Wednesday, June 17, 2015

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?

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…..


No comments:

Moto

Words to Live By: “Here’s to the crazy ones, the misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers, the round pegs in the square holes… The ones who see things differently — they’re not fond of rules… You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them, but the only thing you can’t do is ignore them because they change things… They push the human race forward, and while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius, because the ones who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world, are the ones who do.” (Steve Jobs)