The havoc caused by Hurricane Sandy on the North American East Coast has brought to light a threat that has been keeping a low profile, but has immense implications for the digital environment – physical security. While intense focus has been placed on malware, botnets and exploit kits, it seems the industry has almost forgotten that none of these really matter if there is no connectivity. In the end, we are still constrained by our physical surroundings – no power, no internet.
One emerging trend in the mobile application business is the arrival of drag-and-drop app-builder platforms, which allow their users to develop apps without actually writing a single line of code. My (hopefully) adequately educated guess is that they will do for app development more or less what blogging platforms and Facebook have done for web content - in other words, drastically lower the needed human barriers to entry.
Today a big deal has been announced by three of the world’s largest processor IP companies.
As with other criminals, terrorists are taking advantage of information and communication technologies to advance their own agendas. The term cyber terrorism features increasingly in the media, despite having been the topic of debate for some time at the government and international level.
It does look like SoftBank and Sprint are making a coherent case for the technical and market synergies of their merger. Nevertheless it is really quite a bold move for a Japanese mobile operator.
I attended my latest demo for BlackBerry 10 this week, and I remain [client access only] impressed by the platform’s features and general look. The highlights include a seemingly smart, learning (Swype-style) keyboard, a compelling and very HTML5-ready browser, the ability to sandbox the device’s personal and professional uses into BYOD-friendly and easily changeable identity modes, as well as a whole new approach to multi-tasking. I also remain equally concerned by its main problem – the fact that it’s not ready, being now scheduled for Q1 2013. But all in all, the bits I like in BB10 are enough to make me give RIM the benefit of doubt and assume that the platform could make an impact upon its release.
It does look like SoftBank and Sprint are making a coherent case for the technical and market synergies of their merger. Nevertheless it is really quite a bold move for a Japanese mobile operator.
NTT DoCoMo has made a number of strategic investments in Asia (e.g. TATA Teleservices in India) in recent years but it got its fingers burnt in the cellular and dotcom boom. NTT DoCoMo tried to enter the international mobile operator licensing/purchasing/investment market too late. In 2001, NTT DoCoMo invested around US$ 10.2 billion in then known, AT&T Wireless Services Inc, in an attempt to encourage adoption of its then more advanced wireless services (remember iMode handsets being introduced into the US market?). NTT DoCoMo was having considerable success with its iMode services in the Japanese market and NTT DoCoMo tried to spur the adoption of its iMode mobile data technology in a number of international markets through investment and/or joint venture marketing and supply of handsets.
iMode failed to capture the imagination of the US consumer. The technology only had limited success and NTT DoCoMo had to discretely withdraw from a number of markets.
SoftBank may have more success than NTT DoCoMo, as it is not evangelizing a ‘walled garden’ business model and technology.
So we are nearing the end of 2012 and I am still waiting to see real movement amongst the operator community that was making noises all last year about NFC payments and mobile wallets taking off. Not only that, but they have largely blocked anyone else from going it alone too.
Yes , there are some mitigating circumstances, the EU monopolies investigation into Project Oscar in theUK was a big factor, but even then there could have been seeding of handsets and SIMs and other progression.Google Wallet went 2.0 and is certainly an improvement, having much wider support and engagement from the banks and card issuers. Is this the only reason it hasn't gone bigger? And the reason that no other NFCpayment providershave been able to enter the market?
To me the MNO positionstrikes meas oneof an industry that is worried. To date, MNOs have held back from rolling out NFC and seeing what happens. They are worried that to do so will open up the market for other players. Maybe it wouldbut as it stands the delays andprocrastinationis putting off partners and allowing a different form of competition to enter the market. Such protectionism hasn't worked in the past (walled gardens anyone?) and I see no reason why this occassion will be any different.
Operatorspotential partnersandB2B clients do not want to tie themselves into a business model and pricing strategy that is not entirely fair and equal. Some flexibility and lateral movement is needed to stimulate their interest and attract customers. If anything, retailers want to get away from the 4-party model and interchange fee system that they find expensive and less justifiable. What can they do to appeal to them? No-one has shown the retailers that NFC will produce returns for them. No-one (with the exception ofone or two players)has developed platforms offering VAS that will appeal to retailers. This seems like a role that MNOs could fill.
In the meantime alternative means of mobile payments are creeping in and some majorretailers are launching their own payments combined with their loyalty programs. Amazon and PayPal are increasing their presence instores and McDonalds has followed the lead taken by Starbucks. These companies have the scale todo so and have identified the potential of mobile.
It is a shame that the MNOs do not have the same level of confidence because if they continue to dither then they will miss out on a lucrative new revenue stream. The OTT players move much faster and focus on building scale before monitising their services. The MNOs have left the door ajar and these companies will slam it open if things continue to remain in limbo. The next 6-9 months will be critical in how this market develops.
The National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC) of Thailand has trimmed down the maximum amount of frequency a carrier can purchase in the upcoming 3G auction from 20 MHz to 15 MHz.
With 45 MHz to go around, the tightened limit implies that the big three – namely Advanced Info Service (AIS), Total Access Communication (DTAC), and True – can now secure an equal share of the pie quite easily. The NBTC hopes that reduced competition will translate into lower spectrum acquisition costs for carriers and hence more affordable 3G services for consumers.
However, the Thailand Development Research Institute (TDRI) describes the wireless industry as "a profit-maximizing monopoly dominated by three operators" and contends that the 3G service tariff will therefore probably be steep anyway. Meanwhile, the government will not earn as much as it could from the auction.
The NBTC counters that competition for the scarce resource will still be healthy, because the 45 MHz is split into nine slots that are not homogenous. Operators will therefore be fighting for optimal slots with the least interference. In addition, the Chief Executive Officer of AIS has indicated that slots adjacent to those currently occupied by the Telecom of Thailand (TOT) are more desirable due to the possibility of future strategic business partnerships.
So who is right? Our recently published Insight takes a look at the impact of this policy revision.