FirstNet says they can make money off the PSBN, but the State can’t? Of course the State can use its own revenue! Allow me to explain…

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment
Have you ever had a time when you know someone is wrong, but there’s no chance in changing his or her mind no matter what you try? It’s like watching them stumble while desperately trying to maintain and upward stance of control yet everything is falling down around them? You told them not to drink half that bottle of whiskey, but they insist they can hold their liquor. That’s exactly what I’m seeing with FirstNet. They keep drinking their own liquor and every swig along the way only convinces them more in believing their own delusional mindset. Here we stand just waiting for them to just lose their balance and go crashing through a plate glass window, down 4 flights of stairs surrounded by a group of Governors just watching them fall. The power of personalities and influential know-it-alls has reached a point of no return.
There are those within FirstNet, although a valiant effort, are failing to see beyond their only limitations. As I have stated from the very beginning, the solution FirstNet is advertisingwill not work, that being the carrier supported national model, but I’m helpless in lending a hand and helpless in penetrating those thick personalities who are convinced they have all the right answers. Letting them fall is the only option now. The good thing is that the “Opt Out” States really don’t need FirstNet to get their Public Safety Broadband up and running. FirstNet needs the States more than the States need them. It’s a hard fact to accept when FirstNet fails to see beyond its own delusion of an idea that will fail no matter how far you get along in its implementation. Unfortunately, the drunk must learn a lesson.
FirstNet was doomed once Sam Ginn announced they already had a plan and were working with the carriers to come up with a solution. At that point in time they had already convinced themselves that they had all the answers they needed. Everything since then, and up to know, has just been a waste of time and money.
In a recent Urgent article by Donny Jackson entitled “FirstNet says opt-out states must share revenues, meet nationwide network policies“ he quoted a couple of FirstNet representatives. Just one thing before I show you the quote; would anyone ask a lawyer to build you a house? Why would we ask one to build us a network? Anyway…
“Some state officials have been intrigued by the opt-out alternative almost from the moment that FirstNet was established, with a few initially expressing a desire to have revenue generated from the network help address general state-budget shortfalls. FirstNet officials quickly noted that the law requires all revenues must be reinvested into the FirstNet system, but a legal question remained: Could an opt-out state keep all revenues generated by the RAN it built within the state to deploy a network with greater performance or reduce the subscription costs to public safety?  
The answer is “No,” according to the resolution approved by the FirstNet board last Friday. FirstNet Acting Chief Counsel Jason Karp noted that opt-out states would benefit from the use of 20 MHz of 700 MHz broadband spectrum that is licensed to FirstNet, which is mandated to build out a nationwide broadband network for public safety.
“We need to ensure that any revenue that’s generated—particularly in highly dense, populated areas that will generate significant value for the excess capacity available—that that money is appropriately reinvested back into the network in a way … that benefits the entire nation,” Karp said during the meeting. “We don’t want the national deployment to, in any way, suffer because a particularly rich state that is able to generate significant revenue because of that population density retains that revenue to create essentially a higher-quality radio access network in their state than we have in other localities around the country.”
I’m sorry, but I have a few issues with these statements. First, the law States that the revenue generated by the State must be reinvested back into the network. That is true, but nowhere does it say anything about the people. The network is being created as Public Safety being the Priority. To add, the law states that the use of Public Private Partnerships can be utilized and thus commission commercialized services on a non-priority basis giving Public Safety the primary role. Any Public Private Partnership (P3) created will have an ownership stake for invested parties. The FirstNetBoard even said themselves that they were looking to give a majority share of“63%” to a commercial carrier partner.
So, if I get this right, it’s okay for FirstNet to setup a P3 and utilize the investment revenue for itself and its partners, but the States can’t? Something just doesn’t seem right with that, then again it may be just me. Why would FirstNet be allowed to give away 63% of anything? The network, and the spectrum, was allocated to Public Safety – not FirstNet. FirstNet wasn’t even created until after the law was enacted, and even then it took them a year to get the FirstNet Board even going. Remember all that talk about having a 15-member board, but no organization to operate under its direction? FirstNet was not mandated to build the network, the 15-member board was, plus the spectrum was not allocated to FirstNet — especially when it didn’t even exist yet — it was allocated to Public Safety that was represented by the Public Safety lobbying committee long before the board was even a thought.
The law, as written and signed by the President, was in fact scribed before FirstNet ever came into existence. What I’m confused about is when did FirstNet take over the entire spectrum, and who said they could do anything to the spectrum without the okay of Public Safety? I may be missing something here, but isn’t the majority of Public Safety driven at a State and local level, not some newly created NTIA organization? From what I recall, FirstNet was created to organize the creation of the network as to support Public Safety’s needs; in essence FirstNet was created to help develop the solution for Public Safety – not the other way around. From what I understand, and I may be wrong, but nowhere along the way was FirstNet ever given all the assets to build what they wanted. The spectrum has always been allocated to Public Safety — thus the State. If anything, FirstNet should be reporting to a 15-member board under the direction of the Board of Governors instead of what they have going on now.
If a State, or States, decides that they want to do their own P3 arrangement, and grant ownership shares to their own private investors, then the State must reinvest their own share back into the needs of the network. The law says nothing about the share of the private investment side. If the law stated that a State had to reinvest all of their revenue, then why would FirstNet approve a vote to relinquish “63%” of its partnership, thus revenue, to third parties? If it were true then, by law, FirstNet has to dedicate all its revenue to the network as well – that means no money for its partners, thus no investors. Catch 22 going on here.
Jeff Johnson is a great guy, but the following statement is awkward.
“We are building this nationwide network for public safety, and that doesn’t mean seven of 56 states, territories and commonwealths—it means all 56,” Johnson said. “That means we’re going to have to take resources from areas that produce more, and share them in the places don’t produce enough.”

