Month: May 2016

Is FirstNet a Lame Duck, Cooked Duck, or Politically Ideological?

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment

I’m attending the Broadband Summit here in the District of Columbia. While attending I noticed a few themes that struck me. One theme is the lack of States attending and second the overall summation of those States that did attend were very vocal about the need of funding and resources.

The lack of attendance of State representation can demonstrate a few things; lack of interest, lack of confidence, or the idea that a change is coming. My gut feeling is that the State’s are seeing a mixture of all the above, thus the low attendance. Does this mean that FirstNet has been cast into the pit of Lame Ducks? Me personally I love the taste of Duck, but that’s another story. What should FirstNet take from this notion? How should it proceed?

There are a couple of routes FirstNet could choose in moving forward; the first being the realization that they need to play ball with the Opt-Out scenarios, or, stand and fight against the flow of common sense. Being that the FirstNet leadership has been at this since 2012, my gut feeling is they are dedicated to their cause and will not be responsive to any other solution other than their own. This means the lines are being drawn and ultimately, if left in the hands of government action, will be partisan politics. What really confuses me is the ideology approach to coming to a similar solution.

If the continuance of FirstNet hinges on an ideological approach to deploying FirstNet, then FirstNet is not only a Lame Duck, but a Cooked Duck as well. Why would you risk not cooperating, being relentless on your own solution,  only making the entire FirstNet “Opt-In” solution undesirable? I sat with one of those States and I was quite surprised that the decision to Opt-In was already made. I can understand the notion to commit to a business solution if you fully understood all the available options, but in this case that analysis was not done, which leads me to believe it is being done purely along political lines. I base this on an overly simplistic view of how FirstNet will come in, pay for everything, and that all the State has to do is pay to use their own network based on an availability payment taken from the taxpayers of the State. If I were a State Governor then this would raise some major red flags.

Essentially, if you go through the steps associated with such a plan, you will quickly start to notice that the “Opt-In” solution actually goes counter to the Law as it’s written. Does that mean they are breaking the law? How do you gain any kind of tax relief, job creation, or middle class tax relief by actually charging more taxes; giving State jobs away to the Federal Government; and not reaping the benefits of revenue creation in using your own network to help ease the middle class (and pay for Public Safety)? Maybe it’s just me, but that just doesn’t make any sense…unless it were an ideological point of view….or just naive. My guess is the ideological viewpoint is the basis for such a stand. If it is, then there is little chance of changing those minds. Those that deal in such actions are already sold and have already convinced themselves to what is right and what is wrong and anything you do or say will not change their minds. Unfortunately, the only people that will suffer from such ideological stances will be Public Safety and the citizen. Then again I’m just an old telecom guy that has been building networks for 30 years – not an attorney.

Another viewpoint is that the allocation of spectrum, and the creation of the Public Safety Broadband Network, was all just pork and actually has nothing to do with the Act itself. But the law is the law and it is explicit of its use of the Public Safety Broadband Network and its inclusion in the “Middle Class Tax Relief and Jobs Creation Act of 2012”. Does this mean anything, well no, especially if you are being ideological and partisan in your approach. In some minds the entire FirstNet solution is a pure political play of controlling a large – profitable – broadband solution, keeping their own measly job, and pushing their own agenda. In short, it’s all about money and pushing ones agenda.

Let’s forget about all the conspiracy theories and just focus on the political stance. Now I’m no rocket scientist, but you can google the definition of the political leaning States. From what I can analyze there’s a solid contingency of 35 Red States, roughly 13 Purple States (Swing States), leaving roughly 2 solid Blue States. Now if I’m a betting man, my gut would tell me that the risk associated with the success of an “Opt-In” buy-in is far from being realistic. Even if all the Purple States went Opt-In, plus you added the 6 territories, you still don’t even reach half the States. FirstNet will need upwards of 90% of the States to Opt-In to have any chance to be successful. Don’t know about you, but those are some steep odds, steep enough that I would never bet on, but I don’t gamble – especially with taxpayer money – but some do. So do you still put all your money on a federal FirstNet centralized nationwide solution? Or do you bet on what you can do within your own State’s borders? Possible something you actually have some say in and have more influential control?

