I must take issue with Sewell Chan, city desk reporter for The New York Times, as he reports on Wi-Fi Salon's demise in Deal Collapses for Free Wi-Fi in Parks.


He begins with this "The long-troubled arrangement to install wireless Internet networks in Central Park and other New York City parks has quietly collapsed after the contractor, Wi-Fi Salon, ran out of money because it could not find corporate sponsors."

Now one might assume from this that the network was never built, that it was an intent to build that was never acted on.   The fact is that the parkwifi network was built out in the second half of 2006 and for 2007 and 2008 served 1000+ New Yorkers a day in 17 locations in 10 parks in 4 boroughs.  

Now Sewell went to Harvard and majored in English.  I think he knows that the phrase 'arrangement to install' means.  It means something quite different from 'built out and maintained,'  which we did for years.   In fact I pointed out this out to him.  He said he would 'consider changing it.'   Nice slant there,  Must be nice to have so much ink to spill on someone.

Let's go back to his first words --  "long-troubled arrangement" -- now.   The Parks Department gave Wi-Fi Salon an initial three year concession, renewable after that year by year.   After the first three year installment, during which Wi-Fi Salon invested 1.3 million dollars to build out the 17 locations, the concession was renewed for 2008.  Wi-Fi Salon was well on its way for renewal for 2009, contingent on payment of $16K concession fees and another $7500 as a security deposit when September hit.  We just could not find a sponsor quickly enough to cover those fees and the considerable month to month operational fees in time (10K/month for 17 locations in bandwidth, overhead).    The shut down was quiet because right up until the last day (December 5th) we were working with a potential sponsor to offer something more than a written commitment and write a check, which in this climate was just too much to ask.    

Glenn Fleishman was good enough to post my response to his slam of me on his site along with an apology of sorts:

"Marshall Brown, Wi-Fi Salon's founder, takes issue with my characterization of his operations. No one--especially me--ever claimed that building outdoor networks was easy. From all that's happened in the last few years, it's clear that building large, sustainable, free (sponsored or otherwise) networks requires many stakeholders, a diverse revenue stream, and real purposes for a network beyond public access."

The trouble is, what Glenn here proposed as 'lessons learned' along the way are things that some people knew from the very beginning.    We in fact were awarded the concession based in part on what one must call prescience.    Ideas and words come easy though.   It is making it happen in the first place that mattters, getting to the endpoint still alive and kicking while everyone else has cratered that ultimately counts.   Now with Wi-Fi Salon we fell short of the vision, but the vision is still as valid now as it was when I first proposed it to Parks in August 2003, and through Wired Towns I intend to play a part in its fulfillment:

 



From the Original Proposal to the NYC Department of Parks and Recreation Executive Summary 8-11-2003:

"The WiFi Salon proposes that The City of New York Department of Parks and Recreation become the test bed for a new generation of WiFi Hot Spot design.   We call it WiFi 2.0.   The content is multimedia - with streamed video and music, archived or live.   It is interactive, enabling IP Telephony, gaming, personalization, and even web video conferencing.   It can be delivered to all web enabled devices - phones, PDAs, flat panel displays, kiosks, laptops and desktops.   It is also location specific, where each Hot Spot defines a unique social space through the content it offers.

Our consortium is convinced that WiFi 1.0 deployments, where people are expected to pay for mere Internet access (whether by subscription or a la carte) will not succeed as businesses. Access is but a commodity, and it is one that is rapidly depreciating.The price wars between WISPs, whether they are at core cable/DSL companies, cell phone companies, or WiFi specialists, are rapidly removing any profit from the equation. Further, the 'demand' side for WiFi access, while expected to grow significantly in the coming years, will not generate nearly enough demand to make up for the commoditization of access ( See accompanying Spreadsheet, Attachment A)

We in the WiFi Salon are all in agreement that WiFi's real future lies in the fact that it represents the localization of the Internet as a broadband interactive experience.   Our aim is to turn Hot Spots into destinations for tourists and other park visitors, into portals for art and culture, into a platform for the delivery of business services and essential public services, and into 'social computing' experiences for those residing within the community defined by the Hot Spot.

WiFi 1.0, like the early Internet, was about grabbing land at whatever cost then charging people to get online.  WiFi 2.0 is a broadband experience that offers people customized rich content.  

By creating a platform that allows various content providers to reach their specific audiences, WiFi 2.0 makes the network itself valuable, worth paying for as a resource, service, or source of entertainment, and worth sponsoring, either by corporations or by the content providers themselves.