First off that statement sounds kind of socialistic. Brings back memories of someone saying, “share the wealth”. I know what Mr. Johnson is trying to say is that the reinvested money, the portion that goes to the “Public” side of the Public Private Partnership, will be rendered for the “self-sustainment” clause within the Act, thus the “entire” network. I understand that, but I have a better thought. What if FirstNet were to stipulate that it has to take 5% ownership of all the State P3’s, thus enabling them a long-term committed revenue stream to support national public safety programs? That would make a hell of a lot more money for FirstNet then giving away the farm to the commercial carriers. Plus, any State that Opts-Out has to abide by the standards of technicalities as listed by FirstNet, i.e. physical network design characteristics, approved vendors, etc..  FirstNet would also be in the position to script a framework for consideration that the State can utilize to execute its own Public Private Partnership. Within that framework FirstNet could state its requirement for a 5% ownership stake, thus its revenue equivalent that would go back to FirstNet as a way to help support the needed Public Safety programs for those States that lack their own funding. Sounds a lot better if you ask me.
Laws can be written or modified to insure the “Public’s” side of the P3 arrangement is committed to Public Safety. We have to remember that Public Safety is essentially a local element — anything else is a nationalistic police force. The law does state the revenue generated by the State (the State’s portion of ownership) has to go back into the network, thus allowing the State to generate self-sustainment to maintain its long-term operations and maintenance of its own solution, where as 5% of their stake would go back to FirstNet to accommodate the Nation’s needs as well. If FirstNet wants to “share the wealth”, then by all means go ahead and share your 5%. Just remember, the State Governors are the ones that define their own State’s Public Safety.
But whom am I other than….
Just some guy and a blog….

FirstNet sells out: Lack of knowledge and the chaos of lobbying has pushed the D-Block into the hands of the commercial carriers. Can I say I told you so?

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment

FirstNet has chosen their business model. Their model is to partner with a carrier to go for a nationwide deployment of Public Safety Broadband. I told you so! Once again FirstNet misses the boat and sides with lobbying from the carriers. Ever since the 400 page business model, that didn’t exist, hit the press it was known what FirstNet was going to do. How they will fail in so many ways is unheard of.

Let’s say they get their network built with a commercial carrier, it will totally defeat the entire purpose of Public Safety Broadband. The entire cause for pulling back the D-Block spectrum back from its original auction to the carriers, almost 10 years ago, was mainly because we could not count on the commercial carriers infrastructure to operate during times of emergencies, i.e. hurricanes, tornados, earthquakes. All FirstNet has done is what it set out to do since the beginning, get the spectrum into the hands of the commercial carriers. Plus, it will fall dramatically short in its original plan for complete coverage of the United States. In fact by partnering with the commercial carriers will only insure that the carriers gets premium spectrum to expand their own services within 42% of the geographic metropolitan coverage areas, while the taxpayer flips the bill to harden the commercial carriers networks – what a deal!

First, you auction off the most valuable spectrum on the planet to the commercial market? The carriers offer up over $10 Billion for it? Then you have a change of heart and pull it back because the commercial carriers can’t keep their own networks up during an emergency? Then you give the spectrum to Public Safety so that they can build their own, protected and hardened, network specifically for Public Safety? Then our Federal Government has a major flip-flop event and gives the spectrum back to the carriers for free? Only in this case the taxpayer now pays for the commercial carriers infrastructure updates via a nationwide RFP? Man I wish I had that kind of deal! Can someone tell me who is in charge here, because I know its not FirstNet. FirstNet, has the board, made up of a majority of non-telecom people, have been easily influenced by those that say they are the experts in delivering the network? How asinine can this get?

The only people that will prosper from this deal will be the carriers. Public Safety once again can’t get its act together. As I stated more than 2 years ago, after the 400 page fiasco, FirstNet has been sold on the notion that they can’t build anything without the carriers help. The fact is the carriers don’t even build their own networks, plus they don’t even own their own towers anymore (ref AT&T and Verizon’s sales of tower assets). What good will this partnership garner? FirstNet’s plan is going to fail miserably, or it will be lost to the political chaos of how the Federal Government typically works. What a total waste of money — and spectrum. As long as FirstNet keeps its course, I’m afraid the solution is a total loss. There is only one way out of this entire mess – the State Governor.

Everyone should read about Pennsylvania’s plan on how it wants to build its network; that is the closest effort to success so far. Just so you know, their solution is in-direct conflict with FirstNet’s plan. Who will win in the end? Who will lose? The winners will not be the taxpayer and it won’t be Public Safety. Public Safety….Governor…..are you going to let the Federal Government come in and build a network with the carriers who have everything to gain using your land, your taxpayer money, and not share in any of the profit? Or will you take control of your own use of the spectrum and create your own model that will enable your ability to create jobs, lower taxes, and reap the benefits of revenue? Even the Commonwealth of Kentucky has initiated its first step of building the backbone that will let the wireless broadband ride upon, and its using my Public Private Partnership model (although stolen acquired by Macquarie). Will Kentucky allow the Federal Government come in with its carrier partner to force the others out, all while giving them free access to your newly created fiber network? The FirstNet plan does none of this for you and in fact will only be setup for the commercial carriers to win. Let’s get ready for the fight.  

