Retail Policy Review - Town Centre Manager - Submission - 24 August 2018

Submission 10 Town Centre Manager Hello Panel

Please see below an update on progress since the last scrutiny report. I would be delighted to also attend the panel at your next sitting.

Achievements

• Formation of the Jersey Retail Association in 2018 as the retail representative body
• Retail Development Steering Group formed in 2017 to create the next retail strategy
• The Town Centre Manager and Retail Development Group Chairman worked with Skills Jersey to create Retail specific courses at Highlands. This commenced in 2017, Highlands now also offering Retail Diploma course
• Town Centre Manager and PoSH funded and supported the role out of Alive After 5 initiative in 2016
• Town Centre Manager and PoSH have funded and delivered the following events to enliven St Helier
  • 2016 16 events
  • 2017 – 19 events
  • 2018 – 22 events
• Pay by Phone and number plate recognition (at Sand Street) rolled out across Jersey
• PoSH, SOJDC & TDF funded new way finder signs in 2016, to support visitors and also add historic facts
• WiFI St Helier – PoSH & Digital Jersey funded a feasibility report (see attached)
• Search Jersey (Jamazon type site) launched in 2016 with very little uptake from retailers (see attached)
• Retail Ambassadors – Jersey Business offered World Host training to over 400 retail / hospitality employees. They can be identified by a Retail Ambassador pin
• Charing Cross was pedestrianised in 2017 and has become an important event space
• Conway Street pavement was extended in 2016 to accommodate pedestrians comfortably
• Bollards along Colomberie were removed at the request of PoSH in 2015
• Minden Place carpark has been modernised

Not yet achieved

• Mystery Shopping report funding stopped in 2017
• Additional work required to extend opening ours further than just Thursday evenings required
• Sunday Trading deregulation. Visit Jersey data highlights the need for this deregulation to enable visitors to have a rounded experience of St Helier
• De Minimis level. Retailers are still experiencing an unfair playing filed and Amazon has now taken over as the largest retailers in Jersey
• Retail Champion is still not clear with minimal political support
• EDD representation not invited to attend Future St Helier Group
• Guy Gothard 2010 Jersey Market Review not applied to markets. Opening hours have not changed
• No data to support retail shift. Additional footfall cameras required in key areas of change
• Digital focus for smaller retailers. Jersey Business worked hard to engage with small business with minimal update on free digital advice
• North of town masterplan not applied
• Hopper bus / park & ride scheme

Wish list

• Robust data on the value of retail to the Jersey economy. Monthly gathering of retail sales data would be beneficial and could be used to understand the market. Highlight St Helier as a retail hub with inward investors and highlight issues with certain areas of retail
• Additional footfall cameras throughout the town centre to further understand the movement of people and the impact of development
• Specific funding from government for events. Fete de Noue is extremely underfunded compared to the days of Jersey Tourism
• Benchmark of where we are to feed into the new retail strategy
• Deregulation of Sunday trading
• Government understanding of the value of the sector when the sector is applying for licenced staff. One size does not fit all and poor service reflects on the brand Jersey
• Change in legislation to reduce timescales that retail shops are empty
• More streets accessible for pedestrians between 10am6pm

Kind regards Daphne

Daphne East

Director of Customer Services & Town Centre Manager

Ian Ronayne No 5 Maufant Lodge La Route de Maufant St Saviour

Jersey, JE2 7WZ t: 01534 857023 m: 07797 722356

e: ironayne@gmail.com

Digital Jersey

History

Referenced Documents

Contents

1. About this document ....................................................................................................................................... 3
2. Context ........................................................................................................................................................... 3
3. About Ian Ronayne ......................................................................................................................................... 3
4. Executive summary......................................................................................................................................... 4
5. About municipal WiFi networks ....................................................................................................................... 7
6. Comparable networks and services .............................................................................................................. 11
7. Stakeholder analysis ..................................................................................................................................... 13
8. Outline service description and performance expectations ........................................................................... 14
9. An analysis of the potential operating model ................................................................................................ 16 10 Identification of potential technical solutions and suppliers ........................................................................... 18 11 A cost / benefit analysis based on outline costs ............................................................................................ 19 12 Risk assessment ........................................................................................................................................... 20 13 Conclusions .................................................................................................................................................. 21 Appendix A: SuperConnected Cities Programme ................................................................................................. 24 Appendix B: Stakeholders consulted .................................................................................................................... 25