 

Where Wi-Fi 1.0 just gets you to the web, WiFi 2.0 situates you at the center of a community where local businesses, non-profits and local government are all represented.   In Battery Park, for instance, the Parks Department would have access to the network for its own internal communications.   Small wireless web cams would be positioned both for security and commercial purposes.  Tourists could have a digital snap shot taken to be e-mailed home.  The Korean War Memorial (see photo) or the 9/11 Memorial (see photo) could be augmented with interactive content.   While waiting for ferries to the Statue of Liberty or Ellis Island, tourists could experience a preview of both places wirelessly through kiosks, panel displays, and other WiFi enabled devices.   A location-based tour of Castle Clinton (see photo), using pictures, sounds and text provided by The New York Historical Society, can help bring the past to life.  The American Café, like other restaurants within the park Hot Spots, could use a Wi-Fi driven solution to deploy a system that would take food orders, handle billing, and help control inventory.

I'm sorry, this from Glenn Fleishman is just annoying: 

"Eagle-eyed correspondent Klaus Ernst noted that the Wi-Fi in the parks project has shut down. Wi-Fi Salon, the concessionaire for most of the major parks, posted a message about the current economic conditions, but the note is undated.

I was always dubious about Wi-Fi Salon due to the surreal technical explanations made by its founder, its small size and lack of real-world experience, and the extensive delays in every step of the project. Ultimately, something closer to kiosks than coverage were erected, and I've never seen any usage numbers.

Community Wi-Fi organizers in New York City had a variety of other ideas about how to offer free Wi-Fi, but parks had its own agenda. Let's see if they approach this differently this time around."


First off, Glenn, what Klaus noticed, if he is at all honest, is how the Wi-Fi in Union Square is superior to ANY offered in NYC outside of Bryant Park.  Period.  That is with over 200+ contending networks.  

Two Altais, one mounted on Barnes and Noble, the other on Whole Foods.  You want numbers, Glenn?  How about 300 users a day even in this weather?  How about the ability to support 200 + users simultaneously?   That is without much publicity, no signage, and the northern part of the park closed for renovations.   This is all through Wired Towns, my new venture begun in early 2008 to support business improvement districts and small businesses.

There's more to come, too -- other BIDs -- so enjoy your schadenfreude while it lasts.

I will date the note if you like -- December 5th of this last year.  That was when my time ran out with parks.   Can you even imagine what it is like to get sponsorships in this environment?  Whole marketing groups fired, budgets slashed.  

And btw Glenn, I believe you have no inkling how hard it was to get the funding to build a free citywide 17 location network.   How many phone calls do you think you have to make over how many months to get a  sponsor to come to the table?  How many meetings?  Having ideas about how you'd do something is one thing.  Getting it paid for is a whole other matter. 

And what other great ideas do others supposedly have to do this?  For backhaul, all you have are some real shaky DSL lines.   To make matters worse, you have no physical addresses for any of the park locations where we deployed.   When a Verizon/Covad technician was dispatched to install a line, he just plain couldn't find the place given what they had for addresses and moved on.

Delays?   It took six months, an average of 12 visits and $250K just to get the 17 lines in.  I had hired high level telecom project managers and professional field forces to roll this thing out, people who were otherwise doing citywide and national rollouts.   We worked and sweated each day for six months.  I dare anyone else to attempt it.

But I'll tell you what, if they do, they'd better go fixed wireless off a rooftop and they'd better employ something as heavy duty as an Altai. That is my strategy with Wired Towns.   Parkwifi was first generation -- in equipment, and devices.   How good in your estimation was it supposed to have been, given that this was Wi-Fi 1.0?   Everyone else btw cratered on this -- philly, SF, etc, etc.  Why the vitriol towards me?   I guess its easy to do, that's all.   At one point -- 2006 --  I had a 46 Mbps fixed wireless link going in to support all 7 Central Park locations.  Not bad, given the time.  Is that what you meant by surreal?   I was trying to push the envelope on behalf of all New Yorkers, but timing here is everything.  We needed 'good enough' gear and enough devices.  That is only happening now with Altai, with iPhones and other devices.

Now with parkwifi we did achieve some pretty good coverage -- from 400-500 feet away, you could still connect.  Not bad.  I don't even know what that snide remark about 'kiosks' is supposed to mean.   At one point you assumed that we'd be covering all of Central Park -- 843 acres.   That is just a little surreal itself.  Tell me how that might have worked?  You need electricity, backhaul in open green spaces.  Good luck with that.

