business model that incorporates the monetization of the spectrum to capitalize on the State’s ability to fulfill its own self-sustainment requirement. This means a State wants FirstNet to play a part in the State’s Public Private Partnership rollout via their ownership control. Why? Because the States also realize that having FirstNet take an ownership position will allow for sustainability of the overall national network – beyond an individual State’s jurisdictional control.

After hearing about all the meetings, and seeing all the data being collected, I’m beginning to think that the contributors to the FirstNet cause are just doing work for works sake. Now don’t get me wrong there is some great work being done, but a majority may prove useless without a business plan to work against. The biggest elephant in the room is a business model, a business model that can create “self-sustainment”. What I’m afraid of is that FirstNet will get so far down the data collection road, based on information they didn’t need, and have committed to plans that never really considered because they don’t fully understand their own business needs, essentially useless data and watsed taxpayer money…..none the less with perfect timing just before an election cycle.

Once FirstNet actually starts to look at self-sustainment, then a true business plan will take shape. Thank goodness Chairwoman Swenson spoke about that need for self-sustainment in her speech at the PSCR conference. Don’t be afraid to go for 100% self-sustainment, or 100% coverage with truly hardened specifications. It doesn’t matter how much it costs, what matters is that we have a cyclical business model that will drive a balance between business needs, self-sustainment and quality assurance for all that partake.

But then again what do I know I’m….

Just some guy and a blog…..

FirstNet – Sue Swenson a real breath of fresh air! Now lets trial some business models!

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment

OK I have to say I spoke with Sue Swenson and I really like what she has to say. She brings a personality that I am use to seeing in the entrepreneurial spirit of telecommunications. Very strategic driver with the ambition to move things forward, she will bring a great amount of freshness in making things a success for FirstNet. My wife was correct, as she always is, in stating “let a woman takeover so things can get done”. I have to say I can spot a real gem and Sue really fits that mold.

From what I was able to convey she was able to grasp very quickly, reason being is that she knew where I was going, she has done her homework, and well versed on how private networks can develop, especially as it relates to self-reliance and self-funding requirements, as she put it, “she is an operations Gal”. Chairwoman Swenson understands how the Myers Model™ can help and that such a partnerships will be crucial to the success of FirstNet by monetizing the use of the spectrum for the benefit of “self-sustainment”.

As I’m sure there are many pushing their own model, realistically though we only have a few to choose from  — the traditional vendor models, the Myers Model, the Taxpayer funded model, and the spectrum sharing model. Now I may be stepping out there on a limb, but last I counted we had 50 States and 6 Territories, as was suggested to TJ Kennedy, and others on the FirstNet Board, why not trial each of the models as a type of XPrize scenario? Just a suggestion! Each model author, if adopted by a State and approved by FirstNet, were given the chance to deploy their model in a State on a trial basis, then the results can be reviewed by FirstNet, and based on success ratings, be adopted nationalistically. Just a thought. Realistically, with the new Chairwoman, I am confident she will be able to discern what the real models are that could meet their needs without much of an effort. What have we to lose? We are building the same network, using standard vendor solutions (accept the spectrum sharing model), and we have been deploying these networks for years now. If any of the models don’t work, then the more successful model can take over….if none work then FirstNet can pursue its carrier solution. Like I said, what have we to lose?

By deploying trials of the models, I am more than confident that the Myers Model™ will come out on top, after all, this model has been successfully deployed for many years in the transportation and infrastructure industries. Those States that have adopted P3 models for deploying bridges, roadways, airports, etc.. know that this model well and they know it can work, plus, its business they are familiar with. Like I said in the beginning, the Myers Model™ is an adaptation of those successful models onto the telecommunications industry. The fact is, although the P3 concept is not knew, it is new in its deployment within telecommunications, that model is what I am recommending to FirstNet – that model is the Myers Model™.

But then again I’m….

Just some guy and a blog…..