Month: July 2014

FirstNet and a Con to Cover Their Carrier Business Model? 4.6 Billion reasons why!

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment
There are probably a lot of you out there in the world of ether and broadband connectivity that are wondering what is up with all the same old presentations from FirstNet…me too frankly…but I have a theory. The theory is that we are being conned. FirstNet has been working the carrier model since the printing of the infamous 400-page business plan that nobody is supposed to know about and that is owned by the Federal Government. The con has been performed on the malleable and has been the secretive plan since day one. If they aren’t actively engaging any other plans, or just continue with monotonous “outreach” topics, as proof to the progress being made, then I’m afraid their State consultation phase will only try to maintain secrecy around their plan to partner with the carriers. Why would they do that you say? Well let me explain.
It’s simple, it’s all about the money:  the population of California is 38 Million residents. If we target, lets say 20% penetration for commercial services using the D-Block spectrum at $50 a month, then that means $380 Million dollars a month – 38*.2*50 = 380 Million. Once again that is $380 MILLION a month to the commercial carriers, or 4.6 Billion annually…oh and yes they will allow the Public Safety to be on the network – for a fee. It’s all about the money and the monopoly…or is it all about the monopoly and the money?
I can guarantee you that Chief Fitzgerald will probably be the next to go, which could mean whistle blower laws being broken. My gut also tells me that Bill D’Agostino did leave for personal reasons, but it may have only helped mask a difference in opinion between Bill and Sam Ginn. If that is true then my theory is coming to life. The “silent coup” is still underway (as I have written about in the past).
The fact is the Myers Model™ Public Private Partnership makes so much damn sense that FirstNet has to keep their plans a secret, else they will lose all their potential customers and the use of the spectrum. Plus, lets be realistic here, 36 of the State’s lean right which means they are more prone to not accepting too much from the Federal Government. It’s the big elephant in the room…and it has some really big tusks. The fact is we have an election year coming up; we are more than $16 Trillion in debt; the job market stinks; the economy is on life-support; our healthcare system is a website that doesn’t work; and the administration still thinks what happened in Libya is a good thing. Who in their right mind thinks we can keep this up? What do you think will be one of the first things cut from the budget? My guess is that it will look something like a 7 followed by 9 zeros. Why appropriate money to the Public Safety Broadband Network when the State, or region, can monetize the spectrum for their own needs? Especially when there exists the Myers Model™ that can completely build and sustain the network without hitting any taxpayers.
Hellooo! McFly! Are you in there?!
If the States “Opt Out” and decide to build it themselves by monetizing the use of the spectrum for their own needs, well, then FirstNet’s carrier business model will fail…just add it to the list. Why should FirstNet, and the commercial carriers, be the one’s that monopolize the spectrum for their own benefit by monetizing it over a State’s needs? They will say as Frozone on the Incredibles once said “it’s all for the greater good” when in fact such a carrier relationship will still not address the rural coverage requirements, plus will still hit the taxpayers up for money, which makes it ironic that it comes from the Middle Class Tax Reliefand Jobs Creation Act. . The only way it makes sense is if the plan is to monetize the spectrum for their own needs – and those needs don’t include the States, or Public Safety. My guess is that the root to all evil lies within one of the 7 deadly sins…that being greed.
Like I have written about in the past, FirstNet actually has more to gain by siding with the Myers Model™ approach, but who am I other than…

Just some guy and a blog…

FirstNet — President Barack Obama is speaking to you, are you listening?

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment
Recent article on what President Obama said, entitled “President Announces Public-Private Partnership Initiative for Infrastructure Development”. 

Have you ever tried to get a program, or project, done when the CEO makes a direct order to do so? You get a bunch of people stirring around looking for direction so that they know what mundane processes they need to setup that matches what he just directed everyone to do. Ultimately what the CEO is trying to do is spark ingenuity and creativity, but instead what we get is exactly the opposite, instead of opening up the creativity it commissions the organization to act within its current makeup of people.

