Re: Bait and Switch?
"Sam Churchill" <[email protected]> Fri, 5 Oct 2007 10:40:20 -0700
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.wireless.portland.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Well, this is newsy! I would like to include a reaction from PersonalTelco members. Who wants to step up and be quoted? Russell? Michael? Don? - Sam Churchill DailyWireless ----------------------------- On 10/5/07, Brian Moon <[email protected]> wrote: > > What does "anchor tenancy" mean? What does it look like? > > My first thought was of a shopping mall: a bunch of stores, mostly small, > with a large store (Macy's or Sears, for example) as a big draw. > > But I don't know how that would work for municipal wireless. > > On 10/5/07, Michael Weinberg <michael.weinberg-LS+HbC+WUqwFvAYqzeGVJV6hYfS7NtTn@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > It would appear that MetroFi is now refusing to build networks > > without anchor tenant agreements, regardless of prior contracts. > > After first backing away from cities where they had won bids but not > > signed contracts, MetroFi has now declared that they are halting > > their Portland deployment indefinitely, with a not so subtle > > suggestion that the future of the deployment will hinge on whether > > Portland decides to become an anchor tenant. [1 + 2] > > > > Many people--including PTP members, City Commissioners, Business > > Journalists and bloggers--questioned the MetroFi business plan, and > > suggested that muni-wireless by a private business could not work > > without an anchor tenant. MetroFi, though, insisted at their > > appearance before Portland's City Council that city-generated > > revenues would make up at most 25% of MetroFi's income. Given that > > they made this pronouncement, specifically in response to questions > > about the financial viability of their model, it seems they had the > > opportunity to demand anchor tenancy, but they declined it. > > > > Is this a bait and switch, or is it just a reasonable adjustment for > > market realities? > > > > More importantly, I expect that at this point, they are pushing the > > City to enter into an anchor tenancy agreement, and if you have an > > opinion regarding which course the city should take, I recommend you > > write the Mayor and City Commissioners letting them know what you > > think. [3] > > > > Michael > > > > [1] http://www.kgw.com/video/video-index.html?nvid=181025 > > > > [2] http://blog.oregonlive.com/business/2007/10/ > > mayors_office_portland_wifi_ne.html > > > > [3] http://www.portlandonline.com/index.cfm?c=28533 > > > > > > -- > > The Personal Telco Project - http://www.personaltelco.net/ > > Donate to PTP: http://www.personaltelco.net/donate > > Un/Subscribe: http://lists.personaltelco.net/mailman/listinfo/general/ > > Archives: > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.wireless.portland.general/ > > Etiquette: http://www.personaltelco.net/index.cgi/MailingListEtiquette > > > -- > The Personal Telco Project - http://www.personaltelco.net/ > Donate to PTP: http://www.personaltelco.net/donate > Un/Subscribe: http://lists.personaltelco.net/mailman/listinfo/general/ > Archives: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.wireless.portland.general/ > Etiquette: http://www.personaltelco.net/index.cgi/MailingListEtiquette > -- Sam Churchill (www.dailywireless.org) -- The Personal Telco Project - http://www.personaltelco.net/ Donate to PTP: http://www.personaltelco.net/donate Un/Subscribe: http://lists.personaltelco.net/mailman/listinfo/general/ Archives: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.wireless.portland.general/ Etiquette: http://www.personaltelco.net/index.cgi/MailingListEtiquette