TWACS®
Attacks AMR Market
Evolved Technology for Full Requirements
by Tim Smith, PhD, 12 November 2003
<back
| | next>
As discussed in our recent article, new business requirements
in automatic meter reading (AMR) has increased market demand for
AMR and repositioned the leading suppliers. (See
Changing Business Requirements Shifts Value Demand) The TWACS
solution by DCSI is a well received within the AMR market. What
makes the TWACS solution compelling to the market and what threatens
its potential market dominance is the subject of this current introspective
into technologies serving the utilities sector.
TWACS by DCSI (www.twacs.com)
enables electric utilities to incorporate two-way data communication
with service points across electric powerlines themselves. The value
of two-way data communications is created not only by automating
the meter reading business process, but also by the market demand
for advanced real-time business processes such as meter reads on
demand, demand response contracts, and outage management.
When I spoke with Bob Richardson, Sr. VP Business
Development at DCSI, I asked him why he believes TWACS is having
such strong market reception. His response highlighted the product
strength. If the product is truly the source of DCSI’s positive
market reception, an examination of its competitive position is
in order.
Competitive Position
Early market adaptors of AMR solutions selected drive-by, fixed
network, and one-way powerline carrier solutions. Each of these
solutions is still attractive to portions of the market and each
addresses the specific business requirement of displacing employees
from menial tasks of reading meters and replacing them with technology.
As the business requirements evolved, the solutions evolved too.
The concept of using the powerline itself to carry
the data signal is well known to the utilities sector. The Turtle
System by Hunt (www.turtletech.com)
entered the utilities market in 1995 earning $1 million in revenue
in its first year. Perhaps because of this early success, The Turtle
System by Hunt has somewhat defined the perception of powerline
carrier technology within the minds of utility decision makers.
This is unfortunate because not all powerline carriers are alike.
The Turtle System provides one-way communication of the meter data
to the utility. And, as implied by the name, the transport of the
data over the network is slow, on the order of magnitude of a day.
This suffices for the business requirement of reading meters, but
fails to meet the growing requirements to enable a real-time enterprise
with respect to communicating with loads. As such, The Turtle System
has been largely successful with the many smaller rural Cooperative
utilities where the business pressure for real-time two-way communication
is lower.
In contrast with the Hunt powerline solution, the
TWACS solution provides two-way data communications at relatively
real-time speeds. (20 second round-trip data communication speeds
for on-demand meter reads.) This technological advantage enables
DCSI to meet the evolving business requirements of the larger investor
owned utilities such as on-demand reads, outage management, and
demand response programs, but commands a higher price than one-way
powerline solutions.
Investor owned electric utilities, in which the 179
companies provide 80% of the electricity to the United States, place
a premium value on two-way communications with service point data
in real time. To meet this requirement, a few have adapted an earlier
CellNet solution, currently owned by Schlumberger Sema (www.schlumbergersema.com/utilities/).
Outside of early installations however, the CellNet solution has
not significantly penetrated the market. Other, somewhat similar
solutions that utilize wireless fixed networks for data communication
with service points have evolved. These solutions vary in the radio
frequency used for wireless communication and by the accompanying
equipment necessary to transport the data. These newer wireless
solutions are attracting much market attention, but have not yet
had the same level of success enjoyed by TWACS.
With respect to fixed wireless solutions, sources
at DCSI believe that the powerline solution provides similar functionality
but at a lower cost. The lower cost of the DCSI solution is related
to the aspect that a powerline solution naturally covers all service
points within an electric utility. To create a wireless solution
that communicates with all service points within a utility’s
service area, fixed wireless networks require the build-out to include
relatively low-density service areas thereby increasing the price-per-service
point.
TWACS Market Success
TWACS market successes support the above analysis of their competitive
position.
The TWACS solution is part of the DCSI communications
line of business within the ESCO Technologies Corporation (www.escotechnologies.com).
TWACS has had noticeable market success since 1986 due to an initial
sale to Florida Power & Light (FPL). This somewhat older technology
has continued to evolve and expand its value proposition as the
market demand and requirements changed.
According to their financial reports, the DCSI unit
achieved $192.4 million in new orders in 2002, up from $104.0 million
in 2001. This unit has also been highly profitable. The DCSI unit’s
earnings before interest and taxes were at 22%. Unlike the bubble
internet companies, this is a fast growing and profitable business.
DCSI has been able to attract the attention of both
smaller and larger utilities. During 2002, DCSI received $72 million
in new orders from smaller rural Cooperative utilities. In the large
utility market, DCSI has recently sold a $112 million project to
PPL Electric Utilities to be completed in 2004 with over a million
service points live in November. This is in addition to their current
installations at Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (PREPA), Wisconsin
Public Service (WPS), and Florida Power & Light (FP&L).
Potential Threats
If the competitive position of the TWACS price and performance is
driving DCSI’s success, there are two noticeable threats to
their future.
First, Cannon Technologies has long provided somewhat
similar functionality (www.cannontech.com).
They entered the utilities market in 1997 and have mostly focused
upon rural Cooperatives. Cannon Technologies might attempt to compete
for greater market share, however specific technological issues
appear to limit their market penetration. Similar to this threat
are a number of companies that have been able to provide powerline
AMR solutions outside of North America, but due to specific technological
reasons have been unable to significantly compete within US and
Canada.
Second, new entrants are beckoning with a number of
different technologies. Meter Smart by Hunt Power L.P. (www.metersmart.com
related to the Hunt Family of Texas, no relation to the Hunt of
Turtle Tech) has entered the market with a large and noticeable
campaign. Tantalus (www.tantalus-systems.com)
has also entered this market with a fixed network system that utilizes
the public wireless spectrum.
Expectations….
DCSI’s current competitive position is strong but not secure
for the following reasons. (1) Competitors compete hard for each
sale in this market because the value of any individual sale is
large (often over $100 million). (2) Much of the market remains
to be won. After approximately 10 years of market penetration, most
utilities have yet to adapt AMR, leaving 86% of the meters being
read manually. And (3) recent studies indicate that the pace of
market adoption is accelerating leading to the large potential for
the industry leadership position to be readjusted. (See
AMR Market Penetration Analysis) Given the dynamics of large
sales in an open market that is heating up, no industry player can
rest on their laurels.
---
Author
Tim Smith, PhD is Editor of the Wiglaf Journal and Adjunct Professor
at DePaul's Kellstadt Graduate School of Business.
<back
| | next>
|