Email Delivery

Receive new posts as email.

Email address

Syndicate this site

RSS | Atom

Contact

About This Site
Contact Us
Privacy Policy

Search


November 2010
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        

Stories by Category

Basics :: Basics
Casting :: Casting Listen In Podcasts Videocasts
Culture :: Culture Hacking
Deals :: Deals
FAQ :: FAQ
Future :: Future
Hardware :: Hardware Adapters Appliances Chips Consumer Electronics Gaming Home Entertainment Music Photography Video Gadgets Mesh Monitoring and Testing PDAs Phones Smartphones
Industry :: Industry Conferences Financial Free Health Legal Research Vendor analysis
International :: International
Media :: Media Locally cached Streaming
Metro-Scale Networks :: Metro-Scale Networks Community Networking Municipal
Network Types :: Network Types Broadband Wireless Cellular 2.5G and 3G 4G Power Line Satellite
News :: News Mainstream Media
Politics :: Politics Regulation Sock Puppets
Schedules :: Schedules
Security :: Security 802.1X
Site Specific :: Site Specific Administrative Detail April Fool's Blogging Book review Cluelessness Guest Commentary History Humor Self-Promotion Unique Wee-Fi Who's Hot Today?
Software :: Software Open Source
Spectrum :: Spectrum 60 GHz
Standards :: Standards 802.11a 802.11ac 802.11ad 802.11e 802.11g 802.11n 802.20 Bluetooth MIMO UWB WiGig WiMAX ZigBee
Transportation and Lodging :: Transportation and Lodging Air Travel Aquatic Commuting Hotels Rails
Unclassified :: Unclassified
Vertical Markets :: Vertical Markets Academia Enterprise WLAN Switches Home Hot Spot Aggregators Hot Spot Advertising Road Warrior Roaming Libraries Location Medical Public Safety Residential Rural SOHO Small-Medium Sized Business Universities Utilities wISP
Voice :: Voice

Archives

November 2010 | October 2010 | September 2010 | August 2010 | July 2010 | June 2010 | May 2010 | April 2010 | March 2010 | February 2010 | January 2010 | December 2009 | November 2009 | October 2009 | September 2009 | August 2009 | July 2009 | June 2009 | May 2009 | April 2009 | March 2009 | February 2009 | January 2009 | December 2008 | November 2008 | October 2008 | September 2008 | August 2008 | July 2008 | June 2008 | May 2008 | April 2008 | March 2008 | February 2008 | January 2008 | December 2007 | November 2007 | October 2007 | September 2007 | August 2007 | July 2007 | June 2007 | May 2007 | April 2007 | March 2007 | February 2007 | January 2007 | December 2006 | November 2006 | October 2006 | September 2006 | August 2006 | July 2006 | June 2006 | May 2006 | April 2006 | March 2006 | February 2006 | January 2006 | December 2005 | November 2005 | October 2005 | September 2005 | August 2005 | July 2005 | June 2005 | May 2005 | April 2005 | March 2005 | February 2005 | January 2005 | December 2004 | November 2004 | October 2004 | September 2004 | August 2004 | July 2004 | June 2004 | May 2004 | April 2004 | March 2004 | February 2004 | January 2004 | December 2003 | November 2003 | October 2003 | September 2003 | August 2003 | July 2003 | June 2003 | May 2003 | April 2003 | March 2003 | February 2003 | January 2003 | December 2002 | November 2002 | October 2002 | September 2002 | August 2002 | July 2002 | June 2002 | May 2002 | April 2002 | March 2002 | February 2002 | January 2002 | December 2001 | November 2001 | October 2001 | September 2001 | August 2001 | July 2001 | June 2001 | May 2001 | April 2001 |

Recent Entries

In-Flight Wi-Fi and In-Flight Bombs
Can WPA Protect against Firesheep on Same Network?
Southwest Sets In-Flight Wi-Fi at $5
Eye-Fi Adds a View for Web Access
Firesheep Makes Sidejacking Easy
Wi-Fi Direct Certification Starts
Decaf on the Starbucks Digital Network
Google Did Snag Passwords
WiMax and LTE Not Technically 4G by ITU Standards
AT&T Wi-Fi Connections Keep High Growth with Free Service

Site Philosophy

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. Part of the FM Tech advertising network.

Copyright

Entire site and all contents except otherwise noted © Copyright 2001-2010 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

« The Philippines as One Giant Hotspot? | Main | Define Wi-Fi »

October 1, 2005

Can Google Pay for SF Through Clicks?

The speculation has been that Google thinks it will make back what it spends on an SF Wi-Fi network in more advertising sales: The first supposition is that by adding a Wi-Fi network citywide that Google will increase overall Internet usage. Because it already owns the minds of a large percentage of Internet users in general, branding their putative San Francisco-wide portal won't shift lots of users from other search engines or outlets. They have to rely on adding clicks if they're trying to justify it in part through additional income from advertising clickthroughs.

Google doesn't have a per-se average clickthrough price. You can pay a nickel a click for unique and unpopular keywords, but those aren't delivered very often for that reason. Keywords relating to asbestos litigation can cost $60 or more a click.

I'm going to estimate that for Google to build the low-broadband-speed ubiquitous network they propose for San Francisco that they'll have spend $5 million to $8 million. Philadelphia's network will be more expense because they have twice the population (over 1.5 million versus SF's 750K) and nearly three times the area (135 square miles versus 46 square miles)--and because Philly wants a higher level of minimum bandwidth. They'd like 1 Mbps in each direction; Google's plan promises 300 Kbps.

If Google can add a few million incremental clicks a year, it's possible that the network will be entirely paid out of ads. But that's not what they're aiming for--they don't really need incremental users to drive delivering more ads and clicks. They're aiming to move more advertising dollars out of the devastated newspaper business in the city and suck more life from telephone book display advertising. National advertising in the U.S. comprised $45 billion the first half of 2005; local advertising, $26 billion.

Because Google will run the network, they can deliver ads targeted to the city block for folks using their Wi-Fi network without knowing anything about the individual consumer, as it will be entirely based on the Wi-Fi network not consumer characteristics. I imagine Google views this as a massive experiment and money well spent.

2 Comments

actually San Francisco asked for 1mb up and down as well, not the 300k free version offered by Google - and let's remember - this was not an RFP or RFQ process just RFI/RFC.

maybe this 300k/sec bits is a good compromise speed in that it won't conflict with people who need/want better speed on their dsl at home and work so it doesn't compete?


It will be interesting to see what Google is actually offering - for example if it is just an experiment for them, then what does the city have to prevent them from uprooting on a whim if they like.

The pre-proposals by Google and the other 12 companies aren't yet posted publically - as they should be at (san francisco has a very strong Sunshine ordinance):

http://www.sfgov.org/site/tech_connect_page.asp?id=33899

I estimate that for $12M in network buildout (for VERY good coverage- Mayor Gavin wants FREE WiFi for EVERY San Franciscan) and $1M/month for bandwidth Google will get EXCLUSIVE access to a quarter million click fingers. It is indeed a grand experiment.
Unfortunately for the User, this could mean captive Google portals (granted, individually customized with to-the-neighborhood local content) effectively displacing Yahoo, AOL and MSN, and maybe even proxy servers forcing an infuriatingly endless (and unavoidable) parade of popup ads to ruin your surfing experience. Well, what do you expect for free?