Tag Archives: Silver Spring

Rent a Phone, Lose a Headache

Bulletin Board Matthew Upchurch travels a lot — a lot. As CEO of Virtuoso Travel, which provides marketing and technical-support services to luxury-travel agencies in North and South America, he roams the world to cut deals with hotels, cruise lines, and resorts. Upchurch, who has a heavy schedule of clients at every stop and must keep in touch with his 125 employees as well as his family back home in Fort Worth, needs a portable phone. What he doesn’t need is the headache of finding local providers in the tangled web of overlapping cellular networks around the world. His solution? Rent phones from IMC WorldCell, a Silver Spring, Md., company that maintains contracts and roaming agreements with service providers in more than 120 countries around the world. Like its British competitor CellHire, which offers similar services in nearly 100 countries, IMC WorldCell offers the convenience of operating in many places with one phone and one number. However, if Upchurch is traveling to Japan, Korea, Mexico, or Brazil, each of which has a cellular platform incompatible with the platforms in the rest of the world, he needs to order a separate phone for that country. IMC WorldCell delivers the phone in advance, so Upchurch knows his phone numbers in Seoul or Tokyo before he leaves Texas. After renting phones for about four years, Upchurch purchased an IMC WorldCell phone with a permanent number in countries running the GSM (which stands for “global system for mobile”) platform, the operating system used throughout Europe. IMC WorldCell’s prices are sometimes steep: calls to the United States range from 55¢ a minute for preferred customers in the United Kingdom to $5 or more a minute in Kosovo. But the company can give travelers reliable access in countries like Russia, Kazakhstan, and China, where service is otherwise hard to arrange. Bulletin Board See Bot Run Rent a Phone, Lose a Headache No Receptionist Necessary Things We Love: Home-Phone-Line Networking Log On, Turn Off, Spend Less Acronym Watch A Network for Networkers A ‘Black Box’ for Your Car Please e-mail your comments to editors@inc.com.

Upstarts: Internet Salvage

Cleaning Up from the Dot-Com Mess Online companies are falling left and right. But for some start-ups that spells opportunity It’s been almost a year since the Nasdaq crashed last April, and the results haven’t been pretty. Anyone who has invested in Internet companies, worked for one, or simply enjoyed shopping online has probably had a disappointment or two. Some 210 dot-coms closed up shop during the year 2000, according to a report by Webmergers.com. That desperate gasp you hear emanating from places like the San Francisco Bay area and New York’s Silicon Alley is the sound of Internet hopefuls running out of money. Of course, not everyone is suffering. In fact, the spate of deaths in the Internet world is fertilizing a new crop of start-ups. Look at it this way: when an epidemic hits, you need doctors to tend to the sick and undertakers to bury the dead. New companies like NetCatalyst are aiming for the Internet first-aid niche, while others like Bid4Assets.com are standing by to take care of the dot-coms that won’t make it to the hospital. Life support Long before last April, Ronald Posner knew that a dot-com shakeout was coming. Too many start-ups were getting funding too quickly, without enough due diligence. That’s what prodded Posner and cofounder Chris Karkenny to start NetCatalyst in August 1999. Posner, then 56, was a venture capitalist and former CEO of five software companies. Karkenny, 32, was running an Internet incubator. They believed, Posner says, that “when the downturn did come, there would be a lot of good companies looking for partners” — that is, hoping to be acquired by a stronger company. Billing itself as a “liquidity engineer,” NetCatalyst is not a plumber but an investment bank, with some management consulting thrown in. Its target customer is a high-tech company whose venture capitalists have turned off the spigot or a business that has realized that attaining the nirvana of a public offering is no longer a possibility. (“Internet companies that have hit a road bump,” as NetCatalyst’s Web site delicately puts it.) NetCatalyst’s aim is to help such companies get back on the road by finding an acquirer, a merger partner, or a new investor. When necessary, though, NetCatalyst will also supply some management advice to get an ailing company into better shape before shopping it around. If NetCatalyst manages to match a company with a new partner, its fee is usually 3% to 10% of the acquisition or investment amount. The company also charges time-based fees for its management-consulting services, which generally total less than $100,000. What companies like NetCatalyst can provide is “a fresh set of eyes” to find efficiencies and help a dot-com reposition itself in the market, says Emily Meehan, senior analyst at the Yankee Group. Many Internet companies have relied on incubators and venture-capital firms for capital and guidance. Now, says Meehan, “that help is totally drying up.” It’s hard to put a number on the potential market for NetCatalyst’s services, given that the