Being that it came from the CEO, those that handle the day-to-day operations will not make a move unless they get specific rules of engagement because they don’t want to lose their jobs – these are the amiable and analytical types (see Personality Profiles developed by Peter Urs Bender) and typically these types don’t want to rock the boat with change. We see it all the time, it’s that guy, or gal, that really doesn’t have much skills other than keep the lights on — not that that’s a bad thing, there is a place for everyone — but these are the people who manage to stay employed no matter what happens. These types manage to keep their head down and out of the line of fire allowing them to avoid the fight. Actually, if you think about it, these workers are analogous to the typical career oriented federal workers. You can’t blame these people for what they are, they’re just doing what their genetics has programmed them to do. What is really at fault is the state of our nations economy.
With the lack of financial support to expand our productivity and creative approaches in expanding business, we are stuck in a mode of “protect your job mentality”, which is perfect for the analytical or amiable types, but is disastrous for driver and expressive types. The driver is the type of personality that wants to lead and drive to get things done; the expressive are those that make the sale and sell the business into new business. If the money isn’t freed up, then the creative and new business will not occur, and if you aren’t looking for new business and creative solutions to expand your product, then you are in a mode of hoarding cash, essentially cutting staff to eliminate those that are trying to push the business into new business – essentially eliminating their creativity, and entrepreneurial activities, thus the companies overall success — essentially the company has moved into stagnant mode. What’s worse is that this hoarding will continue until the economy starts to show signs of relief so that the company (CEO, in this case the President of the United States) can free up the cash to spend on new business. What does this have to do with FirstNet? Well everything actually.
With the current state of the economy, companies are holding back the creativity associated with building the Nations largest telecom job ever, actually all the industry segments are doing the same thing. Our problem is that those that are actually sitting in control of the program are those personalities that are inherently analytical and amiable; this means we will be inundated with data, material, meetings and confusion due to lack of leadership, which is exactly happening. This does not mean these people, currently in the leadership roles, are bad people, it’s just what the market demands right now. The fact is we can’t accomplish what we need to accomplish if the economy doesn’t improve. An improved economy will allow the companies to free up the money. We also can’t do make it a success without a mixture of the analytical, amiable, expressive and the driver. Are we in a state of the chicken, or the egg? Yes.
In perspective, the commercial carriers were created with the entrepreneurial spirit and the leadership and salesmanship of the drivers and the expressives. The operations of the commercial carriers are run by the analytical and the amiable (hunter versus gatherers). The fact is we can’t have a good model of execution and strategy for FirstNet without the partnership between all four-personality types; and we can’t do that if the economy is not there to support it. Is there a solution? Well yes, and the President recognizes the solution when he opens the gates for the Public Private Partnership models.
Now there are those that believe the carriers, working with Federal Government, is a Public Private Partnership, in actuality you can call a mailbox working with a postman a Public Private Partnership, that doesn’t mean it’s a Public Private Partnership that will work. After studying the topic for many years, there is only one solution for FirstNet that is the best suited for what we are trying to do and I developed that in The Myers Model™.
The President is not telling us what to do, rather he is telling us we can do, and it is based on our own creativity and willingness to step out there and present ideas; thus the rational behind The Myers Model™ Public Private Partnership. The wool has come off the eyes for many of the States as well. The use of the Myers Model™ is nothing new to them and they are just now finding that out. It’s a process they have done a dozen times for other large “infrastructure” jobs. That is what’s so important to what the President is saying. My suggestion here, is take hold of it and lets get going.
You see I’m the personification of the driver mindset. I get up everyday thinking about ways to make things a success, and to me this FirstNet network is as clear as day on what needs to be done, but I can’t get anything done unless I attract “followers”. I only represent one quadrant of the personalities needed to execute FirstNet – which are you? What do you contribute and how do we get the team together to execute this?

Just some guy and a blog…

FirstNet — lead, follow, or get out of the way. Don’t let those that know act on the fears of those that don’t understand.