I invested over $1.3 million dollars in sponsorships and personal investments to build the parkwifi network.   Do I now look back and say what else could have been done, where I made mistakes?  Of course.   

But in the end, we had 1000+ users a day -- there's your numbers -- the technology got better, the devices started to arrive (iphones), and the stage was set for providing public Wi-Fi that is 'good enough.'  Unfortunately, I will not be doing that in NYC with fixed wireless and Altais because I am 500K short.   Any lead on how to secure that in this business environment would be appreciated. 

I invite you to respond to this publically.  I notice that your blog does not allow comments.  That speaks volumes.  By contrast, I allow comments and will allow yours.  You can always e-mail or phone.   I want the same thing as you do -- reliable, free public Wi-Fi.

So Glenn this is your opportunity to be a mensch -- speak to me directly and honestly. I can be reached at marshall@wiredtowns.com or 212-362-6546.   If someone has a better idea to do this, that is cover the parks, fine.   Love to see it.    Over the past five years, I have worked with some really smart people for a long time to do this as best I could.   Right now, you are just flaming.  You called me out.  Here I am.     


 



 

 

In an article entitled Let Your Fingers Be Your Guidebook, Seth Kugel offers that with the growing abundance of public Wi-Fi Hot Spots around museums and other points of interest in NYC, tourists are increasingly able to access the websites that pertain to them, and get useful information -- hours, fees, new exhibits -- even before their visit.

The parkwifi network takes this process one step further.   We offer more than access.   We also offer local links.    Someone for instance logging on to The Delacorte Theatre on the southern part of The Great Lawn, for instance, will see an interactive map of the park location and surrounding neighborhood that looks like this (click to enlarge):

On April 26th, The Parkinson's Unity Walk took place in Central Park.   WiFi Salon was asked by Netbriefings, a company specializing in high quality large scale webcasts, to provide an uplink to the internet so that they could conduct 'man on the street' interviews along the Mall in Central Park.

Nice to have an interesting contrarian position. Craig Mattias looks at the current bad news on muniwireless — read Earthlink — and takes the long view. WiFi will come because there is no other alternative. WiFi will come to complement the cellular network because WiFi is just better at delivering local wireless broadband, and is a global standard.

What could well happen, especially in an urban environment, is that public WiFi will become the victim of WiFi’s over all success. At Union Square, NYC for instance, where we have one of our parkwifi locations, WiFi Salon has detected 215 other nearby networks. They interfere with our coverage, and affect our QoS, and of course interfere with each other. This is open spectrum, so that’s the way it goes.

Advances in technology will increase performance/QoS, but there are real limitations when it comes to RF interference.

Covad has been great. New York City is a challenge, the parks are an even greater challenge, but we got it done. We got working DSL into 17 park locations and ADSL2+ into Columbus Circle, The Sheep Meadow, Washington Square Park, Summerstage, with Union Square pending and other locations also upgradable.

What does that mean for the user? Free high speed WiFi, with the capacity to support multimedia and a good number of simultaneous users. ADSL2+ tripled our capacity. Visit any of our free WiFi Hot Spots here.

Here is the rest of the press release, also available as a google search here.

, Wayport Among Providers That Rely on Covad's T1 and DSL to Connect Hotspots in Airports, Parks, and Other Public Areas

Here's something from the NYT opinion page on the announcement that ePath has been selected to provide Wi-Fi to L.I.

The editorial makes no mention of the fact that first ePath has to raise $150 million in capital. One wonders what the market is for venture capital for muniWiFi deployments given Earthlink's travails. Keyspan Energy, their backhaul partner (they will provide fiber) could well back them. The other partner, Cisco, has at least the gear. Perhaps with the $150 million, once they get it, they will be able to cover a projected 750 square miles, which would come out to 200K a square mile.

Here we go again, this time from Newsweek. We have been hit with the collective realization that for-pay citywide WiFi networks are not getting nearly enough subscribers to support the costs, and that QoS issues when covering large geographic areas and going in doors are driving up costs and undermining the value proposition.

In what seems to fly in the face of the new conventional wisdom post Earthlink's travails that large scale muni wireless deployments are dead, a franchise to build a muni-WiFi network over Nassau and Suffolk Counties was awarded to "newcomer" ePath to provide WiFi service.

You can read the Times article here.

ePath has an infrastructure partner in Cisco, and a fiber backhaul provider in Keyspan Energy, so they come to the table with something. All they need to do now is to raise $150 million dollars to build the network. Nassau / Suffolk will not be providing any funds or committing to purchase any services from ePath. It is all upon them to find the backers willing to take the risk.