number of failing dot-coms is still unknown. But researchers at Gartner Group estimate that as many as 60% of business-to-consumer Internet start-ups founded in the past three years will be gone by 2005. And even if the dot-com epidemic abates, says Karkenny, Internet mergers and acquisitions will undoubtedly continue. One early NetCatalyst client was Alert-IPO.com, an Internet business that tracks initial public offerings. The company hired NetCatalyst early last year while debating whether to seek a large round of venture capital, says Karkenny. NetCatalyst’s recommendation: bring in more experienced management and look for a strategic partner instead of VC money. Within 90 days, NetCatalyst engineered Alert-IPO’s acquisition by Internet.com, a portal consolidator that has rolled up more than 67 Web sites since 1995. In a year and a half of operations, NetCatalyst, which is based in Santa Monica, Calif., has worked with approximately 30 companies as an acquisition or investment intermediary. Its revenues for 2000 totaled some $2 million in cash, which doesn’t include the more than $10 million in equity that the company has garnered from some of its deals. Increasingly, says Posner, NetCatalyst finds itself being retained by venture-capital firms whose Internet portfolio companies need attention — fast. “They may have investments in 30 to 40 companies and don’t have the resources internally to deal with more than 4 or 5,” says Posner. “They’re turning to people like us.” NetCatalyst is picky about choosing which dot-coms to take on, though. Posner says he looks for companies that are fundamentally healthy, despite cash-flow problems, with a technical advantage or a business model that differentiates them from the rest of the marketplace. And if the company is down to its last nickel, forget it. “We don’t do dot-bombs,” says Karkenny. “If they have less than three months’ worth of cash, we don’t get involved at all.” Last rites Those unlucky Internet companies that fail to make NetCatalyst’s cut might consider the services of Bid4Assets.com. Launched in November 1999 as a site aimed at unloading goods ranging from bad loans to items seized in bankruptcy, Bid4Assets has found a serendipitously lucrative niche in selling the assets of defunct dot-coms. “This wasn’t in our business plan,” admits vice-president of strategic development David Marchick. “We didn’t really see it coming until about September.” But now as much as 20% of the business’s revenues come from liquidating Internet companies, and interest in Bid4Assets’ services is growing, says Marchick. “We have conversations with between 10 and 20 Internet companies per week,” he says. Based in Silver Spring, Md., Bid4Assets auctions items both online and off. Bidders for the assets of the recently deceased Value America, based in Charlottesville, Va., came from 16 states, says Marchick. “That would never have happened with a live auction,” he adds. Unlike Overstock.com, its best-known competitor in the dot-com scavenger business, Bid4Assets tends to sell to businesses rather than to consumers. About 40% of the time, Bid4Assets buys assets directly from failing Internet companies and resells them. In other cases it acts as a broker, usually collecting 10% of sales, plus a premium. Liquidating dot-coms brings some special challenges. A brick-and-mortar business usually has buildings, equipment, inventory, or other tangible property that can be sold off. Internet companies, which tend to be more virtual, often have a different range of assets. As of mid-December, Bid4Assets was offering intellectual-property rights from the now defunct Zodo.com, an entertainment-content site, including the company’s trademark application, its business plan, and its prototype site. (At press time, one bidder had offered $1,000.) Another recent auction involved computer equipment, office equipment, and furniture from the failed Value America, all of which sold for about $300,000. Other typical dot-com assets might include domain names, software, and licenses. Bid4Assets sells retail inventory only occasionally. “Assets from Internet companies are perishable,” says Marchick. “They’re like fruit.” So Bid4Assets tries to act fast, auctioning items within a week or two. “If you hold on to a server for six months, its value drops exponentially,” he explains. Intangible assets like domain names are short-lived, too. Even if a site has tons of traffic, once it shuts down, “within two months no one goes there,” Marchick says. There’s likely to be no shortage of troubled dot-coms in the near future. But what happens when the shakeout is over? Marchick says that he isn’t worried. By then another industry will be in a downturn, with Bid4Assets ready to scoop up the remains. “That’s kind of how it works in bankruptcy,” he says. Emily Barker is a senior staff writer at Inc. Cyber-kvetching The downturn among online companies has launched a slew of Web sites for the downsized and the people who love them to complain or commiserate or both. And — surprise! — some of those sites are even making money. Here are some of the loudest voices. FuckedCompany.com, in New York City, publishes a list of troubled Internet companies, based on reports that founder