The document is proprietary to Ian Ronayne and should not be copied or reproduced without permission. ©2017 Ian Ronayne

1  ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT

This is a feasibility report containing the outcome of a work package undertaken by Ian Ronayne (IR)  at  the  request  of  Digital  Jersey  (DJ).  The  subject  of  the  work  package  is  a  feasibility assessment of installing a public WiFi network in St Helier town centre.

2  CONTEXT

The possibility of installing a public WiFi network (often termed municipal WiFi) in St Helier has been raised on several occasions. Interest has chiefly followed news of comparable installations taking place in UK city and town centres.

Previously, the Parish of St Helier (PoSH) has directly investigated the option, engaging with potential WiFi network suppliers to understand what is possible but not progressing beyond discussions. As a result, DJ has agreed to facilitate a focused initiative with the goal of formally deciding to proceed towards the installation of a municipal WiFi network or deciding to not progress further.

The approach taken by IR is to initially undertake a feasibility study with the aim of bringing together sufficient information and views upon which to decide whether to proceed with the initiative or not. If the decision is to move forward with the project, the next stage would be a full business case based on firm requirements and fixed quotations.

3  ABOUT IAN RONAYNE

IR operates as an independent consultant in Jersey, with a specialist expertise in telecoms, communications and technology services. IR has a background of 20 years working within the communications' industry, with primary experience in technology based product development, marketing, business development and project management. Since 2010, IR has operated in a self- employed capacity, working with organisations throughout the island.

In addition to this consultancy work, IR works in several other roles, including as a lecturer in management qualifications, as a trainer in a number of soft skills disciplines including project and change management, as a researcher, writer, guide, historical consultant and speaker. IR is also a published author and recognised historian.

4  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. Summary of findings Why WiFi?

There is nothing new about municipal WiFi. It's been a concept since the 1990s and a functioning reality since the mid-2000s. There has not been a smooth exponential growth curve, however, municipal WiFi has gone through several ebbs and flows to reach its position today.

That position is an increasing number of city and town centres installing municipal WiFi networks, in the UK at least. A central government  funding initiative is partly responsible, recognising the link between digital savvy and enabled citizens and national economic success. At the  same  time,  municipalities,  such  as  Norwich  for  example, are investing in WiFi as a means of supporting  the highs street and its traders.  

Curiously,  the  current  flourishing  of  municipal  WiFi  comes at a time when mobile data technology in the  form  of  4G  networks  is  at  last  capable  of  offering  genuine  and  ubiquitous  wireless  broadband.  Some  municipalities  want  control  of  the  end  user  experience,  however,  preferring  not  to  rely  on  commercial mobile operators.  

Why St Helier?

Given the rise of municipal WiFi elsewhere in the UK, the question is perhaps why not St Helier. Yet discussions with several town centre stakeholders reveal an inconsistent array of views on whether there is a need for WiFi or not.

While some firm support exists, primarily for the same reasons put forward in the UK, other views are  dismissive,  unable  to  see  the  benefits  or  at  least  the  need  to  prioritise  WiFi  over  other initiatives.

What could a St Helier WiFi network look like

The technology and expertise exists to install a public WiFi network in St Helier, based on proven technology that has been widely deployed elsewhere. The technology allows for a customisable service based on standard features tailored to client requirements.

The critical choices are how extensive the coverage should be and whether to charge for the service or not. Both would have significant impact on the business case.

How much would it cost?