Also, FirstNet stated they will work with the rural carriers as well. Only problem there is these rural carriers are in the metropolitan areas as well. Will FirstNet give authority for the commercial carrier to control on that turf as well? Plus, the rural carriers only cover the small towns and cities. Nobody in the telco space provides services to the rest of the 60% of the geographic landmass of the US. Why? Because it costs too much for them to make a profit. So, instead of the commercial carrier not willing to lose their own money on the plan, FirstNet decides to step in and have the taxpayer pay for the carriers deficiencies?  As I stated before, the carriers will now be able to access the rural markets, sell commercial services to the rural areas, all while not spending a dime of their own money to build it, nor a dime to acquire the valuable spectrum they once offered more than $10 Billion for. Instead the taxpayer will pay for it? Somebody just got taken! That someone is all of us. If I were a carrier I would be having the biggest party ever! As an entrepeneur, that was a great play by the carriers. FirstNet — I think the term is called rope-a-dope.

But who am I other than….

Just some guy and a blog……

FirstNet: Motorola making a SMART move. Could be the game changer they need – they could take over all control of FirstNet!!

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment

Motorola buying Airwave may be the smartest move yet and the solution they were looking for. This has many points of positive moves. The primary being their move into Managed Services where as they could maintain, manage and operate public safety broadband networks. Another reason is a foothold in the UK, thus Europe, by pushing LMR over Tetra products (that will be a tough sell though). Plus, they got it at cheap price, given Macquarie just bought Airwave back in 2007 for $3.8 Billion – that’s quite a loss on their investment. But Macquarie seems to be lacking in the SMART area when it comes to technology investments.I believe it is a direct result of who is at the helm in making the decisions for them. But hey you can’t win them all. About the smartest thing Macquarie has done is plagiarize acquire my P3 info to invest in Kentucky.

Motorola’s acquisition of Airwave will enable it to establish managed service contracts between the UK,Canada and the US, thus being the first to consolidate a national capability of operating FirstNet. I guess Motorola will be bidding on whatever FirstNet RFP is advertised then. That’s how Motorola usually does it anyway; go for the bid, even if it’s a bad RFP, win it, then negotiate terms and conditions at the same time changing the RFP in the process. It wouldn’t be the first time and it won’t be the last – check out the history of LA-RICS. Although it seems to be kind of “under the table” type deals, it’s business (with my Bronx tone). Although, Motorola hasn’t been doing very well lately, when it comes to this philosophy leads me to believe that Motorola has only been doing this out of desperation. Regardless this acquisition could be the maneuvering that Motorola needs to insure its future as the market leader once the Public Safety Broadband Network gets underway, and it will get underway. Motorola has some very good relationships that go deep within the Public Safety space; it would take an act of God, or a major dissolution of Motorola, to get rid of that “good o’boy network”.

Motorola is in fact putting itself into a very smart position; even if they may not fully understand what they have done. Operating and managing the Public Safety Control Center piece allows Motorola to be the only one in the space; or at least the only one that can proclaim its individuality in the space. After all, control and operations of the Public Safety Broadband Network will be the gateway into the Applications layer of the broadband services, i.e. NG-911, Utility infrastructures, Transportation and many others. He who control’s the broadband layers – controls the market. Seems that this would be a great “in” for players like HP, IBM and even Honeywell (if they are still around).

How will controlling the network operations enable Motorola to be best positioned for controlling all of FirstNet? Simple, the control plain of the network will be based on connectivity within the DWDM (Dense Wave Division) layer, or layer 2, inter-connecting all the statewide networks, thus wireless broadband tower infrastructures. Gigabit Ethernet will be transported via wavelengths (Lambdas) one layer up. Those Lamdas will be the fiber and virtual network connectivity for all those that ride on the network – to include the entire wireless broadband portion. The controlling entity of the core backbone in the transport layer needs to maintain, track and provide access for all entities that need to access the network – this is where Motorola is positioning itself. Once again, Motorola may not even know what they are doing here and it could just be a fluke.

The scary thing is that Motorola has never operated as an ISP (Internet Service Provider) before, such as XO, or Level 3, etc.. Doing nationwide network management, using umbrella management solutions, is not the same as LMR; add on top of that the controlling fabric of the wireless layer – that being the backhaul and RAN solutions – makes it even more convoluted as to what Motorola would need to do. My gut feeling is that they may never be able to take on the work they are buying into. But, it’s a smart move and one that I would engage as well. Could make them a big force in the communications market again (beyond just handsets). Makes the SWOT analysis of the entire acquisition quite appetizing. Then again they could be just making a play to replace Tetra as well.

But whom am I other than…

 just some guy and a blog…

FirstNet RFP: will it be a party with a bunch of nerds, some ugly chicks and bad food? Invite the Turkeys!

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment
FirstNet is going to advertise an RFP to the market place asking for a partner. It may be just me but we may have a few issues.

Let’s see, lots of talk about nothing; lots of travel saying nothing; no business case presented; no funding solution presented; no real plan for the future; no standards divulged; and nothing that talks about what a partnership will look like and how it will achieve any type of success. Who wouldn’t want to go to this party? What could go wrong? It’s like a slow train wreck happening on ground hog day.

Let’s take a look at a potential partner. Someone who has deep pockets, wants to invest in something, and wants to make lots more money to put back into their pockets. OK that’s fine! But what do they invest in? Who do they invest with? Who will be there investment partners? What is the share of their investment? When is the ROI on that investment? What will the exit strategy look like? What is the realistic view of whether, or not, the investment will actually happen? What does the timeline look like? And oh yes, they have to have deep pockets. Did I say that already?
A turkey was chatting with a bull. “I would love to be able to get to the top of that tree,” sighed the turkey, “but I haven’t got the energy.”
“Well, why don’t you nibble on some of my droppings?” replied the bull. “They’re packed with nutrients.”
The turkey pecked at a lump of dung and found that it actually gave him enough strength to reach the lowest branch of the tree.
The next day, after eating some more dung, he reached the second branch.
Finally after a fourth night, there he was, proudly perched at the top of the tree. Soon he was promptly spotted by a farmer, who shot the turkey out of the tree.
Moral of the story: Bullshit might get you to the top, but it won’t keep you there.
I can safely state that there will always be Turkey’s willing to go to this party — guaranteed.