Philip Kaplan collects from disgruntled dot-commers. What spawned it: Last June, Kaplan, the founder and CEO of a small Web-design company, put up the site as a joke for his friends. He got back from vacation a week later to find his answering machine full of calls from reporters. Tone: Gleeful schadenfreude. Kaplan even runs a pool that lets users bet on which Internet company will be the next to fail. Revenue sources: Advertising; job listings; merchandise, including T-shirts and coffee mugs. NetSlaves.com, in Yonkers, N.Y., posts essays, rants, and other contributions from tech workers. The offerings provide a virtual underground guide to the Internet workplace. What spawned it: Founders Bill Lessard and Steve Baldwin started the site in 1998 to relieve their burnout after a series of frustrating Internet jobs. Tone: Grassroots subversion with a high-tech twist. Stories on sweatshop recruiters, articles on drug use in dot-coms, and gift suggestions for the special geek on your list. Revenue sources: Advertising, plus sales from Lessard and Baldwin’s 1999 book, NetSlaves: True Tales of Working the Web, which was launched on the site and has sold 50,000 copies so far. Another book is in the works. Startupfailures.com, in Castro Valley, Calif., offers advice and a community that help entrepreneurs bounce back after their companies have failed. What spawned it: Last February, after his third start-up in a row tanked, founder Nicholas Hall came up with the idea of starting a Web site for guys like him. Tone: Helpful encouragement of the “You get right back in there and keep trying” variety. Hall refers whiners to FuckedCompany.com. “I didn’t want to have that karma,” he says. Revenue sources: Sponsorships, plus off-line business coaching, speaking engagements, and workshops. Q&A Opportunities Abound Seth Freeman, managing director of EM Capital/EM Management Inc., a San Francisco consulting firm that specializes in turnarounds, talks about some of the opportunities that he sees in the Internet shakeout. Inc.: What can turnaround experts do for distressed dot-coms? Freeman: Venture capitalists, private-equity funds, and banks are beginning to use turnaround managers to evaluate their portfolio companies. And that leads to another opportunity for turnaround people: performing a planned wind down or asset sale that delivers as much value as possible. Inc.: What are the challenges of working with Internet companies? Freeman: There’s a perception among turnaround specialists that with dot-coms leverageable assets don’t exist. There hasn’t been much understanding of how to value and use intellectual property as collateral. Also, the ability to appraise the value of a dot-com brand name is still developing. Inc.: What are the opportunities for new turnaround companies? Freeman: You’re going to see firms set up to work as advisers to Internet “vulture” funds. Those are run by people who would like to buy either the assets or the ongoing companies at a discount. For that, they’ll require new-economy-savvy consultants. Inc.: How long will such an opportunity last? Freeman: I think it’s permanent. We’re going to continue to see new Internet start-ups. And many of those will fail. Q&A So What’s to Sell? How is liquidating an Internet company different from dissolving any other type of company? Jeffrey Wolf, a bankruptcy specialist at the law firm of Greenberg Traurig, in Boston, who represents Bid4Assets.com and other more traditional liquidation companies in many of their transactions, explains. Inc.: What are the opportunities for liquidators in the dot-com downturn? Wolf: Clearly, there will be a lot of failed dot-coms. The real question is, What is there to liquidate? Many dot-coms have no inventory. Obviously, there are the minimal physical assets, like office equipment, used computers, and the like. Then there are the intangible assets: the technology, the licenses, the customer lists, the domain names, and any intellectual property. And each one of those unfortunately comes with its own liquidation difficulties. For instance, customer lists, which everyone at one time supposed would be a very valuable asset, have become difficult to liquidate because of privacy concerns. Inc.: Sounds as if the opportunities for liquidators could be pretty small, then. Wolf: Yes and no. If liquidators can find efficient, cost-effective ways to dispose of companies’ assets, there could be a lot of opportunity, especially for online liquidations. Since the cost structure of an Internet-based auction is theoretically very low, the net results will be higher. Inc.: What’s the competition like? Wolf: Some companies have tried to liquidate themselves over eBay and other online auction sites. And some of the traditional liquidators are experimenting with dot-com liquidations. I don’t know how successful they’ll be without partnering with an experienced online player. The investment criteria of a traditional liquidator may not justify spending a lot of time or expense in that area. I think the traditional liquidators will have plenty of brick-and-mortar retailers to work with very shortly and will not necessarily be focusing on the dot-com sector. Please e-mail your comments to editors@inc.com.