Taking an assumed median coverage area encompassing much of the town centre, and a simple, free-to-use service, the estimated installation costs are circa £150k - £200k, although this is just a high-level estimate. Network maintenance and running costs are circa £20k - £40k per annum.  There  would  also  be  a  requirement  for  project  management  costs  along  with  site acquisition fees and charges.

Who will be responsible?

There are several roles associated with the procurement, installation and operation of municipal WiFi, including a network owner and service operator. The former would assume contractual responsibilities, the latter to define a service specification and ensure it is delivered to end-users.

From discussions with stakeholders, it's not clear who would take on these and other roles associated with any service.

Could there be a justifiable business case?

A simple cost / benefits analysis suggests a positive business case, but largely on the basis of indirect revenues. A high-level risk analysis suggests a low to medium outlook.

2. Summary of conclusions

works best as a free-to-use service, not subject to intrusive sign-up procedures or unsolicited  adverts.  One  option  to  limit  that  cost  is  to  find  a  supportive technology supplier to partner with, by widening the potential choices to non- Jersey companies for instance.

Point 5  It is not clear who would own and operate a municipal WiFi network in St Helier,

with little appetite among consulted stakeholders. This is a critical gap in any strategy – there needs to be a person or organisation responsible for contracting, setting  service  expectations  and  dealing  with  end  user  issues.  There  is  an alternative  to  one  stakeholder  or  consortium  of  stakeholders  taking  on responsibilities: create an entity that could perform this role.

5  ABOUT MUNICIPAL WIFI NETWORKS

1. What is a municipal WiFi network?

A wide-scale wireless network installed in town and city centres that offers free, or partially free, highspeed internet access to anyone with a suitable wireless device. Based principally on an array of access points running the 802.11 networking standard, which is common to devices supporting WiFi, including laptops, notebooks, tablets, mobile phones, etc.

2. Enabling technology

The diagramme shows a simplified representation of a municipal WiFi network's components, with detail on each explained below.

Wireless Network  Running  software  that  monitors  the  WiFi  network,  controlling  the

Controller  operation and synchronisation of the wireless access points.

3. Historic development

Municipal  WiFi  networks  are  a  comparatively  recent  development,  with  the  first  significant installations occurring in the early years of the 21st century. The initial focus was on the concept that city authorities should be responsible for providing internet access to their citizens, in the same fashion as roads, pavements, public lighting, sewers, etc. This principle placed internet access in the same category and other utility services. A counter-argument proposed that it was the role of private companies – chiefly mobile network providers – to run wireless data services, although the absence of high speed mobile broadband made this impractical.

On this basis, some cities began installing and offering a free or partly free municipal WiFi service. They faced challenges, notably on the grounds of cost and expenditure – installing citywide WiFi was an expensive business. These challenges,  led to many of the early networks failing. An  example is Wireless Philadelphia', one of the  first to launch in April 2005. By 2007, the  network was in serious trouble, having failed  to achieve roll-out targets and struggling with  contractual  arrangements.  By  2008,  the  service had closed.

In the years between 2005 and the present day, many of the originally installed or conceived largescale municipal WiFi networks have closed or not progressed. The concept continued to be popular,  however,  employed  in  smaller  scale  as  publicly  accessible  infrastructure  or  private campus-level installations.

4. Current position

A renewed charge to deploy municipal WiFi networks has recently come from central governments. Recognising the economic value of digitally connected organisations and individuals, stimulus funds have been made available to encourage the rollout of high speed broadband connections, including  those  using  WiFi  networks  in  city  centre  locations.  An  example  of  this  is  the  UK Government's Super Connected Cities', part of a multi-million pound Broadband Delivery UK' project – see Appendix A for more information.

At the same time, smaller municipalities have extended the drive to provide high-speed broadband connectivity into their town centres. Within the European Union, a new initiative called WIFI4EU' proposes, in the words of the EU President, to Equip every European village and every city with free wireless internet access around the main centres of public life by 2020.'

