BD: Re: SCN: "Free-Nets" in Los Angeles Times
Steve Guest
steve at groupworks.org
Sat Dec 29 04:43:48 PST 2001
Well we could debate this for months. Let me clear up a few things first:
1) We are technically an ISP, but since Microsoft started putting the connect to the internet icon on its desk top the idea of what is an ISP has changed. We are an ISP which does not offer direct connection to the Internet, only to a server on the Internet. We were and still are a founding member of Washington Association of Internet Service Providers (WAISP) which is a lobbying group. But due to the failure of most of the local ISPs to either survive or not get eaten by the national big fish, WAISP could soon die from a lack of membership. So it depends on your definition of an ISP.
2) As far as the costs for an ISP - these are well know and we have investigated them. If we were to take NWNexos for example, it had a budget of several millions when WindStar bought it and still it failed to be profitable. There are way too many factors to make this a simple calculation. We would also change our profile and start to impact others like wolfnet, drizzle and eskimo. There are several ISPs open to offers in the area, go look at their books if you think this is a viable proposition. From my costings, I worked out that we would need about $5-10 Million a year for SCN's operations and service to be "professional", plus a major culture shift. Which is way too many $10 customers.
3) I am confused by the 501(c)3 comment. Lobbying is not a high priority for SCNA at present. The thing that Eugene did, as far as I can see, is that it needed money and decided to do a fee for service. They didn't read the small print though. Any fee for service is fine if the service is educational, but as a connection to the Internet, it is deemed by the IRS to not be educational. They currently agree that the service is educational, but the connection to the internet is offered by 100s of other vendors which are commercial. Therefore this breaks the 501(c)3 agreement with the IRS. Plus it brings us back to the first point - we are a connection to a "service" which is educational and on the Internet.
Personally, if I thought a for-profit with low cost for service would make a profit, I would be doing that rather than working for SCN as a volunteer CEO. Plus I think I know where I could have gotten a few "staff" that might wish to work for me rather than volunteering. So if running a cheap access ISP were profitable, then where are they? They came and most went with the dot.coms.
Steve
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Steve Guest steveg at scn.org steve at groupworks.org
VP of Board and ED of Seattle Community Network
(425) 653 7353 http://www.scn.org/
----- Original Message -----
From: emailer1
To: Marilyn Sheck ; scna-board at scn.org ; steveg at scn.org
Cc: douglas at scn.org ; scn at scn.org
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 1:42 AM
Subject: Re: BD: Re: SCN: "Free-Nets" in Los Angeles Times
The key part of Steve Guest's message is the following:
____________________
"I do not see SCN being able to commit
to supplying free full internet access for our users.
Plus - this was not what SCN was designed to offer. It is initialy an
email and maillist site which grew into a major web resource for Seattle.
We were never in the free ISP business."
_____________________
The above contains a Catch 22 element. (1) We do not have the funds and staff to support a full ISP (including standard graphical functions); and (2) we will continue to offer a very limited type of service and so we will NEVER attract or bring in the funds to support such a full ISP service.
Rather than mere speculation, it will be necessary to get a proper accounting (indepent) to determine
1. How much funding it would take to operate an independent, proper ISP. (Staff and hardware)
2. How many paying subscribers it would take (at $10/month) to support such an ISP service. (This price would under cut almost all other services.)
3. How many low-income subscriptions could be offered for little or no cost under this full ISP scenario.
If the answers to 1 and 2 are positive (i.e., it would be doable to get enough subscribers to fully fund all aspects of a complete ISP service), THEN it would be appropriate to discuss abandoning the tax-free status and switch to a for-profit service.
By the way, the tax-free status comes at a cost: SCNA cannot lobby. SCNA, like Eugene was, is severely limited by the IRS as to what low-income services it can offer and as to what philosophical stance it can follow actively.
The library connection also has similar costs. If SCNA actually did become active (read "controversial"), the library could no longer provide free connection. As Steve pointed out, "(SCN)A is initialy an email and maillist site." The design of the organization is limited by that earlier small mission. Keeping the library "sponsorship" and the subsequent tax-free status prevent SCNA from being a desireable ISP and from being an effective community influence.
Until an independent accounting can answer 1, 2, & 3, there is no way to describe SCNA's potential or future. It can only continue to drift.