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment
Has the shift started to happen? That is, has the focus on FirstNet started to shift toward the States? It would be a naturalistic turn of events given that the closer we get to that faithful old quote of “you either need to lead, follow, or get out of the way” – a very familiar phrase to those of us who spent time in the military. The closer we get to the notion that we actually need to start executing something, and stop flabbergasting our way through the minutia, we realize the execution means fiber, microwave and access edge construction – physical construction. Let the States start issuing RFPs and then let the Governors and their staff decide what is best for the State. Let the better business model win.
If that is indeed the case, and the shift has started, then FirstNet has a much bigger problem ahead, that is fighting the lack of confidence from the States in its ability to get anything done. FirstNet should work with one State and implement the process advertising an RFP for the business model and its implementation. What better way to understand the best course than to actually start the journey?
In the end all we can do is submit the strategy and see what’s comes of it. There are those that will steadfast in their ways and will be unrelenting in protecting their share of the turf, but in reality all they are doing is going down with a fight, which in the end is just bad for Public Safety and not good for the legacy they leave behind.
Building a wireline and wireless network is nothing new. There will be those that try to convolute the message just to convey “how complex the solution is”, when in reality its just another fiber, microwave and access edge network. But, it is anticipated that there will be those who have their own agenda of aligning to the cash – believe me when I say — this network will make a lot of cash and there are those that know this. What better way than to cloud the message with perceived complexity, in order to advance your own cause, in essence, acting on fear. In reality fear is just something we make up for something that may never happen; but there are those that use fear as a tool to get the less informed to do what they want. In the end it’s just something we make up in our own mind. I can guarantee that we will make mistakes, but have faith that this is nothing new and should be viewed as so. You don’t see me not getting on an airplane simply because I don’t know how to fly it, just get on, sit down, and let the pilots take charge; after all, they have been doing it for years.
There is nothing wrong with the drive towards cash; after all it’s what got us here in the first place. The strategy of how we get to that cash just needs to be led with the ethical position of building it for Public Safety and not for some corporate framework to continue a dying business. With this in mind I am not against any model that will help build the Public Safety Broadband Network. I am one of those pilots who have been flying the plane for many years. If you want me to get you where you need to go, then eventually you need to let me fly, and you need to sit back and relax.
The States are not idiots, if you aren’t in bed by 11pm – come home. The fact is we need to execute now, or a network that should be completed in a State in 24 months will take 24 years — if you run the numbers that’s a lot of catastrophic events that could be expected in that timeframe (or a long time sitting on the tarmac). If the network is just another network then why wait? Just move forward with the RFP and procurement strategy, but it has to be a strategy that addresses the requirements in the Jobs Creation Act, just like a pilot needs to follow his rules of piloting. There is only one model that will achieve that – The Myers Model™, but who am I other than…
Just some guy and a blog….

Is FirstNet a big waste of time? Does Public Safety need FirstNet?

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment
I wanted to highlight some of the difficulties in the below strategy of FirstNet’s RFP and what it will face if they pursue a one network build for the entire Nation, most specifically the lack of consideration of the States, the monetization of the spectrum and commercialization of the Public Safety’s spectrum. I can only raise the bigger concerns I have, in that there are too many issues to highlight in one blog entry. 

Taken from FirstNet’s procurement page:
Comprehensive Network Solution Draft RFP:

The Comprehensive Network Solution Draft RFP may solicit offers to develop a comprehensive network solution that possibly includes the core and all RAN components, backhaul, devices, network infrastructure, deployable capabilities and maintenance to fully function as an operational wireless public safety LTE network. This solution would potentially include “in kind” or monetary value provided by the offeror in consideration for secondary use of FirstNet’s excess network capacity. The value provided for excess network capacity, time to market, first responder performance objectives, and rural coverage, among many other factors, will be considerations in this potential approach. (FirstNet Website)
In the context of FirstNet deploying a one network programmatic approach, which this will only benefit the largest contractor, a contractor who may not be the best suited, but this isn’t the worst of it; why we over complicate these things is beyond me. The bigger issue with this strategy still does not address how Rural America will be covered. Partnering with the commercial carriers, to build the entire network, still, will not meet the needs of funding the build out to the rural areas. This strategy screams taxpayer funding all the way, and I can almost guarantee that it will be heavily subsidized by the State, not the Feds. This strategy also risks total defunding if we have a change in administration.
The framework of this strategy illustrates their intention to bring in a commercial carrier to build the network, where as they anticipate that the commercial carriers will pay for the build – “in kind” – which means something for nothing without any real justification or incentive for it’s future outcome. If I were a carrier today, and I am avoiding the build to the rural areas of the Nation because the ROI isn’t justified, why would I think that partnering with the Federal Government would accomplish the need, a need that isn’t essential to the success or future of my existing business model?
The solution is broken up into two parts: Capital Expenditures (capex) and Operational Expenditures (opex).  The capex spend will be a tight thing to concur in that no amount of investment in the capital construction of assets will justify a market turn for the carrier to refocus resources away from their long-term plans of content services. There is a reason the carriers are moving away from owning the assets. One of the reasons is because their existing market is much larger than FirstNet and is shrinking everyday which also happens to be core to their current revenue generation. Another reason is because the market dynamics have changed, where as, the carriers need to re-home their products to the data generation else they will not survive in the future, that means the current carrier market needs to go up against new players like Google, Netflix, Apple and the likes. The battle the carriers are facing today is a much more important topic than answering the heroic call of building out FirstNet without any assurances of its success in revenue generation – seems pretty flimsy to me.
Another topic of concern is the opex portion. If the network will cost $60 Billion to build, who will pay for the $6 Billion annually to operate it? The carriers have enough on their plate to run their own operations let alone FirstNet’s needs. Why would I divert my energy and resources to try and concur a FirstNet business model that is built within a House of Cards? It just doesn’t make sense. If I were a carrier my first thoughts are to grab the spectrum, if I can just tie this whole solution up in the process and the legal system long enough, then the spectrum will come back up when FirstNet fails to meet its objectives, then the context of the conversation will change to “I told you so”, or, “give it to those that are in the business of selling broadband today”. Why invest my Billion’s into a FirstNet plan that will fail in its current approach? All I have to do is wait-it-out and get the valuable spectrum for next to nothing, or free? My execution plan would be to stonewall this program and tie it up to the point it fails on its own merits.
It has been more than 2 years since FirstNet has been created, their current course, and mindset, needs to be changed or this will be a big waste of time. I’m confident in Sue Swenson, but I also fear that the penetration of the carriers has convoluted the thought process with fear and intimidation to the point that the existing FirstNet members don’t know what is real and what isn’t. The fact is this is only a broadband network, nothing else. Yes, it’s a big new market, but all you have to do is plant the first seed. Just plant the seed and fixate the growth on a sound business model of your own private network. FirstNet really needs to relinquish itself from the mindset that the only resources they have to tap into are those that created the current carrier business model; a business model that will not work for FirstNet; a business model that is on the downturn itself; a business model that is converging into a content delivery model, not an access solution. 
The big elephant in the room on this one is the fact that the current FirstNet mindset is a one holistic network approach that has to be governed by a new Federal Organization. Of course the Federal Government will still be needed to insure everyone is playing fair, but that role is an oversight role, not an execution role. Stop looking at his from the top down and start looking at it from the bottom up. This network is too big to think holistically, you need to start in a microcosm of it’s eventually landscape. The bottom up approach means that you need to start in one State (the seed) and then build-out from there. I have studied this long enough to know this is the best course forward. If I were a State Governor I would just listen in my consultation meeting with FirstNet and then commit to the “Opt out” scenario, because the current FirstNet strategy will not succeed. 

If the Governor doesn’t choose to “Opt out” soon then they will risk the spectrum falling into the commercial broadband space…when that happens you can forget about having your own Public Safety Broadband Network.

But then again I’m….
Just some guy and a blog….

FirstNet Public Safety Broadband – Local Control of FirstNet and Hidden Agendas?