5. Competing / complementary technologies

For many years, mobile data has been playing catch-up to other wireless technologies. Until the advent of 4G, the prospect of true mobile broadband was an ambition rather than reality. This has now changed, and will continue to do so as new and even faster mobile data technologies are developed.

What this means is that mobile broadband now provides a genuine alternative to WiFi. It has advantages: established and far wider coverage, for example, better handover' between access points when end users are moving, and ease of access – typically no login required. But mobile broadband also has disadvantages: WiFi is simpler to install and maintain, mobile data usage is chargeable, potentially leading to large bills, and mobile data is often subject to high roaming charges when away from the subscriber's home network.

Jersey has excellent mobile coverage provided by its three operators, each of which offer extensive 4G services. Pay monthly subscribers often have a bundle' of mobile data within their tariff plan, which can be added to if paid for. Pay-as-you-

go customers typically have less inclusive data, but some options do provide it when adding a

set amount of credit.

All this means that many local people coming into  St  Helier  will  already  have  access  to  a highspeed wireless service and may therefore be less inclined to use a free WiFi network.

Roaming charges have traditionally inhibited the use of mobile data when away from the home network. Recent EU legislation has now eliminated roaming charges between member countries, however, meaning people pay the same when roaming as they do when at home. Correspondingly, mobile data bundles from home apply when abroad, potentially meaning free-to-use' mobile data when travelling.

Despite Jersey being outside the EU, the UK mobile operators – Vodafone, O2 and Three – have removed roaming charges for their customers travelling to the Channel Islands. This means that UK visitors with mobile data bundles can continue to use them while in St Helier.

All this means that many overseas visitors to St Helier will already have access to a highspeed wireless service through their mobile subscriptions and may therefore be less inclined to use a free WiFi network.

There is a risk involved in relying on mobile broadband, however, as recognised by at least one UK town centre WiFi operator interviewed as part of this feasibility report. Control of cost and quality rests  with  the  mobile  operator,  which  may  decide  to  change  things  to  meet  commercial requirements at any point. Eliminating this risk means installing and operating a comparable wireless data network.

6  COMPARABLE NETWORKS AND SERVICES

Within the UK, there is the growing concept of smart cities', with many smaller municipalities installing town centre WiFi networks. Some examples are examined below.

1. Norwich

The city of Norwich has installed and operates a municipal WiFi network covering areas of the city centre along with key public buildings. Funding for the initiative came through the Business Improvement District' or BID principle, a UK Government backed programme that supports city and town centre development. The stated reasons for installing the municipal WiFi network are:

Modern  business  and  visitors  travel  on  their  internet  connection  

Businesses and visitors want to share everything online  

City users want to stay connected to work  

Mobile service alone isn't good enough  

International visitors hate roaming charges  

More devices use WiFi than ever before  

There is also an intention to enhance the attractiveness of Norwich compared with out-of-town shopping centres or other town centres, which are competitors for public footfall.

The  installation  was  executed  through  several  contracted  suppliers,  and  achieved  with  the assistance of expert consultants. The service is free to use without restriction, and without any pop- ups or pushed' adverts, which are deemed intrusive and off-putting to end users. Coverage is restricted to outside use only, with minimum in-building penetration except where required.

The response from end users has been reportedly very positive, with a quarter of a million-people accessing the network in the 21 months since its launch.

2. Basingstoke

In a similar fashion to Norwich, the Basingstoke BID launched a free WiFi service covering the town centre and adjoining shopping mall in December 2016. The initiative was partly funded by town centre traders through the BID, and partly by the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council.

As well as providing public access, the network monitors footfall, duration of stay, movement around the town centre, etc.

Subsequent to launch, the BID has reported more than 8,000 unique users, mostly in the younger age groups.