As I’ve stated in the past, it’s not about the technology, or even who runs your solution, it’s all about what is best for Public Safety, Americans and the State — think locally, support locally, control locally and execute locally. FirstNet still has a role, just not the way they think they do.

But whom am I other than….

Just some guy and a blog….

FirstNet – States of denial?

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment
Is it just me, or do we all sense a slowdown in FirstNet? Not hearing a lot from any of the key players and not sensing any real support from the market – except Rivada – for the proposal responses. There is one thing I am hearing though and that is a lot of rumblings within the States to Opt-Out. In the end is a State really Opting-Out of anything….no not really. The only real difference is that a State will take control of its own solution and its own future. How many of us out there really expect FirstNet to come in with a great solution, a solution that will replace an existing carrier contract, a solution that will be self-funded, self-sustaining, truly hardened and not demonstrate a hint of distrust? Who really thinks the Federal Government will come in to your State and actually work for the benefit of your constituents, especially when there is 56 of you – 50 States and 6 Territories?
There is no possible way a FirstNet solution will be totally void of taxpayer funding and prioritized towards Public Safety priority without some concessions. Any solution outside of the P3 I have been boasting about will in fact break the law – how do I know this – because I specifically designed the P3 model based on the law. As I have stated in the past there are too many variables out there that can contribute to a disaster. In fact, if you could picture Red Square in China on a revolutionary holiday entrenched with all the Red Flags – FirstNet would still dwarf its celebrations in Red Flags of distress.
Forget about the technical side of FirstNet and all its glory of LTE and shared services, just think about the governance headaches, the political follies, the campaign redirect, and the political funding cuts, plus the notion that there are States who just don’t trust the Federal Government to do anything. Has anyone tried to ask the question how many of these States that Opt-Out potentially ruin FirstNet’s plans before it even starts? I did and my figure is roughly 5 average size States or 1 large State and three smaller ones. Even if FirstNet were to setup and award its Program Management Team to build out nationally, given the amount of Opt-Out States will only mean that FirstNet picked the PM Team for the State still leaving the State to responsibility to complete the task. What is different than the State just picking its own team do to the same work anyway?
Now I understand FirstNet put out an RFP asking for any and all solutions that FirstNet should consider in addressing its objectives based RFP. Which is a good thing. Unfortunately, the market lost confidence in FirstNet following all the accusations of insider trading and monopolization of the spectrum. Show me one State that has complete trust in FirstNet to completely deliver what is says it will deliver. In a past article I wrote about the honor that needs to be restored and the trust that needs to be rebuilt with the community — before FirstNet can expect a viable response. I’m afraid that time has passed and now FirstNet’s only real option is to hope the States can deliver the solution themselves and will consider FirstNet’s contributions.
As I said in the past, FirstNet should be focusing on a business plan that can accommodate for all the Opt-Outs and still succeed. I gave my own solution for that issue some time ago, in short, FirstNet would just be an equity partner in the P3 established by the State that Opts-Out. FirstNet will be the standards organization and centralized control center in connecting the national layer solution. Do we actually think a centralized FirstNet organization is going to build an entire broadband network that is twice the size of AT&T and Verizon combined from the top down; during a change of administration; and following the disasters of the Healthcare Act, websites and many others? Take a sip from the commonsense cup and focus on your local needs. You know you can do better than what a top-down federal agency can do for you. Just the sheer size of the programs; the timelines to getting things accomplished; the pride for the State to accomplish it; and the personability of a local touch; and the local ability to address local concerns cannot come from an organization that resides in another State or in the District of Columbia. Carpe Diem!
But what do I know I’m….
Just some guy and a blog….

