Admin
Recent Posts
Amazon Launches Digital Locker - But Does Somebody Still Need One?
Mar 29, 2011 12:00:00 AM / by Admin
Amazon has become the first of the big firms to launch a cloud based digital locker for music (and video), amid continuous rumors that both Google and Apple are working on something similar. The whole locker concept is still up in the air because nobody really knows how its licensing dimension will eventually pan out. Much of that will depend on the outcome of the courtroom case between Mp3tunes.com and EMI. Amazon has apparently concluded that the risk of irking the labels is negligible, and isn’t paying licensing fees for content that it stores in its Cloud Drive service. The company'sother conclusion may wellhave been that if it wants to make its music download business grow, now was the eleventh hour to get a complementarylocker offering out.
In terms of specs and features, Cloud Drive seems pretty well designed and implemented – but that’s only if you still want to own the music you listen to. Not everybody does anymore, as our recent study on Mobile Cloud Music Services shows. One major factor that has worked in favourofon-demand and internet radio providers is the fact how ridiculously difficult listening to your own music collection viaphone or car stereo can be. Assuming that selling music track by track is the most lucrative form of digital distribution for the rights-holders, they have definitely scored an own goal by dragging their heels over cloud storage. (Yes, those lessons from the years when the only MP3 songs you could downloadwere pirated ones couldhave been learned slightly better by some.)
One tip toAmazon and others who bet their money on lockers: Add to your features a decent recommendation engine. Locker customers are likely to be heavy users, who own hundreds of songs. Putting such a collection into a desirable playlist can be tricky when the user is on the move, so integrating the service with a recommendation app (like e.g. Moodagent) canmake the listening experience a good deal better.
The Femto Forum has finally published a set of APIs, which can be used by third party software developers to build services and applications for femtocells. The idea is to have applications access a mobile's location and presence information while it is in a femtozone. This information can then be used to trigger services such as alerts, content synchronization, etc.
There are two kinds of APIs that have been defined
- Reusing existing ParlayX APIs part of GSMA OneAPI such as RESTful and SOAP WSDL which allow for access to SMS, MMS, location or payment information on the mobile network
- New API for ‘Femto Awareness’ which notifies application when user enters, exits or moves within a femtozone. This is also implemented using ParlayX authentication
The Femto Forum approach has been to build upon available APIs and utilize existing frameworks rather than invent APIs from scratch. ParlayX (now part of GSM OneAPI) are standard web service APIs built for accessing fixed or mobile network capabilities.
The hard work for the Femto Forum and femtocell vendors begins now . This includes educating application developers about these new femtozone APIs. While the possibilities and use cases for femtozone applications are endless (covered in an ABI Research report ‘Consumer Femtozone Services’), the litmus test will be building an ecosystem of developers. The one place I would start would be the Apple iOS and Google Android developer events.
This could also turn out to be a classic ‘chicken and egg’ situation where developers wait for operators to get behind femtozone services, while operators wait for an ecosystem of developers to form.
The AT&T T-Mobile merger worth $39 billion has taken most of the telecom world by surprise. Although it was expected that Deutsche Telekom was looking to dispose off their T-Mobile US asset close on the heels of the T-Mobile UK asset which got merged with Orange – no one really expected AT&T to step in with the amount of money that they have put up - a whopping $39 billion.
On the brand new merger website, http://www.mobilizeeverything.com/ - which sounds quite similar to Everything Everywhere (the newly formed entity from the Orange T-Mobile UK merger) – AT&T has laid out its reasons for the deal. The reason is clear – AT&T has been struggling with an 8000% increase in data traffic since the launch of the Apple IPhone on its network. AT&T is network infrastructure and spectrum constrained to meet the growing demand of mobile data traffic.
AT&T has been trying all the tricks in its bag to get its network up to speed (literally!) – moving to HSPA+, adding additional cell sites/towers/rooftops, building its indoor coverage footprint with DAS and femtocells, recently rolling out Outdoor DAS nodes in Palo Alto, and using Wi-Fi as a preferred offload solution in hotspots like New York and San Francisco.
With the LTE launch expected for later in 2011, and with Verizon’s LTE network up and running in 38 markets already – AT&T was under pressure to boost its network capabilities more importantly its spectrum assets. T-Mobile’s AWS spectrum with its 10 MHz and 20 MHz chunks ripe for spectrum refarming of LTE should give AT&T an advantage over Verizon.
More importantly – AT&T’s femtocell strategy (which is largely voice-based at the moment) complements T-Mobile’s Wi-Fi/UMA strategy – with both femtocells and Wi-Fi being important from a network offload perspective. While Wi-Fi is likely to become the dominant offload strategy - femtocells combined with the ability to reuse multiple spectrum chunks in small cells - give AT&T with an advantage where they have many more tools at hand to compete against Verizon's mobile broadband push.
However, the question that everyone will be asking is whether AT&T was justified in spending $39 billion to fix its network woes or is there an element of over-valuation of T-Mobile’s network assets?
So AT&T and DT dropped the bomb yesterday, messing up lots of people’s weekends, the question I asked my self was – is this deal good for consumers?
So where will these consumers go? I think the biggest benefactor of subscriber churn in this deal will be Sprint. While they have a solid enterprise customer base and are not a cut-rate post-paid provider, they could use post-paid subscriber growth, no matter what segment those subscribers fall in. Sprint also has the most diverse and vibrant prepaid suite of offerings of the major U.S. networks, which might be attractive to post-paid value segment customers with no real post-paid value segment alternative to choose from. Other value players, such as Metro PCS could see disgruntled T-Mo customers come their way as well.
