Receive new posts as email.
RSS 0.91 | RSS 2.0
RDF | Atom
Podcast only feed (RSS 2.0 format)
Get an RSS reader
Get a Podcast receiver
| Sun | Mon | Tues | Wed | Thurs | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
| 29 | 30 | 31 |
This site operates as an independent editorial operation. Advertising, sponsorships, and other non-editorial materials represent the opinions and messages of their respective origins, and not of the site operator or JiWire, Inc.
Entire site and all contents except otherwise noted © Copyright 2001-2006 by Glenn Fleishman. Some images ©2006 Jupiterimages Corporation. All rights reserved. Please contact us for reprint rights. Linking is, of course, free and encouraged.
Powered by
Movable Type
« Metro Round-Up: Champaign (Ill.), San Antonio (Tex.) | Main | BART System's Soft Launch of Train-Fi Gains Notice »
Parsons seems to have underestimated the difficulty in unwiring one of the longer, popular ferry routes in Washington State: The Washington State Ferries (WSF) have had Wi-Fi on more frequently used routes for three years, starting with a long-running pilot project that Parsons took over last year. When I spoke to the firm that was running the trial in 2004, they made it clear that the curvy passage for the Bremerton-Seattle run—a 55-minute ride—involved several antennas and rights of way issues.
So it’s to my surprise that The Seattle Times this morning writes that Bremerton ferry riders are a little peeved that Wi-Fi is on several other major routes, but not theirs. Bremerton is on the Olympic Peninsula, where housing is still cheaper than in Seattle proper. It’s not unusual to have this kind of relatively relaxing commute (less so for drivers, who may have to wait for one or more ferries).
Service is now expected for July because Parsons ran afoul of a rule in one place in siting an antenna, and in another case hadn’t yet secured roof rights on the tallest building in Seattle. Seems like pretty poor planning. And why do I know something as a reporter that a multi-billion-dollar firm seemed unaware of? There’s a missing piece.
The article also cites Parsons’s need to get a license from the FCC, which doesn’t make sense. Were they purchasing a license? If they already had a licensed frequency they wanted to use for backhaul, the FCC isn’t involved.
The three routes noted in the article, the Winslow/Bainbridge Island, Clinton/Whidbey Island, and Kingston runs, carry more than 50 percent of the system’s traffic and, by extension, more than 25 percent of the passenger ferry traffic in the US. The WSF carries about half of all ferry rider trips in the US.
The company wouldn’t release statistics on use or subscriptions, but here’s a tip to all WSF riders: While Parsons charges $29.95 per month for unlimited use just on their system, you can pay $21.95 per month to Boingo Wireless and have access to thousands of locations and the ferry system at no extra charge.
Posted by Glennf at June 10, 2007 8:38 AM
Categories: Aquatic
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://db.isbn.nu/mt3/mt-tb.pl/4623
A clue about usage statistics can be found in the WSDOT March 2007 Revenue Forecast Update from their site. WiFi is categorized as misc. revenue and was downgraded in part due to "start up problems and customer acceptance of paid WiFi".
Their full year revenue projection is only $23k for WiFi ($55k in 2008). Presumably this is a percentage of the revenue or their cut. If Parsons is spending millions to make this work as stated in the ST article, the revenue forecast tells a different story.
Greg
Posted by: Greg at July 16, 2007 3:36 PM
Bremerton is actually on the Kitsap Peninsula, just across from Seattle. The Olympic Peninsula is further west (and would be a much, much longer ferry ride).
Posted by: Phil at June 13, 2007 1:36 PM