But who am I other than…..

Just some guy and a blog….

FirstNet is giving all the D-Block spectrum to the Commercial Carriers!!!!!

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment
Have you read the recent article by Donny Jackson entitled “Updated FirstNet Operational Architecture would make winning bidder responsible for most functions”. (Sep 24, 2015)
“FirstNet’s winning partner—likely a team of commercial partners—would have ownership of more than 63% of the system functions, with public-safety entities being responsible primarily for user-management issues regarding devices and applications, according to FirstNet’s updated Operational Architecture document released earlier this month. “
First off let me point out that without proper ownership controls a 63% majority has all the rights to the solution, which means minority shareholders have no power whatsoever. Well, I told you so. In essence this falls directly inline with what I recommended right from the start. FirstNet should run itself as its own Public Private Partnership and give ownership to the private side of the deal, thus incentivizing the role of the partner. BUT…. FirstNet needs to understand that this partnership is only to address the national footprint model and not the statewide model. The network will still have to be operated locally under State jurisdiction. Trying to operate FirstNet as a National Carrier will not work on this solution. Such a partnership at this level would address the need of FirstNet to tap into statewide networks, or combine resources for multi-state scenarios, but it won’t be able to address the daily needs of the local support, especially if there is revenue involved – of which this model starts to tap into. Public Safety users have a lot more demands that just some guy and a smart phone.
The same P3 model needs to be addressed and employed at the State level as well; only the State level solution will be more about local ownership and control, yet still utilize the centralized standards and requirements of the national solution. The Federal level P3 awardee will only structure a nationwide overview of all the State’s and Territories. It should not provide local service on a local operational framework. It’s a lot more than just providing monthly cell phone service for a fee. What happens when the private side wants to sell virtual network usage that is only within State boundaries? What happens if service models starts to outpace the local First Responder needs? After all, money is king in the PPP scenario and with 63% of the shareholdings why not start to dilute the minority?
This falls in line with what I had mentioned two years ago, FirstNet should consider a separate RFP and contract to outsource a national organization to operate, as a Program Manager, the network at the highest topology overseeing all statewide operations and the State’s need to construct and deploy the physical infrastructure utilizing their own statewide public private partnership. I can think of 30 or more revenue producing service offerings other than just voice. If the P3 arrangement touches more than just Public Safety entities then that number would multiply tremendously. Why must we restrict the revenue producing products just to one awardee at the Federal level? What stake does the State have in the deal? After all isn’t it the States land, assets, local contractors, airspace and local First Responders? Isn’t the State generating all the local physical work to build the solution? Why can’t that State make its own profit on the deal? Why do we have to have the Federal Government come into the State’s jurisdiction to run and operate another federal monstrosity?
In the end all I am seeing coming out of this RFP will be the basis to creating another carrier that is modeled on the typical revenue producing business model that is specifically designed for commercial service. This RFP does not fit the business needs of Public Safety at the local State level. I’m afraid this is a very large train wreck that is inevitable, especially with threats of the new election cycle coming up. In my professional opinion, this is not going to go well for FirstNet and we will have wasted 4 years of work and money, as I stated in the very beginning of my blog entries.
What I can predict, is that the Federal Government will continue down this convoluted mess and the entire solution will be a huge waste of time and money, unless it can model this RFP correctly.  In the end the entire network will be taken over by its 63% owner of the entire solution – that being the commercial carriers – thus taking it all away from the State’s and putting it directly into the commercial carriers pockets. Forget about using the network to help reduce taxes and create more jobs. Why don’t we just save ourselves all the headaches and just give the spectrum to the commercial carriers now?
But whom am I other than…
Just some guy and a blog….

FirstNet and the Public Safety Broadband Network to Privatize! Love the idea!