3. Southend-on-Sea

Southend-on-Sea Borough Council is presently launching a public WiFi network allowing end users free internet browsing in the city centre. The stated aims of doing so are to:

improve the overall visitor experience in the town and help Southend-on-Sea compete as an attractive destination for retail and leisure. It will also increase social inclusion by making the internet free and accessible to anyone in the area of coverage.'[1]

The network will include analytical applications designed to improve parking intelligence and waste collection. There is also a wireless application aimed at allowing residents and visitors to find restaurants, attractions and activities.

The approach taken by Southend on Sea Borough Council is granting a concession to private company IntechnologyWiFi to deploy, monitor and maintain wireless equipment within the city centre, using street furniture and buildings owned by the council and their partners.

7  STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS

1. Representatives

Identified stakeholders were individuals or organisations with a direct interest in the St Helier town  centre,  specifically  from  the  perspective  of  visiting  locals  and  tourists.  Among  those interviewed as part of this feasibility assessment were: Parish of St Helier, Visit Jersey, Digital Jersey, Jersey Chamber of Commerce, Jersey Heritage, Jersey Retailers Association, States of Jersey - Economic Development Department.

See Appendix B for further details.

2. General views

There were mixed stakeholder views on the prospect of free WiFi in St Helier, ranging from important to not required. Excepting PoSH, installing a network was not among the top priorities of any stakeholders, although Visit Jersey believed that access to always-on' mobile capabilities would increasingly become a contributing factor with some people  when choosing a holiday destination.

Among those who believed free WiFi in St Helier would be beneficial was also a recognition that any installation must be cost justified.

3. Potential benefits

Among those who were supportive, the potential benefits envisaged by the installation of a free WiFi network in St Helier were:

To enhance the experience of people visiting the town centre, for personal or work reasons, by allowing them to connect with their online applications, for communication, information, entertainment and so forth.

To improve the measurement and understanding of people flows around the town centre, thus allowing more informed planning of urban changes and enhancements.

To  support  the  positioning  of  Jersey  as  an  advanced  digitally  connected'  location,  thus enhancing its broad appeal to potential inward investors or talent.

To augment the appeal of Jersey as a destination of choice for potential visitors, especially those who view the ability to share real-time experiences via social media as an important aspect of their lives.

To provide a platform for pushing dynamic data to people coming into the town centre, thus offering them real-time information (e.g. news updates, transport information, factual guides) or commercial (e.g. sales promotion, opportunity awareness).

8  OUTLINE SERVICE DESCRIPTION AND PERFORMANCE EXPECTATIONS

Reviewing comparable networks and potential technologies, along with stakeholder feedback, permits envisaging the following potential municipal WiFi network for St Helier.

8.1  Network coverage

The  extent  of  required  coverage  differs  between  stakeholders,  though  there  could  be  three potential WiFi zones:

Encompassing selected popular town centre public spaces – King Street and Minimum

coverage  Queen Street, Royal Square, Weighbridge Place, Liberation Square, Wests

Centre, Parade Gardens.

Median  Encompassing an area bounded by Gloucester Street in the west, Union Street, coverage  Burrard Street and Minden Place in the north, Bath Street in the east and La

Route de la Liberation, Mulcaster Street and Hill Street in the south.

Maximum

coverage  Encompassing the area bounded by the St Helier ring road'.

The network should be primarily  accessible  in  outdoor  locations  only,  with  signal  strength  optimally  established  to  meet  this  criterion  but  restrict  in- building  penetration  wherever  possible.  

There may be a requirement to  extend  coverage  indoors  within  designated buildings, i.e. harbour  terminal,  municipal  buildings,  etc.  

1. Network capacity  There  should  be  sufficient  download  and  upload  throughput capacity to allow an  acceptable internet access experience for users based on a service level defined by the operator.
2. Service control

A secure service control function accessible by the operator and potentially contributors that will

allow the monitoring and reporting of WiFi zone performance, both network-wide and access point specific. Examples of information available from this function are traffic loading and distribution, download and upload throughput speeds, user profiles and behaviour.

