Greg Wyler has viewed universal connectivity as a basic right long before governments around the world sought to legislate it as such. From his Rwandan fibre optic venture Terracom to O3b Networks, Wyler has made it his mission to provide internet access…
Greg Wyler has viewed universal connectivity as a basic right long before governments around the world sought to legislate it as such. From his Rwandan fibre optic venture Terracom to O3b Networks, Wyler has made it his mission to provide internet access to unserved areas throughout the world. His latest venture, OneWeb, is the pinnacle of these ambitions but can it succeed where previous attempts like Teledesic and Skybridge failed? SatelliteFinance spoke to Wyler about his latest project and how it will work.
Ed Ansell: When did you first have this idea of providing universal broadband through a small satellite constellation and how did it evolve from O3b to what is now with OneWeb?
Greg Wyler: Solving connectivity problems has broad ramifications across a wide spectrum of people. While we’re OK with a 30 second lapse in connectivity, we’re not OK with a 30 month lapse. Our goal and mission has been to reach into the emerging markets and the places where people have a long-term lack of connectivity.
The satellite system provides a solution, a relatively fast and instant solution to connectivity problems but it can also be used for other things. So O3b provides an incredible high speed backbone while OneWeb is a different system. OneWeb provides a direct to consumer, to home, to business solution.
The time period it takes to set up the solution is different between O3b and OneWeb. The speed that you get is different, the latency is different, and the cost structures are different. So they are very different systems.
If you were a telco, you would look at the need for multi-gigabit backhaul to your core network and you would call up O3b. And if you needed to provide pinpoint coverage directly to consumers at specific locations then OneWeb would be the answer.
EA: You have had this dream to provide global connectivity for a long time. When you first started out with the O3b project, was that what the original dream was? Did it change as the company developed, focusing more on backhaul than consumer, or was that always the plan?
GW: When O3b started out, the plan was always to be exactly what it is today. There were considerations and ideas for expansions into all sorts of directions, but the design structure of O3b is fundamentally one where you are laying these large diameter spot beams in particular locations. So it is not a system designed for global coverage. It is a system designed for direct coverage to large antennas. It is a very different architecture. A very necessary architecture but one further removed from the consumer’s focus.
EA: Are you still part of the O3b project in any way?
GW: Very much so. I’m a huge fan, supporter and maybe their biggest cheerleader.
EA: What has been your experience working with O3b’s largest shareholder SES, a large established satellite operator with a very different system to O3b?
GW: It was both fascinating and fantastic working with SES. Romain Bausch (SES’ former president) saw the vision, stood up, grabbed it with both arms and gave it a bear hug.
You can’t be an old school operator and expect to live forever, because the world is going to change. Technology is going to change. The size and use of terminals, the way people use connectivity is going to change. So if you don’t build upon your strengths as an FSS operator, then you’re only going to stay with the markets that currently exist and you have limited control over their future.
EA: So you think that O3b will become increasingly important to a company like SES?
GW: I should think so, yes. Building satellites is hard and long, and most people think that it is an insurmountable task from day one. I often said that if people don’t think you are crazy when you start then you are not doing the right thing.
EA: And with all the upfront capital requirements for such projects, it must be difficult to persuade investors to come on board?
GW: I have had to build extremely credible technical and financial cases for the projects. From my position where I am raising large amounts of capital from potentially some of the most conservative investor pools you can imagine, the systems that you design have to be incredibly solid. The spectrum positions have to be incredibly solid. The people, vision and customer base have to be well articulated, well thought out and extremely understandable.
EA: How have you presented the business case for OneWeb? How have you persuaded potential investors that they will get a return on their investment?
GW: The interesting thing about the OneWeb business model is if you start with the technical capabilities of the system, they’re enormous. The initial launch system will have over 10 terabits per second of capacity. The system design has incredibly efficient spectral reuse. It enables hundreds of times more megahertz in capacity than all the other satellites combined.
EA: How will it achieve this, is it just the way the satellites are designed?
GW: It is not so much the satellites, it is the system. There is much more to this than the satellite and this is not apparent until you get into the details. Satellites are an important piece of the puzzle but it is the architectural design choices that are the most important component of the system.
EA: So for the system to work will the satellites need to be able to communicate with each other?
GW: Not necessarily. There is a roadmap and we have only released the first part of the roadmap, so there is a long way to go.
EA: Where are you on the roadmap with regard to discussions with manufacturers to build the initial plan of 648 microsatellites?
GW: We’ve done a tremendously detailed design of the satellites themselves, the system architecture, the gateways – all the components. So we know what we want. We’ve worked with suppliers, received quotes, done detailed studies with them and we know what is capable.
We have driven people, especially those in the satellite industry, from what they thought couldn’t be done to ‘oh yes of course we can do it’.
There has been a massive sea change in the viewpoint. It has taken quite a bit of evangelism and education inside the satellite community for those suppliers. But those outside the satellite community – in industries where volume production and efficiencies of scale are how they operate – have been comfortable with our plan.
EA: What is the estimated cost of the project?