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment
Sorry for the long delay in my postings – not that anyone cares anyway – but family takes priority. I’ve been following all the articles and press clippings on the progress – or lack there of – related to FirstNet and the National Public Safety Broadband Network (NPSBN). I have a few comments, if anyone is interested.
So let me get this straight the Middle Class Tax Relief and Jobs Creation Act was signed in February of 2012 and we are just now assigning a “CEO” for FirstNet? Isn’t that 3 years now and more than 14 years since 9-11? I have nothing against Mr. Poth, and frankly don’t know anything about him, so lets give him the benefit of the doubt and support his ability to lead the effort. My real question to everyone is, will the appointment make a difference? At this point in the game we could appoint Hillary Clinton to the job, at least we would have an email server setup. 😉 You must admit that setting up her email server in her bathroom made for an easy wipe of the hard drives – I’m just saying. Puts a whole new meaning to potty talk. Here I felt as though reading the iPad on the toilet was going to make my wife mad!
We have an election year coming up. If the conservative’s take over the government what do we think will happen with FirstNet? Do we actually think the new President will keep funding the FirstNet initiative, or will it become and unfunded mandate with the new guidelines to let the State’s build their own solutions? Or worse yet, do we still think the carriers are the best option? As I have preached about in the past, building this network is not rocket science. Developing a real business case is not some secret private sauce. It’s all too obvious that there are a few who understand quite well what this network could do for the Nation, and what it’s worth, thus delaying its deployment is to the advantage of a certain sect of the elite. I’m not trying to be derogatory towards the Elite — I wish I were one of them. If that were the case, and I was part of the Elite, I wouldn’t be posting on any blog, rather I be laying on my private beach, on my private island, acting like a Cabana Boy for my wife.
It’s also very obvious that a high-stakes game of poker and politics (is there really a difference) is being played on all of us, most importantly the Public’s Safety.  All I know is that the State’s are wasting time waiting for FirstNet to get its act together. In fact those that wait are those armchair quarterbacks trying to decipher when to buy stock in the deployment of the NPSBN (National Public safety Broadband Network). By the time you are able to buy your stock the opportunity has done passed you by. Why do we need to wait when we know what the outcome will be, an outcome that is becoming all too familiar with all of us? The Federal Government has its place, but I’m afraid that the Federal Government is not in a position, or retains any real technical capability to deploy this highly complex LTE solution. I know that sounds counter to my statement of not being rocket science. But to someone like myself deploying a broadband infrastructure is not a technical challenge; it’s more of a managerial issue.
LTE is still a very complex technology, which means, you need to have the market insight, technical knowhow, and the entrepreneurial spirit of deploying telecommunications first. But if you think the basic deployment of a physical infrastructure is important, wait until you see what the virtual world of enterprise applications all based off cloud based service platforms will be.  Yes, I’m talking about the cloud native applications to implement the services. That’s right we are talking about the enormously complex tone of cloud-based services, PaaS, SaaS and other Big Data analytical solutions to modernize our entire infrastructure of Public Safety capabilities that will make our physical deployment of LTE look like a child playing with Legos. Better start reading if you haven’t done so already. Deploying the applications layer of the entire solution will outpace the needs of the physical infrastructure fast. Why you say? Well because we have an entire new market of Big Data and Cyber Security that is forcing the verbiage of LTE and broadband as passé.
The implications of deploying NG-911, which should be the first application to be designed, built and delivered, will not, and should not, be just a migration of the old enterprise solutions onto the new broadband platform. The NG-911 solution will, in fact, have to be designed from the ground up so that we can benefit from all the real feature sets of native based Platforms as a Service (PaaS). The impacts of PaaS solutions will mean a whole new way of hiring the right talent and fostering the right technical know-how than we have experienced in the past. This is where Mr Poth, and his contacts at HP, will come in handy.
You see HP is one of the leaders in this market, which is very beneficial to all of us, having them on your team will be a great start. We have to remember that there are many others in this field, i.e. IBM, SAP, EMC and others that are just in the start-up phase, who all specialize in certain aspects of enterprise application development. But don’t worry; there will be plenty of work and programs to go around. If you think the complexity of deploying NG-911 will be difficult, wait until you see the deployment of Healthcare Patient Tracking solutions; or the deployment of hardened SMART Grid; or the applications to support High-Speed Rail throughout the United States – all of which are considered part of the Public Safety Broadband Solution. Unfortunately, NG-911 will be fast paced fad in a market that will last decades, if not centuries.
The entire ecosystem of the native cloud solutions will drive a whole new market of opportunities. I’m more than confident that there are those within this political quagmire who fully understand the situation.  There are those in charge that are secretly plotting and manipulating the aspects of control. Their end game will be a touchy subject of trying to manage the output, and timeline, for what services and programs will come first – of course delivered by those they believe to be the real experts — thus furthering the same-old isolated procurement processes, segregated and biased towards a non-competitive landscape that only benefits those in control of the process. I know that sounds like conspiracy theory, but when it looks like a Duck, smells like a Duck and quacks like a Duck, then its with sound judgment that it’s a… Fowl. In the end, this network is worth more than all the carriers combined. This network is the baseline for a whole new infrastructure that will replace everything we have seen to date – the carriers know this, a few in the Government know this, and the large corporate government contractors understand this as well.  Do we blame anyone for trying to maneuver for his or her own gain? It’s human nature isn’t it? Or is it just greed? The fact is there will be plenty to go around, and many of those who believe themselves to be the “Masters of Control”, will be a faded memory of a handshake at a conference some years ago.
The move by the FCC to re-commission Title II, naming broadband as a utility, opens the entire market to new players; players that can generate a lot of revenue using this new framework of broadband – prioritized for Public Safety. But, we can’t design such a complex solution with a mass of people, I get that, but that’s no reason for not being transparent. Has anyone seen a real business model for this thing yet? One way to mask your political ambitions is by hiding in plain site. Every little detail of the solution will be lost to the general mass of observers when overloaded with large amounts of data. It’s like forcing a Police Captain to understand every little nuance of deploying a large and costly broadband solution, touching every square inch of the United States, when you knowingly understand that this person has limited market foresight on the economics and the density of deploying broadband. One thing can be assured is that such a person will get out of it is a lot of good sleep. Maybe the intention is not to have that individual act as the lead in deploying the infrastructure? Maybe he, or she, is just being positioned for the next bigger phase of FirstNet – that being the catalyst to creating an entire ecosystem of PaaS and SaaS solutions that will ride the network being deployed. After all, that is where the big money will be made in both the deployment of the applications and the services rendered through them.
If I were a betting man, that’s where I would put my money. It’s all about the long game. After all, why call someone a CEO if you don’t intent to privatize? If that is indeed the direction we are heading, then I for one will be right behind you as a supporter.
But what do I know I’m…
Just some guy and a blog…

FirstNet and Public Safety Broadband moving forward or just the same old stuff?What does Steve Jobs and Michael Jordan have in common with FirstNet?