FirstNet — State Governors you have been given an entire broadband solution covering your entire State on a Silver Platter — Carpe Diem!

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment
So it has come down to decision time for the State Governors; do you start the process of analyzing the “Opt-Out” solution; or do you just sit and wait for FirstNet? Being that the alternative is to do the Ostrich thing and just stick your head in the sand and then hope everything goes your way. I would say now is the time to take charge and do the required work.
For a State to truly analyze its Opt-Out solution it needs to evaluate a certain amount of things first; one is the business model it will use; what is the revenue forecast; what products will you sell; how many users can you expect; what is the cost to design and build. If you look at this from the top down you will see that all we are defining at this stage is a new broadband company. After all you wouldn’t just invest your money into a new company without doing some due diligence first – this is no different.
To accommodate a thorough analysis of the opportunity we need time and money. The time is essentially today until FirstNet presents its model (supposedly November per FirstNet) plus 90 days to decide. That doesn’t give you much time to define out a new broadband company that meets your needs. Starting today that’s seven months until FirstNet’s presentation and three more months for you to make a decision. The good thing is you still have time to get it done. A good example, or case study, of what is needed is the New HampshireRFP to Opt-Out. Essentially all the RFP has asked for, is a business model it can use to help the Governor make his/her call on Opt-Out or Opt-in – that’s really all you need.
To award such an RFP will take a month or two to solicit bids; 2 weeks to award; and NTP immediately; leaving you 7 months (including 90-day decision) to get the analysis completed. This analysis should be competed with a non-biased partner that is already courting financial investors. You have to remember, it’s not about the technology – it’s all about setting up the deal. Which leads us to the next step, that being money.
How do you pay for such an endeavor?  One way to look at this is based on value. What are you bringing to the table to incentivize private investment to fund your design, build solution? What stake of ownership will you get out of the opportunity? In order to find the answers to these questions, the State needs to make its own upfront investment to pay for the analysis. But, where does the funding come from?
The fact is the State doesn’t need to pay for the analysis out of State taxpaying dollars, rather it already has grants available for the purpose; BTOP, USF, Broadband America and the NTIA grant to help the State DB their solution. What will the analysis phase cost?
With a 10-14 person crew, and covering the entire analysis phase, plus the additional approval stage with the NTIA, and the application for use of the D-Block spectrum, we are talking in the ballpark of $10-$12 Million. BTOP grant allocations alone are $154 Million per State; USF is roughly $10-$100 Million (per State) and the FirstNet-NTIA Grant (following approval of your plan) will be in the ballpark of $33-$130 Million (per State) – don’t forget FHA, DOE and other federal Grants out there to help, i.e. ARRA, etc. Did you know that the Federal Highway Administration allocates more than 10% of its grant programs, to fund highways, is dedicated to IT and communications? Remember, the State, if using the P3 model I have presented, doesn’t have to pay for the DBOM of the solution, nor does it have to pay for its long-term operations – private investment will take care of that. That’s not bad for a Billion-dollar broadband solution covering your entire State; hardened to your specifications; puts First Responders as Priority 1; interoperable with FirstNet; and does not need any taxpayer money to help fund it. Where do I signup? The biggest cost item for such a solution would normally be the price for the spectrum, but even that comes for free (almost free).
The issue is not whether or not you need to Opt-Out, or Opt-In, it’s a matter of why haven’t you acted already. If the use of this spectrum, the availability of long-term revenue, and the diversified nature of risk falling on someone else, is not a great recipe for your success, then I don’t know what is. What’s the definition of Silver Platter? Who else will ever sit in such an opportune position as you? Just take it and move on, your entire State is counting on you to do whats right! But, you can’t get there from here unless you get your analysis done upfront…. what are you waiting for? Get your RFP out to the market asking for a business model for the State’s potential Opt-Out decision. But who am I other than….

Just some guy and a blog….