Tuesday, June 6, 2017

FirstNet continues to push FALSE NARRATIVE to the States?

I just got finished watching Mr. Reed’s presentation about Opt-Out procedures. It was a good presentation, but lacked one important detail. A detail I notice that FirstNet tends to leave out of all its discussions and presentations. In fact, I noticed that the presentation itself they keep relaying a false fact about their deployment – that the State will get the network for FREE at “No cost to the State”, when the complete opposite, for an Opt-In State, is actually true.

FirstNet's Presentation Shot

The law specifically says that the NTIA will, in fact, send a bill to the State for its portion of the build-out.
(1) N
OTICE.—Upon the completion of the request for proposal process conducted by the First Responder Network Authority for the construction, operation, maintenance, and improvement of the nationwide public safety broadband net- work, the First Responder Network Authority shall provide to the Governor of each State, or his designee—
(A) notice of the completion of the request for proposal process;
(B) details of the proposed plan for buildout of the nationwide, interoperable broadband network in such State; and
(C) the funding level for the State as determined by the NTIA.

Why would FirstNet continue to push a lie about funding? What portion of “funding level” will that be? What will it cover? Is this in fact the funding needed to expand to the rural areas because AT&T doesn’t have any assets there? When will the NTIA give the State its funding portion? Does this mean that the FirstNet option is not free after all? How can FirstNet continue to convey a false narrative that the State will not have to pay for anything? The entire initiative can be construed as nefarious and deceiving.

The reason we see the line in the law, stating that the NTIA will inform the State of its portion, is because there isn’t enough money to construct the network for the real purpose of covering the areas that aren’t covered today – the rural areas. FirstNet’s business plan simply ties the Opt-In State to Public Safety’s dependency into the AT&T plan. FirstNet, and its carrier only interpretation, is standing steadfast in its view that Public Safety, thus the State, can’t build a network and that only AT&T can.  AT&T on the other hand, is not being true to its intentions either. The only reason we are even talking about AT&T today, is because AT&T wants the spectrum. If Public Safety were really the driver for the AT&T “socially conscious” objective, then why didn’t AT&T give “ruthless preemption” to Public Safety years ago? Other carriers did. You can’t blame AT&T though. AT&T is doing what AT&T is good at, that is beating its market competition and all levels no matter what it takes. The fault lays with FirstNet in this endeavor.

The FirstNet Board should have realized early on, or at least have learned its lesson, that the carrier has an objective and it will fight to take what it needs to survive in a really dog-eat-dog market place. Once the Advisory Committee was formed under the Department of Commerce, and the introduction of carrier executives to the FirstNet Board became effective, that is when the FirstNet Board was doomed. AT&T had the wherewithal to influence the decisions of the Advisory Commission even before the FirstNet Board was created. Through the AT&T lobbying efforts on the commission, prior to the formation, they sought to have direct industry experience take part so that they could keep tabs on what, where, when, and how the spectrum was allocated. From that point forward we started hearing the message of “only a carrier can build such a network”, this was why, in our first week, we saw a full on presentation of how the network was going to be built using a carrier partner and that there was no other choice. You see it started from an early point in the life-cycle. The fact is, the entire FirstNet solution, which is still driven by heavily influenced carrier executives, was always going to be the solution we see today no matter what – this is why FirstNet keeps pushing its solution with false narratives.

The fact remains, and the law is clear, FirstNet will NOT pay for everything for an Opt-In State. The law specifically says that the NTIA will stick the Opt-In State with a bill later on and as determined by the NTIA. So, you Opt-in you will pay; you Opt-Out will you take your portion of the $6.5 Billion, get a network paid by private equity, and collect revenue from services rendered.

But what the heck do I know I’m….

Just some guy and a blog….

No comments:


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)