1. Roaming considerations for the Finnish public WLAN market Timo Smura 29.03.2004

2. Outline Introduction Players in the public WLAN market –Public WLAN value system –Roles of the players WLAN roaming –Roaming models –Roaming architecture Public WLANs in Finland –Sonera HomeRun, DNA WLAN, Vantaa Energy Wivanet Conclusion

3. Introduction WLANs are becoming increasingly popular –In offices, homes, and public places –Due to standardized, interoperable products and low prices Public WLAN business emerging –Primary target group: Mobile business users –Interference issues >> One network operator per site >> Need for roaming A variety of business models exists –The profitable ones hard to find, of course –Fine grounds for academic research, also

4. Players in the public WLAN market Network operator Roaming intermediary Service operator Site owner Any operator WISP / virtual WISP Clearinghouse / roaming broker Site ownerWISP WISP / wholesale network operator WISP / wholesale network operator WISP / virtual WISP Site owner 1) 2) 3)

5. Bargaining power of site owners? Network operator Roaming intermediary Service operator Site owner Any operator WISP / virtual WISP Clearinghouse / roaming broker WISP WISP / wholesale network operator WISP / wholesale network operator WISP / virtual WISP 1) 2) 3) Site owner

6. WLAN roaming Benefits the whole value system –end-users get more ubiquitous and convenient access –operators get larger footprint and revenue base –site owners can attract all customers equally Roaming models: Roaming modelBilateral model Roaming broker model Clearing-house model Agreement typeBilateralMultilateralMultilateral + Bilateral Cost of agreementsHighLowMedium Time-to-marketSlowFastMedium Control over roaming partnersHighLowHigh Control over roaming tariffsHighLowHigh Control over technologiesHighLow Tariffs paid to intermediariesNoneUsage-basedTransaction-based

7. WLAN roaming architecture Source: Intel 2003

8. Public WLANs in Finland Market in the hands of mobile operators –Sonera HomeRun –DNA WLAN Innovative startups are almost missing –No ”greenfield” WISPs –No site-owner WISPs –City-wide hotzone operators give colour to the market

9. Case 1: Sonera HomeRun Traditional WISP model Targets mobile business users Time-based pricing Wide international coverage through roaming agreements No national roaming Roaming: Pricing:

10. Case 2: DNA WLAN Service launched after TeliaSonera merger Traditional WISP model Targets business users Although Hesburger deal could mean a change… ? Many pricing models No national roaming Sonera HomeRun SwedenFinland DNA WLAN Telia HomeRun Telia and Sonera merge, DNA Finland buys Telia’s Finnish operations Telia HomeRun Telia HomeRun Sonera wGate Pricing:

11. Case 3: Vantaa Energy Wivanet An example of citywide WLAN operators –A total of 7 operators in Finland, mostly energy companies Targets a different market –Fixed broadband access to households and SMEs –Limited mobility and portability possible Over 50% of households in Vantaa covered –80% in the end of 2004 Roaming possible between the 7 operators –Although the subscribers are often fixed in location

12. Summary and conclusion Public WLAN business is growing –Profitability of the business still unclear Finnish market dominated by mobile operators –Greenfield and site owner WISP almost non-existent Possibility for innovative business models exists –Although not made use of in Finland National roaming would benefit the whole market –Technically feasible already –Depends on the big players’ attitudes

13. Thank You! Questions? timo.smura@hut.fi