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment
I was watching the Subcommittee meeting yesterday on my iPhone, of which TJ Kennedy was the guest speaker, as was Stu Davis, CIO for Ohio. Both of these gentleman have been presented the Myers Model Public Private Partnership on several occasions — and at great personal cost. They, and their staff, have always been very receptive to the model, yet at times seem to be in conflict with an alternative plan created by someone else. “It’s hard to deny a plan that just makes sense in every notion of the word. A plan that sounds better than any other model we’ve heard and have been presented”. (numerous anonymous’) I’m thrilled that we’re starting to see some breadcrumbs indicating which way this thing is going — which happens to be the exact course I’ve said it would take from the start. It’s chaos working its way into order; or like a mixture of pink slimy goo finally pouring into a mold to make chicken nuggets. Yah, it looks good, but are you sure you want to eat it?
FirstNet, and a lot of States, are starting to realize that we can’t do anything without a sound business model. A model that allows them to administer every part of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Jobs Creation Act of 2012. A model that actually does what the Act was intended to do…create jobs and relieve taxpayers. Who would have thought? I understand TJ’s wishes to create a sound organization, and I applaud him for doing such a good job in such a difficult position. I also applaud Chairwoman Swenson for putting this on the right course. Here it comes – BUT – we still have some insight to be relished before complete understanding is at hand. Insight I’m afraid FirstNet doesn’t have. I may sound rash at times, but I only do so to be heard. Humor and straight talk is what is needed for someone to understand that people, like myself, are here to help. Just trying to come in with an open and free flowing mind of cooperation is not the required manner when convincing the masses, especially when those free flowing thoughts spill out all over the floor like a scalped liberal. There are so many others all projecting themselves as the end-all to all that has to happen that I completely understand TJ and Sue’s no-win situatioon. After all in DC, it’s not that you have a great idea that counts, its how loud you can shout above everyone else to make yourself heard. 
The questions from the representatives yesterday were obviously tainted with a slight hint of all-nighters – which is a good thing. It’s good to see that interest is starting to take hold. Maybe it was just that they had some free time; or maybe the Public Safety Broadband is starting to be recognized as something much bigger than just the Public Safety piece. The fact is when you start to see the linkage between the Public Safety Broadband requirements and the reclassification of broadband as a Utility, or Title II under the FCC, you start to understand that all our decisions should be based on the prioritization of traffic users, demand of potential users and the creation of revenue that drives coverage and partnership requirements. 
The PSBN and the commercial carriers are only in like form via the common technology they deploy… their individual business models are totally different. Thus, everything about the prioritization, funding and revenue creation require a uniqueness that has never been tried. PSBN is based on Prioritization first, partnerships second and revenue third. A commercial carrier is based on a revenue model situated on market demand that drives partnerships. One model fits the other about as much as oil mixes with water. 
In reality we aren’t talking about building a Public Safety Network anymore, and we are way beyond any complexity of a website for healthcare :), we are starting to create a solid infrastructure of broadband that can penetrate every corner of the Nation (Rep Walden); an infrastructure that is based on the needs of Public Safety first, yet at the same time utilizing the demands of broadband access revenue to self-sustain the network’s developmental needs. As I’ve stated on numerous occasions, and written about in numerous articles, there is only one business model that will work in this regard, that being the Public Private Partnership model I’ve developed called the Myers Model. I won’t bore you with the specifics on the model, I’ve posted many articles, with pictures and diagrams for those who need it, on my blog that can help explain it – including a couple of really cool Prezis. What really concerns me though is why FirstNet is putting out an RFP without a sound business model?

Does FirstNet already know what the business model is but aren’t sharing it with anyone? Does FirstNet need to solicit for someone to come in and make their business model because they aren’t capable? Does FirstNet have a relationship with someone who is pushing them down this road? Why produce an RFP to ask for a business model and the “turn key” solution, which in turn will just generate more unnecessary RFPs? Just doesn’t make any sense, especially if creating a business model is right in front of them and has been offered on several occasions. Just because the idea comes from a lonely little American citizen and not a large think tank of corporations supported by lobbyist makes it a bad idea. After all, it’s the crazy people who think they can change the world that actually do. (Steve Jobs) 

As Michael Jordan once said, “when shooting a basketball I envision that the rim as big as a 40 gallon trashcan.” The business model that FirstNet uses to justify their national deployment has to be in sync with a State’s business model. The two business models are not one in the same, but at the same time will require a close linkage for success, more so for FirstNet’s national deployment needs than a State’s. The State can actually construct under their own P3 model, that I’ve laid out, and not even need FirstNet; so it would be smart for FirstNet to grasp hold of the linkage requirements within the business model in its entirety before moving forward with just an RFP. My gut feeling is that they still don’t have the right person on board that understands the entrepreneurial demands of selling broadband prioritized for Public Safety. To me, with 25+ years behind me, this is a piece of cake, but I can understand with all the Chief’s in the frying pan makes for a very bland dish – “too much Pepper in the Pot” my kids always tell me.
I did like a few things from yesterdays meeting; one was that as a Catholic I like to hear the same message anywhere I choose to go to church, which in this case I’ m still hearing the same old thing from FirstNet; two, TJ has finally eluded to the masses that they have to sell broadband services to make this happen; three, the fact that by bringing in the Rural Telcos, and Utilities, we are creating a vibrant market place of broadband service capabilities to be sold to the rural constituents; four, the fact that we should not shy away from the notion of creating revenue for the benefit of the Public Safety Broadband Network; and five, probably the best part, is to move FirstNet into the free market as an actual privatized business….did everyone catch that statement in the hearing? Nothing better than seeing the realization that we have to create this as a wholly run private company, sounds like 72 Virgins all singing in my ear. 
There is only one model that will work, that being the Myers Model P3. I feel as though I, a single voice against the masses, am finally being heard. Maybe I can move beyond just being some guy and a blog and actually help someone stay the right course. As I have mentioned before, this has to come from the States, not the Federal Government. FirstNet should be reporting to a board of Governors, not the DOC. Maybe President Obama is listening as well?
Why continue to rely on resources that get their ideas second hand? Why not just ask the expert?
Just some guy and a blog…..