On the Wired Front

Cover Story Blue-collar communities are designing their own high-tech networks to attract business Tacoma, Wash. Stand on a street corner and you can feel it. Not the unstoppable rush that hits you when you emerge from a New York City subway station. Not the charged air hovering about MIT in Cambridge, Mass., or the relentless new-day vibe of a Silicon Valley morning. But there’s something brewing in Tacoma, this city on the south shore of Puget Sound. Young men and women on their lunch breaks dot the sidewalks. Men in hard hats pop in and out of boarded-up, abandoned warehouses and mills that they’re renovating into San Francisco-style loft offices. Cranes swing around the waterfront, where new buildings are going up. “I can’t say I’ve ever seen that before in 20 years,” says Rob Grenley, an area native who cofounded two companies in downtown Tacoma: Grenley Stewart Resources Inc. and ID Micro Inc. How is it that after decades of stagnation the city of Tacoma is sputtering back to life? For starters, it’s only about 30 miles south of Seattle, where the high-tech growth spurt has gobbled up almost all the available space and ratcheted up real estate prices to twice what they are in Tacoma. And there’s another ace up the smaller city’s plaid-flannel sleeve: a state-of-the- art, high-speed fiber-optic network that covers the city. Tacoma — rich with small-city business perks like a sane commute, ample parking, and a start-up-friendly permitting process — is now technologically equipped to play ball with the big kids. Two or three years ago, says commercial real estate broker Eric Cederstrand of Colliers International, corporate clients refused to even drive past Tacoma and look out the car window. Seattle was the city they wanted on their business cards. Now, he says, the Tacoma warehouses he’s renovating are filling up faster than he can sandblast the timbers and hang the reproduction windows. “It’s like Tacoma was put in a time capsule,” he says. “All of a sudden we’ve broken open the time capsule, and we are literally creating a brand-new city.” The new network in Tacoma represents another chance at economic viability — perhaps even boomtown success. As is true with many small cities, all this might not have happened if Tacomans had waited for the local cable or phone company to install the high-speed networks that businesses now demand. Frustrated with the inattention of big cable and phone companies, publicly owned utilities in tiny towns and small cities in states all over the country have taken matters into their own hands. They’ve dug up streets, laid fiber-optic cable, and connected residents and businesses to new high-speed lines. Service providers are rushing in to sell Internet access through the new infrastructure. (In some cities, the utilities are even selling the services themselves.) The introduction of choices has made life easier for the businesses already in place and made the cities more attractive to start-ups. For Tacoma, the new network is much more than a tangle of glass threads. It represents another chance at economic viability — perhaps even boomtown success. City of Destiny Nearly surrounded by water, with preposterously huge Mount Rainier looming in and out of the clouds to the southeast, Tacoma tends to hang back behind its sexier sister, Seattle, just up Interstate 5. In 1873 the Northern Pacific railroad chose Tacoma over Seattle for its western terminus, and ecstatic Tacomans tagged their town the “City of Destiny.” For many years paper mills choked the air with an acrid stench that came to be known as “Tacoma’s aroma.” In the 1960s a shopping mall was built in Tacoma. Almost immediately, the downtown retail district started to collapse. Buildings stood abandoned for decades. Crime rose; street gangs moved in. To business owners in those days Tacoma’s nickname must have sounded ironic. “We were the corner business on both corners,” says Steph Farber, whose family’s LeRoy custom-jewelry shop has occupied a storefront in the middle of a downtown block since 1942. For years buildings on both sides were blighted all the way to the end of the block. By the 1980s, Tacoma was standing still as Seattle flourished. Thousands of people from the Tacoma area clogged I-5 every morning on their way to jobs in Seattle and surrounding King County. When Rob Grenley left for college, Tacoma had “a postapocalyptic look,” he recalls. “You didn’t want to do business there unless you had to.” Grenley worked first on Wall Street and then in Seattle, but returned to Tacoma in 1990 to start a truck-fueling business with Greg Stewart, a childhood friend. Things were just beginning to turn around then. City officials were working hard to clean the place up. They threw all their resources at improving public safety. They ripped down offending buildings and put grassy