3. User experience

The stakeholder's preference is for a free-to-use' service, on the basis that any form of charge would be a barrier to usage, but the owner will ultimately decide the commercial operating model. This may involve providing a free service that is time or quality limited, with a charge possibly made for continuous use beyond a defined period of free use, or to access a superior quality service.

Users should be presented with a web landing page designed by the operator when first accessing the network, through which they will provide personal information and select a username and password for future use.

The operator will determine and set fair usage policies such as restricting bandwidth availability after 30 minutes - and content accessibility, such as restricting access to adult-themed content'.

4. Operator services

The network should provide the following services:

The  network  will  provide  statistical  information  on  the  movement  of Footfall

people through the WiFi zone. Busy thoroughfares on a time of day / week analytics

basis, for example, or time spent in a particular location.

The  network  will  allow  the  contributors  to  present  information  and Information

adverts to end users based on their location in the zone. Inviting a user to and

access  a  related  information  website  when  passing  a  historic  site,  for advertising

example, or a related special offer when passing a shop or restaurant.

9  AN ANALYSIS OF THE POTENTIAL OPERATING MODEL

1. Potential operating model

There are a range of approaches when it comes  to  procuring,  specifying  and  managing  a  municipal  WiFi  network.  What  can't  be  overlooked,  however,  is  a  fundamental  requirement for someone or some entity to be  responsible  for  several  separate  although  complimentary roles.  

One was to identify and consider these roles is  by defining a potential operating model for the  Town centre WiFi network, which divides the  service  into  a  number  of  inter-linked  layers.  These are explained as follows:  

1. Service Experience

Responsibility for service experienced by Users of the network. Encompasses establishing the service parameters, i.e. breadth of coverage, bandwidth availability, content restrictions, potential payment gateways, etc., interfacing with potential contributors accessing the service, i.e. advertisers, information providers, etc., raising awareness and managing sign-up process, dealing with network and User issues as they arise, defining and collating user statistics and reports.

2. Infrastructure

Responsibility for planning, installing and maintaining the physical network, including wireless access  points,  network  control  system,  service  management  system,  internet  gateway  and connectivity.

3. Real Estate

Responsibility for securing and the management of the locations needed for the wireless access points, a supply of electricity to each and IP backhaul connectivity.

4. Ownership

Responsibility for funding, spend and ensuring return on investment, both at initial installation phase  and  subsequently  operational  phase,  assuming  legal  ownership  of  network  assets  or commercial arrangements with possible managed service providers, accountability for legal and regulatory stipulations, i.e. compliance with data protection provisions.

2. Considerations

None of the stakeholders consulted envisaged themselves performing any of the roles identified in the potential operating model. There was a recognition that the roles needed filling, however, and some thoughts about possible individuals or organisations who could do this.

There was also a clear statement from some potential network infrastructure suppliers that they were not interested in providing a turnkey' installation and operation, running the WiFi in a concessionaire arrangement.

An alternative to existing stakeholders or potential suppliers operating a municipal WiFi network would be to create an entity that would undertake the task. This could be small organisation charged with taking on all the potential operating model roles under a managed contract, in return for payment or some form of recompense.

10 IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL TECHNICAL SOLUTIONS AND SUPPLIERS

1. Potential suppliers

To gauge potential costs for a town centre WiFi network, three local infrastructure suppliers received a request for information (RFI) – JT, Sure and Logicalis.

2. Request for information responses

Question  Responses

11 A COST / BENEFIT ANALYSIS BASED ON OUTLINE COSTS

A detailed business case should follow a decision to proceed with plans to install a network. For the purpose of this feasibility report, however, the following simple cost / benefit analysis provides a subjective evaluation of financial viability.