P.S.
About the statement: "We were never in the free ISP business."
Actually, that is exactly what we used to tell everyone -- that we WERE a free ISP.
----- Original Message -----
From: Marilyn Sheck
To: scna-board at scn.org ; steveg at scn.org
Cc: douglas at scn.org ; scn at scn.org
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 1:53 PM
Subject: Re: BD: Re: SCN: "Free-Nets" in Los Angeles Times
Well said, Steve. And, YES, you are right about the library not being able
to sustain your internet feed if your traffic increased. We are already having
trouble with our bandwidth just with SCN in its present form combined with
our own services. We would not be able to use public funds, which is what
we pay for the Internet connection with, to support SCN's connection if it
is more than a small fraction of our overall bandwidth usage.
>>> steveg at scn.org 12/21/01 01:08PM >>>
Hi
Well first off we do have free dialup service. On the other hand, this is
basic command style access and not FREE Internet access. I agree it would
be great to offer such services, but we have address some important issues
first.
Let me try and explain why we do not have free internet access.
1) If we were to offer free unrestricted connections to the Internet via
our free dial service and our SPL donated connection to the Internet, then
the traffic which SCN uses would jump considerably. This would be
followed by the lose of our donated Internet feed, because currently I
have been led to believe that the Library would not be able to justify the
cost of the service. This would mean that we would have to provide our
own Internet feed. At this point we raise the need then to be in the
Library because we are then simply taking up their limited space. So if
this was to happen then SCN would have to cover the phone lines, the
Internet feed and possible the cost of a new location. We do not have the
budget for this and we would be out of funds within months or weeks.
2) If we were to offer such a service with a fee, as indicated that
Victoria in Canada does, then we open another can of worms. First lets
point out we are not in Canada and therefore have a whole different set of
rules to abide by. One of these is the IRS. They are already looking at
FreeNets because our "charitable" status is based on the educational value
of the service. As soon as we set up a competing service with a
commercial service such as MSN or AOL - fee for service - in an area which
is not directly education then we fall outside the charitable status.
Thus we lose the 501(c)3 status. This is what happened or is happening to
Eugene FreeNet. They had to setup a commercial company to sell their fee
for service IP connections and break away from the educational section.
Again something that would put us at odds with the Library and its
donation to us.
The IRS are still sniping and they have not yet gotten to SCN, but we are
in their sights. We have to be careful and stay legal.
Until we can figure out the IRS's view of this, understand the Library's
view, have the funds and staff to support this and the software to ensure
that we can guard against misuse - I do not see SCN being able to commit
to supplying free full internet access for our users.
Plus - this was not what SCN was designed to offer. It is initialy an
email and maillist site which grew into a major web resource for Seattle.
We were never in the free ISP business.
I hope this response is clear. I am not trying to say we cannot discuss
these points, but we need to ensure that we can support our current
services before we branch into others.
Steve
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Steve Guest steveg at scn.org steve at groupworks.org
VP of Board and ED of Seattle Community Network
(425) 653 7353 http://www.scn.org/
On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, patrick wrote:
> I wish SCN had low-cost, regular dial-up service. Victoria freenet
> has regular dial-up service for $104 a year, which is a great deal.
>
> Few people use Lynx and after they have used Hotmail or some other
> web-based service to check their mail, after they have surfed the net
> to check on items on eBay, etc., one would find it hard to go to a
> clunky Lynx browswer to surf the web.
>
> Patrick
>
> --- Doug Schuler <douglas at scn.org> wrote:
> >
> > A good article entitled "Freenets Getting a New Lease on Life" is
> > in today's Los Angeles Times.
> >
> >
> http://www.latimes.com/technology/la-000100643dec20.story?coll=la%2Dheadlines%2Dtechnology
> >
> > -- Doug
> >
> > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * *
> > * * *
> > . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to:
> > majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type:
> > unsubscribe scn
> > ==== Messages posted on this list are also available on the web at:
> > ====
> > * * * * * * * http://www.scn.org/volunteers/scn-l/ * * * *
> > * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
scna-board at scn.org is for the purposes of scna board members' internal
communications. Please contact sharma at scn.org if you have questions
about this list.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.scn.org/pipermail/scn/attachments/20011229/5d65cda0/attachment.html>
More information about the scn
mailing list