Newsletter
Google Left Banner
What’s Behind the Google Phone Strategy?
18 Sep, 2008
The much anticipated Google phone is scheduled to make its debut September 23rd on the T-Mobile network. The phone will be co-branded with Google, HTC (phone manufacturer), and T-Mobile. It will be interesting to see how all of these brands get represented. The phone will have a retail price of $199. The Wall Street Journal quotes T-Mobile officials as saying the phone will include “aggressively priced” data plans. It will be the first phone to run Android, an operating system developed by Google and its partners. Google hopes that other carriers, including Sprint, will follow T-Mobile’s lead with Android powered phones of their own. Verizon Wireless is being somewhat coy about their Android plans, and AT&T has its wagon hitched to the iPhone for now.
It’s already clear that the Google phone won’t reach the mania achieved by the iPhone and 3G iPhone launches. Some will interpret that lack of comparable buzz as evidence of a failed launch. But I think such analysis misses the point. Google is less interested in selling handsets, and more interested in pushing a mobile operating system “open source” movement. Conceivably, success at such a movement draws more people to the mobile web – and more people on the mobile web leads to more demand for search. Google doesn’t care whether consumers access that search through Android, Symbian, or other mobile operating platforms. What matters most is more demand for search, and Google wins in that environment regardless. The mobile web is the next frontier for Google's growth. Android is simply a means to a bigger end. Google co-founder Larry Page’s quote in a recent CNET post confirms this approach, "As people get better phones, they do 20 times more searches."
Is Google, Apple, or EBay Your Next Wireless Competitor?
13 Sep, 2007
There is little doubt that the future of telecom lies in wireless. Just ask Randall Stephenson, CEO of AT&T. "Wireless is the core of the business now," Stephenson told USA Today in a recent article. This future reality does not mean the death of wireline telephony. Wireline circuits will simply migrate to IP enabled broadband pipes which deliver content of all types, voice included. But wireless connectivity will soon become the status quo. This ongoing migration to wireless ubiquity creates huge operational challenges and perhaps, glorious business opportunities. Those potential opportunities are not going unnoticed by non traditional wireless service providers, who are increasingly eyeing the ownership of wireless spectrum as a hedge for the future. We often forget that the cable industry is sitting on a wide swath of wireless spectrum (unrelated to their Pivot Wireless joint venture) gained from the last AWS spectrum auction. The upcoming 700 Mhz auction has the rumor mill ablaze, with Google making much noise about their interest. The latest potential competitor to the party now is Apple, who is rumored to be eyeing 700 Mhz spectrum. EBay/Skype are also rumored to be considering adding spectrum assets to their fold. The key word in all of this is rumor. We won’t know the reality of these interests until the scheduled January 2008 auction. But it’s intriguing to speculate on the potential of these technology innovators stirring up an already intense competitive environment.
About Telecompetitor
- Comcast Brings Wideband to the Northwest
- Muni-Wireless Not Dead Yet
- Is Three Screen Convergence a Pipe Dream?
- Verizon Joins CDN Movement
- iPhone 3G Coming to WalMart
- Verizon Business Teams With Nortel for Managed Telepresence Service
- Verizon’s Turn for Smartphone Spotlight with BlackBerry Storm Launch
- TiVo Adds Domino's Pizza to its Menu
Channel
Webinars/Events
Upcoming Webinars
Packet Optical Networks – Enabling Your Future
Dec 16, 2008
Upcoming Events
NTCA Wireless Symposium
Jan 7-9, 2009 - Austin, TX
Featured Article
Should Telephone Service be Free?
12 Oct, 2008
Comcast announced a new promotion last week that offers 12 months of free basic cable service for new customers who also sign up for an additional service. Customers who don’t want an additional service can get Comcast’s basic service of about 20 -30 channels for $10/month. The promotion is tied to the digital TV transition of February 2009 and entices potential customers to avoid the transition “hassle” by getting “free” cable service. “The simple fact is that basic cable is the easiest path through the digital transition and now consumers can get it for free,” said Derek Harrar, General Manager and Senior Vice President, Video Services for Comcast in a company statement. This move is similar to strategies pursued by other video service providers, who are hoping to leverage the digital TV transition for new subscriber additions.
But is this strategy a leading indicator for the future? Should basic core services like basic cable and basic telephone service be offered for free, used as a “carrot” to entice customers to buy “more important” services like broadband? Maybe a very basic phone service, with no LD, access to landline 911, and maybe outgoing service only (to avoid telemarketers) should be a free component of a bundled offering. Such a wireline service may appeal to a customer who previously cut the cord for wireless only, but also needs broadband. There is a growing portion of the population who find the value of traditional wireline phone service elsewhere – either through wireless or broadband/IP services. But, if they could get the security of landline 911, and an extra dial tone in their home as a free value add for subscribing to broadband (or video from a telco’s perspective), maybe a telco’s bundled offering may look more attractive than a comparable cable offering. I realize this idea is not appealing to the hundreds of ILECs who are a part of the current access/settlement system (in fact, it couldn’t work in the context of today’s regulatory structure), but I wonder whether it’s inevitable. In this possible future scenario, the current settlement system adapts to broadband as the underlying service, as opposed to voice.
This scenario cuts both ways. From a cable company’s perspective, a growing portion of the population is turning to the Internet as a source for their video content, and no longer see value in paying for a broad package of video as a part of a traditional subscription pay-TV service. But, if they could receive basic TV (which includes local broadcast affiliates) as a free value add for buying broadband, maybe the cable bundle is more attractive. In a true IP/broadband world, very basic phone and video service is relatively easy to deliver, and has little impact on bandwidth and network performance. Maybe the digital transition is opening the door to a future where free basic services are a regular component of a bundled offering. Thoughts?

digg this story
google