FirstNet and States need to understand the law and their Business Model

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment
Reference a recent article by Donny Jackson of Urgent. Opt out fight was always going to happen so don’t think it’s avoidable. The only way for this fight to be avoidable is for FirstNet to be under the control of the Governors with specifications that the Federal requirements are met. 
What is confusing to most is that the State, or FirstNet, can’t take any revenue from selling broadband. In fact any revenue the State, or FirstNet, takes in has to be reinvested, but the law states that commercial broadband can be available through a “public private partnership” meaning the States portion of the revenue would be reinvested; this don’t address the private entity though. A privately funded solution for the States buildout would be able to sell broadband service as long as public safety is priority. That is why the law States “public private partnership”, plus it goes hand-in-hand with Title II where as broadband is classified as a Utility. Who would have thought?
In short the only misinterpretation of the law is when FirstNet, or a State, fails to see the business model opportunity, thus without that business model laid out people will freely interpret the law the way it fits them. FirstNet just needs to put the Business Model framework together, then let the States build off it just as Chair Swenson eluded too. 
This isn’t rocket science. This is why I’m always preaching for the need of a real business model for opt out states. 
If FirstNet doesn’t setup the framework I hinted too for the last three years, then when the battles start to happen, it will be presumed that FirstNet didn’t setup the model on purpose. 
FirstNet is the loser either way in this. Without more than 95% of the States “opting in” the “Business Model” they created for a National Footprint will fail miserably. If FirstNet tries to force the issue of “opt in” in then States will just stand down and watch what happens not taking part at all, thus no participants. These are some of the reasons why I think FirstNet needs to report to a board of Governors not the NTIA and DOC. 
But who am I other than…
Just some guy and a blog….

FirstNet Public Safety Broadband Network – FirstNet sees kink in its own armor?

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment
First, sorry for the delay in writing, but my wife is in Stage 4 of Breast Cancer, so most of my time has been for her and the 5 kids.
I’ve been keeping track of what’s been going on with FirstNet and I have to say that I’m a bit disappointed. FirstNet seems to be stuck in this “do it myself” frame of mind and is fixated on putting together a large-scale RFP to install their own nationwide rollout. Yet, at the same time we’re starting to see kinks in their armor for a business plan. It’s not like I haven’t been warning about this for the last three years. I stated right from the beginning that FirstNet could plan for the physical build-out all they want, without a clear business plan it will be moot. I do see some bits and pieces within the analysis that FirstNet has formulated that have merit, but it is far from being any sort of a viable solution for such a complex requirement. Just as an example; without a full understanding of the technology, its capabilities, its viability as a service offering, its deployment necessities and the associated profit engine, then I’m afraid we are a long ways from getting this going.
So here we are sitting on $7 Billion in cash and it’s burning a whole in their pockets to spend it before the Administration change. The reality is that FirstNet does not own the spectrum, Public Safety does, and Public Safety is driven at the State level not the Federal Level, thus one of the primary reasons FirstNet must concentrate on working with the States to accomplish what they need. It’s a heroic cause and gesture, but as I stated long ago there would be a few “Blue leaning” States that will go along with the Federal Government solution, but the fact is that the majority of the States will “Opt Out” if not purely for the fact that they can make money off the use of the spectrum. By my calculations FirstNet needs more than 90% “Opt In” for their business model to even come close to being successful.  I’m just saying – that doesn’t seem to be realistic. So do we keep going down this path of one large RFP, or even a carrier partnership, when we know we won’t get the numbers to help fully build this out, or most importantly, sustain us for the long run?
Eventually I do see FirstNet doing an RFP, but not for what they’re trying to do today. My version of the RFP of the future will be to fill-in the voids that the State’s have issues building out to; or the areas, such as National Parks or Federally owned land that require coverage. It’s unrealistic to believe that the Federal Government can build out a complete physical deployment and then maintain such a network for the long term, especially without the support of the States. Even with all the good intentions it’s just not feasible. You can’t become a telecom company over night and you definitely can’t build a Nationwide Broadband solution from the top down. FirstNet should be spending its time working on a template and standards that the States can follow that will allow them to build their own solution using fixed standards and designs. On top of that, FirstNet should be analyzing their role in the investment portion of the PSBN framework, where as, ownership is allocated at the State level. It would be much easier for a cookie cutter approach to the States then adjust for their individual for individual case scenarios. On our current course we can’t get there from here.
I think part of the problem is FirstNet’s belief that they own the spectrum, so understandably they’re taking a headstrong approach to getting the task done. We have to remember that the Public Safety leadership did not create FirstNet; it was created by the Department of Commerce – a Federal level administration – that was assigned by President Obama. Nowhere in the law does it State that the spectrum was allocated to the Department of Commerce, rather it was allocated to Public Safety. What the law states is that the Department of Commerce was chosen to lead in its implementation, to which the DOC assigned it to the NTIA. You should note that the NTIA has been trying to clean its hands of anything associated with FirstNet since the beginning – I wonder why? The DOC is also the entity that appoints the leadership, and still does, for the FirstNet Board.  Either way the fact remains that the President put the wrong people in charge of this Public Safety network. If anything FirstNet should be reporting to a board made up of Governors.
A better course of events would have been for the President to hand the leadership reigns over the Governor’s Association and utilize the Department of Commerce as his liaison entity with the mandate to create the preliminary business model. Had this been the case then the President would have laid the development and deployment of the Nationwide Public Safety Broadband Network squarely on the laps of the State Governors. I could almost guarantee you that things would have moved much faster; in fact we probably would have already seen some of the build-out underway. Instead what we will have is a mixed bag of timelines of State deployments all trying to be coordinated with a Federal organization tied down in its own bureaucracy who is, at the same time, trying to sell their own solution.
The issue is still the lack of a template to build against and a business model for all the States to follow. As I’ve preached about since the beginning, this is exactly what FirstNet has been devoid in providing, a solid framework for the States to work against and an allocation of required standards to meet. Instead what we have is a programmatic approach coming from FirstNet with a clear disregard for creating the business plan that benefits the States. Our gain as a Nation has been wasted time and money trying to complete arduous tasks when the more simplistic version would have sufficed. FirstNet has now reached the understanding of its own milestone that demonstrates a critical failure in their business approach; you can’t sustain, nor build out in its entirety, the solution that is needed for the Public Safety Broadband Network, without a better business model than what they have today.
What will happen from here on out? Looking into my crystal ball I see a few courses.
1.     The most predominate course will be a continuation of the waste and expenditures moving forward until the elections happen then the threat of losing the $7 Billion altogether.
2.     Or, we start to see the easier course of just putting the deployment template, standardization of technology and the overall business model approach into effect. 
3.     Or, we see this entire house of cards come crashing down in an abysmal failure.
In the end the entire problem lays in President Obama’s lap. When you have a country that was built upon the success of private citizens, and the creation of an economic powerhouse based on capitalism, why would we put such a multifarious solution in the hands of a rookie who has never played in the position? Let alone a highly complex technology based broadband solution twice the size of the Nations two largest carriers? The real secret to this whole mess lies within the business model, not its physical deployment.
No need in beating a dead horse, but I’ve provided the solution that FirstNet, and the States, could use to make all this a success – that being a Public Private Partnership model that I’ve developed over a number of years.
But who am I other than….
Just some guy and a blog…..

