Apparently to the surprise of everyone except the Happy Hippy.
The Ionica scheme was to provide telephones which would connect to the local
telephone exchange using radio waves much like mobile phones are used
except the telephone and associated arials would be permanently fixed to the
side of the house.
The main advantage put forward by Ionica for customers to use their system
rather than the more established British Telecom services or one of the cable
TV companies was that you could have a variety of numbers associated with one
phone and a distinctive ring would occur depending on which number was called.
This meant each member of the family could hand out a different number and, when
the call came in, it would be obvious who the call was for.
Wow. This is the peak of the technological revolution.
Actually there was the advantage that Ionica didn't need to dig up roads or
push copper cables down pipes to get a house wired up and on the network but
this was never really pushed as a Uinque Selling Point.
Perhaps if it had been, and if they'd gained a reputation for being
environmentally friendly, they may have fared beter than they did.
In the event the environment contributed to their downfall; it appears that
the use of the telephone was somewhat hampered by a heavy downpour that could
leave the phone detached from the exchange. And aircraft passing by were also
accused of causing a great deal of interference.
Despite these, fundamental issues, could Ionica have made a go of it ?
Perhaps; there was definately a market in the more remote parts of the country
where traditional telecommunications companies were not prepared to lay
landlines and cable companies wouldn't touch them with a barge pole because
infrastructure costs would have outweighed any return revenues.
Similar systems have been used in northern Canada with great success and such
systems have been touted as being ideal solutions in areas of low or remote
populations such as the plains of Africa or the middle east.
In all cases there has been one key feature; a good, long, direct line of sight
from the customer's residence to the telephone exchanges.
In Britain; the customers who would most benefit from Ionica live in the
craggy hills of scotland or in the undulating valleys of Wales.
Ionica never realy managed to get their system to work in east Anglia which is
one of the flattest places in England; the locals call cracks in the roads
valleys and a bump in the tarmac is the closest one gets to a hill. There was
little chance of success in more hostile environments; even built-up areas
posed a problem limiting their options further.
These deployment issues coupled with extremely bad advertisng and marketing
campaigns ( like flood-advertising in areas where the system was never going to
be installed ) meant that they never got a reputaion as a credible alternative
to what was already on offer.
Most of the population lives in areas where British Telecom have laid down
lines already and cable companies also cover many of the same areas.
Ionica, although an alternative, didn't offer anything better ( although some
of their installation prices and tarrifs were lower ) and with a little bit of
common sense could be seen to be worse ...
The home based telephone needed powering locally so, not only did you have to
pay for the running costs ( traditional telephones get their power down the
lines from the exchange ), but if there was a powercut you couldn't call out.
What if there was an emergency during a power cut ?
The problems with atmospherics were forseeable from the start; anyone with a
television knows how badly reception is affected in heavy rain and when a
plane or unsurpressed motorcycle goes past.
Could Ionica be used for internet access ? Apparently, but if you asked most
people they weren't sure.
Ionica could have put people's minds at rest on these matters by providing
more information, however, what most people got to see was an arty television
commercial, a full-page local paper advert that said not much more than,
"Ionica", and a third of an A4 sheet ( very nicely printed ) that said nothing
much about the service at all. Yes, we'd guessed it was cheaper than British
Telecom ( or they wouldn't have bothered in the first place - but not by a
lot ) but that was it.
They didn't even have a FreePhone number; which is why I never even bothered to
give them a call. If it was a FreePhone number, it didn't look like one and they
never said it was.
At the end of the day; they only managed to capture some 60,000 subscribers and
had a support staff of over 1,000.
With staff costs, I guess, of around 15 million GBP a year; each
subscriber would have to be spending 250 GBP a year to cover those alone and
then there were all the offices, vans and the actual subscriber and exchange
equipment on top. The average home telephone user apparently spends 70 GBP
a year on phone calls and rental.
It is not surprising that Ionica have gone into reveivership with debts rumoured
to be in the region of 250 million GBP.
Ionica would perhaps have gained a much higher profile in the UK if it had
posted everyone in the country a Five Pound note; it wouldn't have placed it
in a financial position much worse that it's in now.
Looking out from my office window in Cambridge; the Ionica office car park,
across the road, is now almost deserted and I don't imagine it will be long
before a removal company arrives and starts taking away the furniture.
I would imagine that they'll leave the telephones behind. Or throw them in a
skip.
Now there's a thought ...
Ayone interested in setting up a radio based telephone system using cheap,
second hand, fell off the back of a lorry, equipment ?
I doubt it, although there are rumours that there is interest in taking over
Ionica, notably Alan 'Amstrad' Sugar's name has been mentioned.
Perhaps with better marketing combined with ridiculously cheap installations and
tariffs it may be possible.
I won't be rushing out to buy any shares though.