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment
There is a lot of talk about the technical approaches to prioritization and localization for command and control of the Public Safety Broadband Network — FirstNet. The fact is that there are multiple layers of prioritization and control, but its adoption is quite simple. Allow me to explain.
The technical approach to prioritizing LTE broadband is an easy subject to be overwhelmed with. At first glance you have this technology that can prioritize in so many ways that it becomes confusing. It’s not the technology that makes it confusing; it’s our own thought process. We tend to over-analyze all the various options with an assortment of data then apply it to the overly researched equipment and situations that we think needs to be addressed as part of the network. With over 260 different variables to choose from, in the current LTE solutions, I would be surprised if we use more than a dozen, the carriers don’t use more than seven. It really doesn’t have to be that complex, then again the vendors may want you to be overwhelmed to sell you more.
The fact of the matter is that you just need to separate the build from the applications and devices that will ride on it. By combining the two topics only confuses the masses. By focusing on the build you will see that we are looking at actual construction activity, installation, rights-of-way, site acquisition and many other physically related requirements. When you put it all together all we have is the deployment of an access LTE, Microwave & Fiber backhaul and centralization of communication routes issue. The technology is what it is. We design and deploy the technology for the given physical characteristics of the geography; along with those characteristics is our ability to get as much out of the technologies reach and capabilities that are possible. There is no design of handsets, or prioritization schemes yet — that will come after.
Getting back to prioritization, the real simple way to look at prioritization is not to be drawn into the weeds on this. Let me give you an example: we have a State, County then City; each has its own jurisdictions and levels of command and control oversight. This layering of control is not because someone wants to be the all-powerful Oz, but because an individual can only handle what is in front of him or her. I’m sure a local Police Chief won’t have the time, nor the will, to manage what goes on in the entire County, or the State, he or she is only interested in what their AOR (Area of Responsibility) brings – or vice versa. Essentially, this Police Chief would be the most knowledgeable about his AOR, not the County, nor the State, and definitely not the Federal Government, thus, localization and control has to be localized and isolated to those that best know the AOR. Plus, legally the State is responsible to help this Police Chief when needed, that’s what’s in the State’s laws, policies and regulations – and it’s Constitution. Unless, of course, we have a new National Police Force that I’m not aware of, and which does not have to abide by State law, which is not out of the realm of possibilities these days.
As for the actual physical prioritization scheme, in relationship to the technology, the application of prioritization is very simple. All the State, County and Local Chiefs need to do is classify who the Priority 1, Priority 2, and Priority 3 Users are, then you set the network up with the same prioritization and place the Users in their appropriate database. It doesn’t matter who is on the network, those with Priority 1 access will be able to boot Priority 2 and Priority 3 users. Priority 2 will be able to boot Priority 3 Users. Priority 3 won’t get to boot anybody. If an incident Commander wants to make a Priority 2 or 3 Users as part of the Priority 1 Users, all they have to do is adjust the database. These databases are easy to adjust and can be done with an App, you can even have time constraints on when the User will be put back into their original pool of Priority Users. It really isn’t that hard to understand, but we tend to overcomplicate things due to our own lack of knowledge or hidden agendas.  
Lack of knowledge is easy to fix, hidden agendas is a whole other realm of politics. The fact is the control of the network is not about the physical layout of the Core, it’s about policies and governance. There are those within the Administration, and the States, that understand the power that this network will bring to the Nation. All this talking about net neutrality can be solved with this network, even if it is being built for Public Safety. The fact is the technology will keep outpacing us when it comes to coverage and bandwidth. Forget about the spectrum being manipulated and focus on the garnishment of bandwidth. But, the only way you will be able to solve this problem is through The Myers Model™Public Private Partnership. But then again, what do you expect when you have lawyers building your telecommunications network?
The only reason anybody would be interested in slicing and dicing the spectrum is if they truly are heroic in their cause, or most likely, their intentions are to take spectrum away from on group to give it to others for their own use, leaving the original owners of the spectrum scratching their heads as they realize they still have to build their network anyway — only now they get to do it with less spectrum. Bait and switch is what this is called, or could be construed as larceny, but in reality it’s a true case of the wealthy stealing from Robin Hood.
As the network is prioritized by the Users demands, even within those prioritization schemes will be mini-virtual networks tying together associated groups of sub-users. For example: Priority 1 Users will be made up of First Responders and within those First Responders there will be sub-virtual networks established for the Police, Fire and EMS. Even though the users are prioritized over everybody else, their traffic patterns are still compatible with each other, this allows them to be on the same network and to communicate with others on the network when needed, essentially setting up their own call-group or email list. It’s that simple. The same will happen for the Priority 2 and 3 User Groups as well.
This is quite common in the telecommunications industry today; it’s called Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation. If you buy access today, and want to connect all your offices, this is how the carriers, or ISPs, do it; they just establish virtual private networks, at the bandwidth level, to isolate and protect traffic in Virtual Private Networks – telecoms 101. Examples would be Cricket, Straighttalk, Netflix and others. In the Priority 2 User Group of the PSBN those players will have virtual private networks that isolate traffic between Utilities, Transportation and others. Priority 3 Users have the same where as the commercial carriers will use their own virtual network isolated from their competition. I’m not making this stuff up, it’s been around for years now.
In short, don’t get all caught up in this. The more we focus on it, the more complicated we make it, when it isn’t.
One further note: even though we are having all these conversations about prioritization and control, the reality is we may never even contend with the physical capabilities of the broadband network being deployed. If one carrier can have 100+ Million Users on its network, I’m sure a more robust, hardened, protected network that covers 100% of the Nation will definitely be able to handle this load. Remember, geographically, this network will be twice the size of AT&T and Verizon combined.
But then again, I’m ….

Just some guy and a blog….