parks in their place. And they clung tightly to Tacoma’s marquee business, the Frank Russell Co., a multimillion-dollar international investment-services firm that is headquartered on Tacoma’s waterfront. But in the early 1990s the city’s communications infrastructure was still stuck in a technological tar pit. “You’d get on the phone and it would be, ‘All circuits are busy,’ ” recalls Steve Klein, superintendent of Tacoma Power, the municipally owned electric utility. The cable service was equally poor. “They had a monopoly, with no incentive to improve the infrastructure,” Klein says. The Energy Policy Act of 1992 had deregulated the wholesale side of the power business. To stay competitive, Tacoma Power was planning a fancy digital network that would allow it to operate switches, read meters, and manage power loads from remote locations. Klein calls this type of service electricom, from electricity and telecom. “Microprocessors are in everything,” he says. “They need electricity to power them, and they need telecom to interact.” The SRI International consultants Klein hired to review the plan told him that while he was at it, it made sense to install a bit more fiber than was called for, to wire the city for high-speed Internet access and other applications. The city surely needed it; its franchise office had been negotiating with cable provider TCI Inc. for service upgrades, but TCI representatives were stonewalling. Klein approached TCI and phone company US West about teaming up to share the cost of the new network. “They told us to get lost,” he says. In 1997 the city council approved Tacoma Power’s plan to spend $100 million on a fiber-optic network. (The money came from the utility’s wholesale revenues; residential and business customers saw no rate increase. Tacoma Power customers have the second-lowest rates per kilowatt hour in the state, according to the company’s government and community-relations manager, Diane Lachel.) Construction of the network began in January 1998, and by July the power company had its first cable customer. Today the Click Network, as it is called, covers 180 square miles. Tacomans now have choices, which forces better customer service. The city’s marketing people claim that 100 start-up companies have located in Tacoma since Click went live; some have relocated from Seattle. Those businesses (and city residents) can choose from five different Internet service providers that the network supports. But the real surprise came along in the same month that Tacoma Power broke ground on Click. TCI suddenly announced a decision to invest $30 million to upgrade its own infrastructure. “When they finally woke up to the fact that we were a reality, they tried to stomp us,” Klein says. But, he adds, Tacoma residents and businesses now have choices, which forces better customer service. Tacomans also have seen hundreds more jobs, more venture capital, and better workforce training in their hometown. Dublin transplant Bill Towey runs a high-tech incubator through his private-investment firm Tacoma Venture Partners LLC. “A lot of these workers were already here,” he says. “They just don’t drive north to Seattle or Redmond anymore.” Towey plans to raise $15 million for his incubator. He and various local companies are involved in a technology boot camp for Tacoma high school teachers. Giddy with the first signs of success, and eager to tout its prospects, Tacoma has retained the New York City marketing firm Development Counsellors International for $127,000. Tacoma’s economic-development director, Juli Wilkerson, is touring the country, promoting “America’s #1 Wired City” to site-selection companies. City employees now have E-mail addresses that end in wiredcityusa.com. And broker Eric Cederstrand is hot on the idea of changing the names of Broadway and Commerce Street to Broadway.com and E-Commerce Street. “There’s a positive-multiplier effect,” Rob Grenley observes. “More people come, which means businesses will grow and flourish, as opposed to people not wanting to come here on a bet. It’s nice to be heading toward that in your hometown.” Naturally, AT&T, which bought TCI in March 1999, says the company had planned to modernize its services all along. “Regardless of whether Click Network was in place or not, TCI would have upgraded Tacoma because plans had always been in place to upgrade at that time,” says Steve Kipp, executive director of communications for AT&T Broadband’s Northwest division in Seattle. Yet the Tacoma experience with TCI was echoed in Cedar Falls, Iowa, and Boulder, Colo. In fact, some 65 municipalities have made end runs around their cable or phone monopolies to offer telecom services, says Martin Gidron, managing editor of UT Digest, a newsletter in Silver Spring, Md., that has chronicled the phenomenon. The trend will continue, Gidron says, since “the demand for telecom services seems to be insatiable.” Heart of the Commonwealth Some 3,000 miles east of Tacoma, nestled among seven green hills far less dramatic than Mount Rainier, lies the city of Worcester, Mass. Worcester — birthplace of Abbie Hoffman, the diner restaurant, the smiley face, and the Pill — has long been known as the Heart of the Commonwealth. The name fits: the city’s central location and highway and rail infrastructure make it a natural for commerce. Worcester has also been known as New England’s utility closet, because it was a manufacturing center for many years. Most of Worcester’s industrial powerhouses have moved on to cheaper pastures, leaving the city with an assortment of old, abandoned buildings, including a cold-storage warehouse that burned catastrophically last December, killing six firefighters. In the 1960s, Worcester replaced a massive piece of its core with a suburban-style mall. The shopping center never really caught on, but like the one in Tacoma, it sparked the collapse of the city’s formerly thriving downtown retail base. In the past few years Worcester officials have staked the downtown’s future on another huge, single-use project — a mammoth medical facility — and have restored the 90-year-old Union Station, a beaux arts train depot that had been left to rot for decades. (Tacoma also recently restored its own Union Station, which is being used as a courthouse.) Worcester residents have always suffered from a bit of an inferiority complex, partly because their town, like Tacoma, is within the shadow of a larger, more vibrant city (in this case, Boston). Even the restoration of Union Station, the pride of the city, came only after years of contentious intracity squabbling and institutional paralysis. Now, nearly a year after the project was completed, its beckoning retail space is almost entirely unoccupied. Like Tacomans, Worcester, Mass., residents have always suffered from a bit of an inferiority complex, partly due to their proximity to a larger, more vibrant city. Another part of the problem may be Worcester’s form of government. The chief executive is not the mayor but rather the city manager, who is appointed by the city council instead of being elected by residents. Worcester has had only three city managers since 1953 (when business leaders succeeded in instituting this “professionalized” municipal structure), and none of them has been directly accountable to voters in the way elected officials are. That can make it difficult to create real change. “Worcester has gotten a little bit behind the curve,” says Arthur Couture, an entrepreneur who eyed neighboring towns before choosing Worcester and its easy commute for his software and computer-services company, ICAL Systems. Now, Couture says, Worcester officials are being pressured to leapfrog ahead. A new fiber-optic network has been installed in the city, and local businesspeople are relying on it to lure new companies to their hometown. A marketing brochure only slightly less effusive in tone than Tacoma’s PR avalanche labels Worcester “America’s #1 Cyber City.” Worcester’s network differs from Tacoma’s in one fundamental way: a private-sector builder of fiber-optic networks called NEESCom, which was established as the telecom subsidiary of the electric utility formerly known as New England Electric System, installed it at no expense to the city. Gidron of UT Digest says that more than 150 private electric utilities have similarly entered the telecom market. Tom Wharton, a former bankruptcy-turnaround consultant, is the man who turned NEESCom’s head. In 1998, Wharton bought a bankrupt Internet service provider. Bell Atlantic was going to charge him $6,000 a month for connectivity in Worcester. So he drove 45 minutes to Providence, R.I., where he could colocate his servers with another provider for $250 a month. On the drive back to Worcester, he mused that it was unfortunate he couldn’t locate his business in the city where he lived. Why, he wondered, was Worcester’s technology infrastructure so far behind that of other New England cities? Wharton wrote a letter to the editor of the city’s daily newspaper. “The next thing I knew,” Wharton says, “I was heading a task force.” He began working with the Worcester Area Chamber of Commerce to bring the city’s technology infrastructure up to speed. Hearing about Wharton’s efforts, NEESCom figured that Worcester would make a great hub for its new regional fiber-optic network and offered to wire the city at its own expense. About half a dozen competitive telecom companies have since moved in and started selling services on the new network, and Wharton estimates that the influx of providers has drawn at least 10 start-ups to Worcester. That includes a new venture for native entrepreneur Steven Rothschild, who, after having run a family