Four Reasons Why AT&T Will Be Allowed to Buy T-Mobile
Mar 21, 2011 12:00:00 AM / by Admin
Deutsche Telekom’s management has had two widely-reported headaches over the past two to three years: the T-Mobile businesses in US and UK. The UK dilemma was resolved about 18 months ago by a merger with Orange, and now the group seems finally have found a dance partner for T-Mobile USA as well. The fact that it’s in the end AT&T and not Sprint makes a lot of sense. Both are GSM carriers, and merging them would give Deutsche Telekom exposure to a market leader which will be much more convincing as an asset than any T-Sprint could ever have been.
Nonetheless, at the same time the move is also much unexpected, since it will create a nationwide carrier that will be much more powerful (by nearlyone-third, in terms of subscriber market shares) than its closest challenger, Verizon. There’s no doubt that this will cause a major regulatory hiccup, and the new “T-AT” will have to shed spectrum and other assets in many areas where it operates. But at the end of the day, our take is that the deal will go through in a form or another. There are four reasons:
- T-Mobile is a weak player, and everyone knew that Deutsche Telekom had been looking an M&A solution for it. Without a merger (this or some other) T-Mobile would just fall behind in 4G investments and lose more ground.
- The FCC and the Department of Justice are likely to evaluate the market impact on a market-by-market rather than nationwide basis. So with some spectrum stripping and other divestments the new market leader could well become palatable.
- The traditional telco model is dead in the water. Operators simply don’t have the same pricing power in voice and messaging as they had before, and thus they can’t really hike their call and SMS tariffs. Consumers would just message via Facebook and call via VoIP.
- The trickiest part of all this is net neutrality. Mobile data access will be a less competitive race from now on, and it’s entirely possible that US operators won’t be given as free hands to manage their data traffic as they might with an independent T-Mobile in the game. So while the FCC relaxes intensely on the M&A front, it could – and indeed should – get stricter when it comes to wireless net neutrality. In the markets where there’s an inadequate broadband competition (including both fixed and wireless) carriers should be allowed less freedoms to police the traffic.
What will the move mean to Deutsche Telekom’s operations elsewhere? Those $39 billion are a lot of cash and shares after all. Our guess is that – apart from a possible dividend increase, or a share buy-back – the money will probably just go to building the “gigabit society” of LTE and FTTH in Germany and across the rest of itsexisting footprint. With a notable exception of Poland, Deutsche Telekom doesn’t have much (regulatory) scope to boost its units by buying out rivals. It’s also too late to invest in e.g. Asia as a newcomer, given that the days of making easy money out of emerging telecoms markets are long gone.
Japan’s Short-Term Loss Will Become Their Long-Term Gain
Mar 18, 2011 12:00:00 AM / by Admin
Like many Americans, I watched the tragic events in Japan unfold over the past week with a mixture of fear, morbid fascination and a desire to reach out and help. You might have noticed the impact the events have had on the global markets, which I find to be an unfortunate, knee-jerk reaction that could put our global economic recovery at unnecessary risk. There have been reports of delicate supply chain problems that could trigger longer term problems. I am not an economist, but the market reaction seems unfair and short-sighted. I decided I’d like to talk with a Japanese company in our mobile industry to explore their point of view on the short and long-term implications of Japan’s natural disasters.
Ikanos today announced their new Fusiv line of communications processors featuring G.vector (ITU G.993.5) extensions for DSL modems. G.vector extensions provide MIMO capabilities to existing DSL modems, and are expected to provide up to 100 Mbps (at least in lab conditions). Higher datarates (up to 300 Mbps) can be achieved with bonding. Ikanos, Broadcom and Lantiq are the 3 major semiconductor providers that have announced G.vector implementations. The announcements that were made around a year ago were primarily around the dense silicon implementations that goes into the DSLAM (i.e., at the central office / CO ). This announcement by Ikanos is the first G.vector announcement focused around the home.
Today’s Financial Times has a story with a mildly misleading but at the same time revealing title: “Regulator demands steep cut in mobile revenues”. This is misleading in the sense that dictating mobile carriers’ revenues is hardly what telecoms regulators are meant to do, but also very revealing because this is what they’re effectively doing these days in Europe. That’s not their fault, however.
The regulator in question is the UK’s Ofcom, and its “steep cut” refers to the new mobile termination rates. Everything Everywhere, O2, and Vodafone will see their MTRs reduced by 84% over the next four years, while the separate rates that apply to Hutchison’s 3 will drop 85%. The background in a nutshell is as follows. In Europe the interconnection costs are shared by predefined charges rather than a bill-and-keep system (such as the one in US), and those charges then are set by the national regulators.
The regulators are overseen by the EU, which tries to ensure that every member state follows the same uniform (and downward) MTR trend.The cost-calculation formulae – and thus the exact level of the MTRs – are subject to some debate, but in general the EU and the national regulators are doing the right thing here. Allowing telcos to price interconnection higher than what it actually costs to them would just limit competition and artificially prop the retail prices of calls.
But what does all this reveal about the European telco space? Well, frankly: its rather sorry state. Mobile calls are like gas or electricity – a utility that can’t really be differentiated, and of which price depends largely on regulation. Quarterly reports from European carriers habitually cite “regulatory interventions” as a main reason for why life was again so difficult over the reporting period, and no wonder. As the FT’s article points out, wholesale typically accounts for 10-15% of their revenue, so the direct exposure to MTR cuts is indeed quite heavy. A further, indirect hit comes from the cuts that the lower MTRs tend to stir on the retail voice market.
Just like gas and electricity firms, Europe’s mobile operators aren’t anymore controlling their own destiny, but a good deal of it is down to such a mundane area of life as the regulation of wholesale prices. That’s another darn good reason to try making those dumb pipes of data smarter.