Muni WiFi: Dangerous Stuff

Scott Pullins links to a study by the Reason Foundation about the advisability of cities taking on their own WiFi networks.

There are seven considerations involved, which in my opinion make it not practical (Reason sticks with “daunting”), and in fact dangerous in all but the most unique of circumstances:

1. Competition — Most place have plenty of players already.
2. Performance Competition — ISPs are providing ever-faster services.
3. Continuous Improvements — ISP are always improving their services and have capital spending budgets for doing so. Muni WiFis often blithely assume they can put up the infrastructure once and forget about it.
4. Technological Change and “Lock-in” — Happens because of #3.
5. Obsolescence — Again, happens because of #3.
6. Risk — Should taxpayers be assuming a business risk, especially in such a volatile industry?
7. Uncertainty — Same question as #6.

Unless a city totally outsources the project, including the risks, and has an ironclad way of making sure that the technology stays current, I don’t see how it works. That’s why Google’s Mountain View, CA setup (with plans, last time I checked, to envelop the San Francisco Bay Area) probably will work. Because the company’s reputation is at stake if the setup starts being seen as substandard, they simply won’t let it happen, and will spend whatever it takes to make it happen.

There may be other successful examples, but I expect they are few and far between. And even if they are working out for the time being, I have to think it’s only a matter of time before any number of the seven items identified above bite most muni WiFis in the rear.

__________________________

Previous Posts:
– June 9, 2006– What Makes Local Governments Think They Can Run Their Own Broadband Business?
– Oct. 5, 2005 — Free WiFi for Frisco: Google’s Idea is Spiffy, But the Mayor’s Mind Is Iffy