Notes:

1. Worst case from RFI
2. Project management / municipal WiFi expertise
3. Project  management  /  services  installation costs
4. Ongoing network supplier costs from RFI
5. Assume rentals paid for access point sites
6. Assume one third of one x individual costing £30k per year
7. Assume 500 additional visits per month with each person spending £5.00 per visit

8. Assume  savings  from  better  understanding people flows around town
9. Assume one additional business attracted that contributes £25K in tax and other expenditure
10. Assume annual tourist numbers increase by
    5. percent and that each spends £330
11. Assume  revenue  from  advertising  using network
12. Includes one off procurement and installation costs amortised over five years

12 RISK ASSESSMENT

For the purpose of this feasibility report, a simple risk analysis has been completed comparing the position of moving forward with a town centre WiFi or not.

1. Moving forward to install a town centre WiFi network

Risk  Impact

1. Influential stakeholders fail to support project or service
2. Political interference undermines confidence in project or service
3. Public discord over cost / benefits of project or service
4. Fail to obtain access to key sites required for network
5. Technology failure during installation or operation
6. Municipal WiFi superseded by other technology or service

Low  High

Low

High

2. Not moving forward to install a town centre WiFi network

 Risk  Impact

1. St Helier appears increasingly out of  Low  High touch with modern town centre

facilities

2. Mobile operators change policies to make mobile data prohibitively expensive

Low

3. Some tourists may decide against coming to Jersey
4. Jersey appears out of touch with

modern digital cities  High

13 CONCLUSIONS

view that it would be a good thing now, and others believed it would be important in the future, others either dismissed the initiative as unwarranted, or believed there were more important priorities for St Helier.

There  is  a  risk  that  without  this  support  dissent  and  disagreement  could undermine any project or service. It would be beneficial to present the case for WiFi more firmly, based on stated benefits, and gain widespread support before proceeding to business case.

extra cost, but having a person or persons formally focused on the network should mean a quality service and better chance of avoiding any potential risks.

APPENDIX A: SUPERCONNECTED CITIES PROGRAMME

The UK Government has made up to £150 million available to support UK cities to develop the digital  infrastructure  capability  to  remain  internationally  competitive  and  attractive  for investors, business and visitors.

Through the SuperConnected Cities Programme across 22 UK cities, the UK Government has provided:

Broadband Connection Vouchers to thousands of small and medium sized businesses to improve digital connectivity

Public WiFi in over 1,000 public buildings including museums, libraries and community centres, across city centres and in over 1,200 buses, trams and trains

Digital projects increasing broadband capacity and supporting business growth in some of our leading cities

The 22 SuperConnected Cities are:

Birmingham, Bristol, Brighton and Hove, Cambridge, Coventry, Derby, Leeds and Bradford (joint proposal), London, Manchester, Newcastle, Oxford, Portsmouth, Salford and York in England

Aberdeen, Edinburgh and Perth in Scotland

Cardiff and Newport in Wales

Belfast and Derry/Londonderry in Northern Ireland

For more details see: www.gov.uk/government/publications/2010-to-2015-government-policy- broadband-investment/2010-to-2015-government-policy-broadband-investment

APPENDIX B: STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTED

Local Online Market

Double Check... Search Jersey first

Search Jersey is a transactional web site

to enable all Jersey retailers to present their goods in a single online marketplace.

With a simple search the site will demonstrate both available product instore or for order by local retailers to generating sales and footfall to their stores.

There is no charge for you to list products on Search Jersey. This is about your products, your service and your loyalty schemes.

Search Jersey is a local shop in a global market. People search online primarily by product, then brand, this is how Search Jersey will function. Customers can purchase online, click and collect or just pop in and/or use loyalty cards and purchase direct. Customers may browse and go instore to purchase or vice versa.

10 Reasons

1  No charge for you to list

products on the site

2  We put the product first

3  Simple and easy search for product

4  £258m estimated purchases

online from Jersey - May 2014

5  We list products not for sale online

creating footfall

6. Direct payment to your PayPal Account
7. Commission on sale only
8. We have no affinity to any one local retailer
9. More customers review online before buying
10. Online sales expected to double in five years

Some brands do not allow sale of their product online, but these can still be listed for purchase instore only.

SEARCH JERSEY is the web site of MERCARI LOCI LIMITED