furniture business for 16 years, had started Furniture.com in Worcester. In 1997, Rothschild’s high-speed T1 line was costing him $1,800 a month. He was having trouble finding tech-savvy executives who were willing to work in Worcester, and venture capitalists weren’t breaking down the door to fund a company in the former mill town. All of that, combined with the tough time he was having in getting tax credits, prompted him to move the company to Framingham, halfway between Worcester and Boston. But earlier this year Rothschild launched an online lightbulb store, called Bulbs.com, in Worcester. High-speed Internet service costs him $168 a month — less than a tenth of what he was paying three years ago. He’s also having an easier time recruiting managers. And there’s even a new $15-million fund for early-stage Worcester businesses. “The technology infrastructure is taking out some of the roadblocks to staying in the city,” Rothschild says. Wharton’s task force — the Worcester InfoTech Project — has taken on the mantle of marketer for the city’s new high-tech offerings. But the NEESCom network hasn’t been a panacea. “This isn’t Field of Dreams — ‘If you build it, they will come,” says Couture, who hasn’t even been able to connect his business to the network yet. Another prominent local company, Tatnuck Bookseller, is situated just a few hundred feet away from one of the city’s three network rings, which cover the downtown business district, a biomedical park, and Worcester Polytechnic Institute. “We are betting our company’s future on giving our customers access to us and having access to them,” says Tatnuck owner Larry Abramoff. “Not being wired is hurting my business right now.” (Until the network reaches him, he’s making do with leased T1 lines and a wireless service.) Still, Worcester’s model — in which a private company, rather than a public utility, installs the network — may prevail in future business-community resurrections. Tacoma’s model has goosed some big privately owned phone companies. In Washington state, GTE Northwest sued the Douglas County Public Utility District to stop it from expanding its fiber-optic network (the suit was later withdrawn following changes in state law), and the Washington Independent Telephone Association took Pacific County Public Utility District to court to stop it from providing Internet service to customers. So far, Texas, Missouri, and Virginia have passed laws limiting publicly owned electric utilities from offering telecommunications services. AT&T’s Kipp views the public companies’ inroads in this area as a conflict of interest. “We’re beholden to our shareholders,” he says. “Then we have to go in and compete with the government, who’s also the regulator. That could have a chilling effect on competition.” Steve Klein of Tacoma Power doesn’t really care if Click loses residential customers to the new AT&T offerings; he built the network for the power company’s own purposes, and the Internet-access stuff is just gravy. The mayor’s office doesn’t mind if some Tacoma residents think “Wired City” sounds as if a bunch of caffeine addicts have staged a coup. Some of the new start-ups may not even survive. But 100% success is not the point. The point is to get things going. The more that entrepreneurs hear about Tacoma, the more seriously they will consider starting or relocating a business there. For the first time the people of Tacoma — and Worcester and other old-economy communities like them — are leveraging their technological assets to promote entrepreneurial businesses. They’re grabbing the reins and kissing destiny good-bye. Jill Hecht Maxwell is a reporter at Inc. Technology . Question Authority Small cities want their zip codes on your letterhead, and they’ll try their darnedest to convince you that their technology is state-of-the-art. Don’t believe the hype. Here are some key questions you should ask regarding tech infrastructure before you relocate: Can I connect to a fiber-optic network in your city? How much will it cost to plug in? How long will it take? Who’s competing to provide me with service? What are the rates? Is the network connected to major cities nearby? How many other companies are there? Do they use the network? Can residents connect to the high-speed network and telecommute? Are wireless services available? Up to Date in Kapolei Remember when every burg across the nation was billing itself as the next Silicon Whatever? Well, now several cities and at least one state want to be known for their wired wonders. Here’s a sampling of the claims: The Wired City Kapolei, Hawaii America’s Most Wired City Louisville, Ky. The Most Wired City in America Stillwater, Okla. America’s #1 Wired City Tacoma, Wash. America’s #1 Cyber City Worcester, Mass. The Internet Capital The state of Virginia Please e-mail your comments to editors@inc.com.