GW: We are looking at between US$1.5bn and US$2bn.
EA: With regard to your regulatory filings, are they the same as the ones that Skybridge, the start-up that planned a similar global satellite broadband service in the late 1990s, secured? If so, is there an issue with Ku band geostationary priority rights around the equator?
GW: Yes we do have their filings. We use Ku and Ka band and have priority rights in both. All the spectrum was freed up by the ITU in 1997 for the purpose of connecting the world. But you need to make sure you don’t interfere with the current users, and that is a challenge that befuddled our predecessors. So we have designed a technology that we call ‘progressive pitch’.
Obviously looking at this issue was a primary concern in the architecture – you must start there. So we designed a patent-pending technology which ensures that we always maintain enough separation from the GEO satellites, that we never interfere with them.
Progressive pitch technology is really an incredibly important secret to accomplishing our goals without interfering with any GEO satellite operator.
EA: SpaceX has also announced plans for a micro-satellite broadband constellation, do you think the need to secure the necessary spectrum rights is a major hurdle to anyone who wants to provide a similar global service?
GW: The ITU and the regulatory rights must be respected. Having rights to that precious resource is really important.
With O3b, for instance, we were one of the first companies to really truly unlock the potential of this spectrum that was set aside in 1997. So we have a lot of experience with these rules.
EA: You have had talks with SpaceX before so what was your view on their announcement and do you feel you might be able to work with them?
GW: I don’t know what the future holds. I know our mission and accomplishing our goal is of primary importance.
The good thing for the finance people is that building a system at such scale enables capacity for so many other applications that are really extra to our core mission. We can provide tremendous low latency capacity directly to aircraft, it would only require a small antenna.
EA: And would that be your design or from a supplier such as Kymeta with their meta-materials antenna?
GW: We have our own terminal design that we have put together. However, that terminal is primarily focused on our mission’s core application. It is a terminal that is super low cost and is designed to fit on a school or health centre in an emerging market and act as a WiFi hub.
Fortunately lots of other people have designed their own versions of terminals. So an aircraft terminal is out there by one company. You will see some really cool things going forward where people are taking advantage of the terabits of capacity that the system will provide and bring it into the aviation, maritime, and oil and gas markets.
EA: So OneWeb is creating a constellation with this huge amount of capacity and if others want to utilise the system, and develop products for it, then that will just help it spread across the world?
GW: Yes, the system has the capacity and capability to do some really wonderful things where there are spots with a lack of connectivity.
One really important part of the system is for first responders. Emergency access for first responders is a huge challenge. We have a terminal that fits on a fire truck or police car, etc, and it senses the cellular towers around it and sees which companies are offering service at that moment. If and when that service goes down for any reason, this terminal turns on instantly and becomes a cell tower that connects to our satellite system, assuring global communications with the phones in your pocket or the LMR or PMR radios.
EA: Is OneWeb’s plan to essentially be a wholesaler to the telecoms operators?
GW: Yes. These telcos and ISPs are doing a fantastic job. They understand the markets but they are limited by the technologies. They want to cover rural areas, they just don’t have the technology to make it cost effective and efficient. We will work with the operators.
The fundamentals are that, anyone who walks near one of our terminals, their cell phone – LTE, 3G, WiFi or 2G – can work with our system and reach their mobile operator’s network. They don’t contract with us, we are just a wholesale provider.
EA: We’ve seen a lot of money invested by governments to improve rural broadband but it has predominantly gone to expanding fibre optic and cable in those areas, which is exceedingly expensive. Do you think this is an area you will approach and look to secure governmental investment?
GW: We hope so. When I was at O3b we had plenty of governmental and inter-governmental investment. If you look at the market problem, we all know that rural connectivity is important, we all want to make it happen, but there has been no technology that efficiently and effectively addresses that issue. This is a system designed to be an infrastructure for the service providers to create a cost effective methodology for reaching deep into the rural areas and covering the remaining 15%.
EA: OneWeb has announced Qualcomm and the Virgin Group as its first investors. How long have you been talking to them, how much did they invest and are you talking to other potential investors?
GW: The investment conversation with Richard (Branson) started three years ago on a beach at Naka. He saw the vision and strongly encouraged me to pursue it.
As to the size of the investment, I cannot disclose that.
We have two very high profile, extremely capable investing partners and there is a lot of other interest.
We have a lot of interest in building a wide variety of investors on a global basis, so we can have a global representation of cultures, values and viewpoints.
EA: And would these new investors be strategic like your existing investors or would you be happy to bring in more institutional investors?
GW: A combination.
EA: You have an agreement with Virgin Galactic to launch some of the satellites, and you also have a regulatory deadline to utilise the spectrum by 2019. Are you confident you will meet those deadlines and do you expect to use Virgin for those launches?
GW: We’ll be far in advance of those deadlines. We should launch our first satellite in the first quarter of 2017. If Virgin are ready then they will do the first launch.
EA: If you plan to launch the satellites by early 2017 when do you plan to begin construction?
GW: This year, but these are built differently from normal satellites. It is lots of pre-work and then the satellites are built really quickly.