FirstNet — why is Net Neutrality and Title II important to Public Safety Broadband?

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment
Why would FirstNet be interested in Title II and Net Neutrality? The basis for understanding is quite simple: Public Safety is the catalyst and anchor tenant for a new hardened infrastructure that can support broadband to everyone. Commercial broadband access is just a derivative of the hardened requirements. FirstNet needs all the partners it can gather, but they also need control of its implementation, at least to a point where the baseline, hardened, protected infrastructure is built and implemented and everyone else’s needs are applications that ride within it.
We hear a lot about convergence and consolidation and a lot of people think it just has to do with the commercial carriers – this is not entirely the case. When analyzing the consolidation we think about shrinking the carriers into a chosen few, i.e. AT&T and Verizon with large amounts of geography and Sprint and T-Mobile with smaller shares. The context of this theory is that the playing field is based on physical infrastructure and signal propagation. If you look at consolidation from a layer above you can see that consolidation also means morphing of the broadband space in its entirety. In short, its more than just a few carriers and some turf… that’s just what the press wants to write about. The fact is the market of broadband “technology” itself is forcing the change not the companies.
As broadband technology continues to progress we see a simplification of the platforms and infrastructure, thus the cost and complexities of designing, deploying and operating broadband services becomes cheaper. What has become more complex, outside of the science itself, is the applications that interface with the platform, but those platforms are associated with particular industry needs, i.e. Public Safety, cloud based services, Utilities, etc..
For the carriers though they are holding the baggage of past networks, towers, and any other physical assets of the old networks, thus their reason for shedding assets. Why do you ask? The reason the carriers are shedding assets is because it detracts from their revenue margin on access. Simply, it costs more to maintain the infrastructure than what they can make off your Internet access to your home. Plus, if they can sell off some old assets, why not. On the upside the carriers are seeing increased revenue on application services, i.e. TV, video-on-demand, cloud services, etc.., so if they can shed the physical and move into all services, they will decrease their overheads and increase their revenue. The issue is control though; this is where FirstNet comes in.
FirstNet managed to acquire the most valuable spectrum on the planet called the D-Block. By acquiring this spectrum FirstNet became the new main catalyst to the convergence and consolidation of broadband. Now we have a physical reason to build and control the unwanted physical broadband assets that are detracting from the commercial business model, i.e. towers, fiber and backhauls. By giving priority to Public Safety we are in-fact establishing the baseline for an all-encompassing telecommunications infrastructure that can be rebuilt from the ground up…literally. Towers will be built to a hardened spec that the carriers find to expensive for their needs and fiber can be delivered to remote areas for coverage that others were unwilling or incapable of delivering. 
With the President and the FCC bending the Title II and Net Neutrality rules, FirstNet will be in the position to work with the Utilities, most specifically the Electric Cooperatives, to deliver broadband.  The Electric Cooperatives cover all the rural areas of the United States and they have inherent telecommunication requirements, most specifically broadband for SMART Grid, and with Title II they will be allowed to compete in the commercial broadband space, meaning they will be allowed to sell broadband as part of their utility bill. It just so happens that the Electric Cooperatives, the bigger IOUs, and the Municipalities are also considered a part of Public Safety, thus are anchor tenants to the Public Safety Broadband Roadmap that FirstNet is working to deliver. Through the Public Private Partnership construct that I created and trademarked the Myers Model®, FirstNet, and the States, will now have the funding they need to build out 100% of the geographic landmass.
In closing, to put this all in simple terms, we have a new sheriff in town when it comes to building the plumbing for broadband to all Americans and its reasoning is in alignment with the requirement for essential services. This is what will help Americans get the infrastructure needed so they can get their universal broadband access. The commercial carriers are reluctant to change, especially when they lose control of the physical assets, yet at the same time can’t complain when they don’t want to spend the money to build it themselves.
But who am I other than…
Just some guy and a blog….