A Broader View of Taipei’s WiFly Usage Rates

Tell a Friend

The recent New York Times article about slow user adoption of Taipei's citywide Wi-Fi network (WiFly) was a rush to judgment and begs scrutiny of the newspaper's evaluation ("What if They Built an Urban Wireless Network and Hardly Anyone Used It?" June 26, 2006, Ken Belson)

Given the stated breadth of free access available at free retail hotspots throughout Taipei, we actually find it remarkable that as many as 31,000 people (not 40,000, as reported by The Times) have chosen to pay $12.50/month to access the pervasive WiFly network since the paid-access service began a short half year ago.

The uptake benchmark that the Times cites—250,000 subscribers by year’s end—is a target set by the city and its partner, Q-Ware, and the Times should have done more wide-ranging and comprehensive benchmarking, considering, for example, the following:

1. How does user adoption of Taipei’s network compare with that in any other city in the world deploying a similar solution? Adoption in Taipei appears to be many times beyond any other city we’ve seen
   
   
2. How does user adoption compare with the first six months of adoption of paid-for, like services in Taipei such as cable and DSL services?
   
   
3. The article pays only lip service to the potential local-government workforce efficiency improvements the city expects to achieve from its ubiquitous wireless network. This area, which W2i has promoted for over two years, is one where Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou and the Taipei City Government have shined consistently over the years thanks largely to aggressive IT policies that have:
   
   
   • reduced the city government workforce by more than 10,000 government employees, and,
   • produced a consistent 1–3% reduction in city operating expenses (net of inflation) over the past five years.

But Taipei’s efforts are part of a much broader story. In most of the deployments we’ve seen, firefighters and public safety and public works personnel immediately see multiple new uses for broadband-wireless infrastructure and applications, making their jobs easier and more efficient. See, for example:

• Tempe, Arizona, where police and firefighters are finding multiple uses for the new citywide infrastructure independent of the public access model.
  
  
• Medford, Oregon, where the network is enabling locates and work-order access in the field, saving 20 crews about an hour a day each — or $64 an hour, resulting in a $333,000 annual savings.
  

Given 8 million local government workers in the United States, of which 2.5 million are mobile workers, these productivity improvements can equate to $15 billion per year in efficiency gains — a welcome achievement in light of the financial pressures facing local governments.

Moreover, the US Department of Labor anticipates that the local-government mobile workforce will grow three times as fast as the sedentary workforce over the next several years—yet another reason why local governments around the world are actively exploring the feasibility of deploying broadband-wireless solutions. These efficiency improvements justify the investment into those networks many times over. In this context, public access may be viewed just as much as a windfall benefit than as the driving factor by which a network’s value to the community is judged.

In Taipei, while Q-Ware will need to work hard to attract more users, The Times deemphasized the current and potential benefits that will factor into a broad return on investment to the city and its residents. If the past is an indication of the future, the anticipated government efficiencies passed along to the citizens in the form of tax reduction will allow them to pay many times over for their network subscription.