Subscribe to Newsletter
Tell a Friend
Print this Page
07/19/2007Update from Toronto: Q & A with Sharyn Gravelle
In the course of my own research on municipal wireless networks, I had the opportunity to sit down with Sharyn Gravelle, VP Wireless of Toronto Hydro Telecom, for a conversation about some of the questions facing ongoing urban projects. Toronto Hydro Telecom is an affiliate of Toronto's municipal electric utility, Toronto Hydro, and runs the One Zone network currently deployed in the downtown core. Sharyn has been involved with this project from the beginning, and brings to the table over 20 years of experience in the cellular and wireless communications industry.
Q: The private utility model adopted by Toronto Hydro Telecom is not something seen very often in the US. What do you think are the strengths of Toronto's model, and what lessons could other cities learn from it? A: A key strength of Toronto's One Zone service is the subscription-based business model we used. We elected to proceed with this model to ensure the One Zone network is sustainable. And, in our view, it is the right model to provide the sustainability necessary, right from planning the network, engineering it, delivering it and running it to ultimately creating value for our shareholders. So I think that's the main differentiator. I'd like to make sure it is clear that the One Zone network was not driven by the city. It was driven by Toronto Hydro Telecom to maximize, or really to capitalize on, our existing asset, which is our extensive 450-kilometre state-of-the-art fiber-optic network. That positioned us well to go into this space. Q: Do you think that a utility model would be less beneficial for a city that, for example, does not have the kind of already-existing fiber-optic infrastructure or other kind of infrastructure that Toronto had to start with? A: I think for any city, you need to look at what the various features, restrictions, benefits and assets are in that existing environment and capitalize on those. So in one case it may be a utility driven model. In another case it may be a peer-city driven model. There is uniqueness in each city and you need to look at what is available and makes the most sense there. Q: Toronto's network is being deployed in an atmosphere of practicality, where much of the fervor of inter-city competition present in the US ecosystem is absent or down played. Is the desire to build a competitive Toronto a driving factor of the project? And if so, what is the nature of the competition? A: I completely agree. The driver was based on capitalizing on our existing assets and delivering better value for the shareholder, which is the Toronto Hydro Corporation, and in turn the city of Toronto. But to answer the question, is there a desire to build a competitive Toronto, is that a driving factor - absolutely. Is it desirable to have Toronto viewed as a world-class city? Absolutely. Is it desirable to enhance the economic development in the city? Absolutely. Is this one way of doing that? Yes it is. So it's certainly there, although not at the forefront as the driver in the messaging. Q: The first significant wave of usage data has been collected, and by all accounts things are looking good. Still, a recent Toronto Star article casts a somewhat gloomier light on the issue. Has usage of the network to date altered future strategies, or are there any changes in direction planned to adapt to predicted user trends? A: We at Toronto Hydro Telecom are thrilled with the success of our One Zone service. We have successfully launched the largest and fastest WiFi network in North America. And we've seen tremendous interest in One Zone - in fact our first subscriber signed up for access just 15 minutes after we launched. At the end of the day, we have a goal of expanding the network. We also have a goal of growing the network, which includes growing the usage, growing the applications, even within an existing footprint. That is our goal. All of the indicators are positive. But it's still very early days given that we're not even three months into commercialization. We're driven as a for-profit and sustainable model, so we will approach new applications, new development, and expansion in a manner that supports the business model. One Zone is part of our overall business model and is designed to create revenue for Toronto Hydro Telecom. Although we do not have revenue we can share, what I can tell you is we anticipate that One Zone will amplify the revenue we see from the enterprise and wholesale side of our business. With regards to the Star article, well, there's some interpretation or misinterpretation of numbers that have been given by other parties. Q: As is normal in any sort of project like this. A: Of course. Q: The initial zone of TH Telecom's network was deployed on what is perhaps the most wired real estate of the city. Why was the financial district chosen as the pilot zone over, say, a more typical Toronto neighbourhood, like a mixed-use commercial-residential area? A: If you look at the six square kilometers area that we've chosen for our initial deployment, it encompasses more than the financial district. The financial district allows us to target the mobility workers and business travelers. We also encompass the entertainment district, both provincial and municipal government environments, universities, colleges and hospitals. There is also a component of the residential market and certainly some key areas with regards to tourism. So what have we done? We've deployed in the densest area, giving us the challenges for deployment, which we've overcome up front and understand what they are going forward. And we've also encompassed a very key area of the city that captures different potential markets. That goes to our business model, ensuring we deploy in an area where we'll see the return. Q: A great deal of discussion is ongoing concerning the re-imagining of municipal governance processes using the capabilities of a wireless municipal network, including here on Costis Toregas' blog. What are the possibilities for Toronto in this regard? Further, how can a city facilitate the evolution of what are often entrenched and fossilized processes? A: First I'll say that I think that Costis' blog is well-written, and very broad, and encompasses a lot of good points. In Toronto, we're looking at a number of different business development and applications initiatives. There are so many different Wi-Fi devices and applications in the marketplace - we're trialing a fleet management as well as a traffic and signaling management application. There's also a parking ticket application that we are reviewing which would enable efficiency of payments and that sort of thing. These are some of the different things that have been brought to us to look at. On the second question, how do you facilitate that, I think it is partnering with the different players - not just the network provider, not just the city, but also different companies promoting the new applications. We're working in partnership with a couple of private companies and a couple of city departments from a proof-of-concept trial point of view. This facilitates identifying and demonstrating where and how there can be efficiency gains in municipal processes. Q: In the States and in much of the developing world, digital inclusion is a key feature of any proposed wireless initiative. The role that digital inclusion has played in Toronto is more difficult to observe. Was digital inclusion a motivation for the network? If so, how has it been pursued? If not, where do you see this need being met? A: My observation of the marketplace is that digital inclusion is not as much a driving component today as it was one or two years ago. What I am also seeing now is another term becoming dominant, which is anchor-tenancy, as well as dialogue on applications and other aspects for a successful network. I see all of that as being very positive in that it is encompassing a bigger picture. In Toronto, digital inclusion was never an aspect of our project. Philadelphia, where it was at the forefront, is a very different city than Toronto. Toronto is a very wired and wireless city throughout its full geographical area. So, to your question with regards to where you see the need being met, if you go beyond the fact that we're a very connected city in general, the One Zone offering and the pricing that we've set is about 35% lower than a comparable wireless offering. We also provide a metro network, not a localized hotspot network. We don't have bandwidth restrictions. We deliver a high-quality, high-speed network. We are on record as saying that we think that the success of our network and the sustainability of our network then will facilitate and permit other ways for potentially working with universities or educational institutions or other areas in promoting the overall education of wireless, and connectivity. That's been our approach. Q: Many of the highly publicized projects in the US have been delayed, sometimes for long periods of time or indefinitely, for various reasons. Toronto's project, on the other hand, advanced at a pace probably unmatched by any other city of similar size in North America. What is the key to this success? A: A question that I love, of course. First, knowing what you want to accomplish up front is critical. That includes choosing your business model. Second, it's a matter of knowing what you need to deliver that. What do you have existing, within your organization or operations, and what do you need to complement it? And that goes to how you may partner with new vendors, but also what new expertise you need to have internally or on a contractual basis. Get all of that sorted out up front. And then, good project management after that. Q: What do you think of some of the projects that have been struggling or have disintegrated recently? A: Projects of this size and scale require the cooperation and expertise and collaboration of so many different entities. Lack of clarity on what the end deliverable is, differing visions on how to achieve that and changing agendas all become roadblocks to the project execution. Q: It has been asserted that a successful city-wide network requires a great deal more than the infrastructure. One of our experts, James Farstad, listed a few necessities in a recent blog, including Community Technology Centers, 24/7 access to e-government/e-medicine/e-learning applications, access on transportation networks, and network interoperability. Do you agree with this assertion? A: Absolutely. And I think James is a great expert in the field and contributes a lot. Most of the necessities that he lists would apply across all projects. Some would vary depending on the particular city, the particular drivers, et cetera. What I take particular note of in his comments is the technology centers. Operational processes including customer support, technical support, service level monitoring, et cetera, are important components after the network is in place and applications are running. The other one is network interoperability. I think that one is a real key to the continued growth and success of the market. Everything we see on the device end now is a convergence. Our communications and in particular our wireless communications needs and desires these days encompass a number of different aspects and technologies, so I think network interoperability is a really important point. How do we get that? Well, another good question. Q: I think that right there - another good question - is a perfect conclusion to the interview.
back
Related Items:
• Alberta SuperNet
• Toronto's WiFi Revolution Hits a Snag
• Are You Dense Enough? 40 is the New 20 in Metro Wi-Fi Nodes
• Del Schmucker, Information Systems Manager, Keewatin-Patricia School District
Comments
Brent Graden
My name is Brent Graden and I am the Director of Economic Development for the City of Prestonsburg Kentucky. I just completed making our downtown completely wireless for free (about 2 miles). I put it up myself and it took about three working days at under $7500 (including pre-paid service for two years ... DSL 3.0). It will help us to achieve improvements in the areas of telemedicine, distance learning, a proposed new business park, and communication within the community. Not bad for a town of 3700 that Sen John Edwards just visited on his poverty tour. Check out the product we used. It's awesome! www.meraki.com. So easy to use, even a caveman can do it!
01:43 PM, 07/23/2007
Post new comment:Only registered users can add comments.
Please Log-in
| 
