Effective November 1, 2008, Verizon Wireless is assessing a transaction fee of $0.03 for every commercial text message (terminated on a moble handset). The new rules do not apply to people sending text messages to each other, but rather to content firms that today pay fees to send or receive commercial text messages of one sort or another. The new fees also do not apply to text message applications, even if commercially-based, if they are free to the end user or are sent or received by non-profit entities.
Interactive voting and text search or text alert applications most likely are covered by the new fees.
Current commercial text messaging fees are said to cost the commercial sender anywhere from a fraction of a penny to a few cents, so the plan will have huge impact on use of such commercial text messaging apps. Predictably, commercial users will cry "foul." Perhaps Verizon should have, or still can, scale the increases in a more-gradual way, allowing their commercial customers time to adjust.
In principle, though, we ought to expect similar sorts of moves on a rather broad range of fronts as broadband and mobile providers try to create new revenue models that involve some sort of revenue sharing between content providers and the carriers themselves.
Commercial customers have sound financial reasons for objecting to the practice: free or cheap distribution is a better cost model for content providers than having to share revenue or pay fees for any number of conceivable services an ISP or access provider might provide.
What is not contestable is that if the global service provider industry is in the midst of a fundamental business model evolution--where voice revenues in fact continue to decline as the industry revenue mainstay--then other revenue sources must be developed to replace virtually all of the lost voice revenue and margin. The actual cost of creating and operating a text message infrastructure is not the issue: lots of products are priced at retail in a way that is not strictly related to the cost of providing them. Sales and loss leaders are widespread retail practices, and products run a gamut: some are low-margin or negative margin, others are modest margin products and some are high-margin products. Production cost is only part of the retail price equation.
The Verizon move is indicative of the seriousness of the revenue transformation. Voice is going away as the foundational revenue driver and must be replaced. Service providers have no choice in the matter.
Content providers won't like the change. But these and similar moves in other parts of the business are inevitable. If the future of communications network revenues cannot be based on voice or simple broadband, it must be based on something else. And if more content begins to be delivered using broadband networks of all sorts, some revenue-sharing model, where service providers are part of the revenue chain, must be created.
That doesn't mean content providers have to like the change. But in the absence of meaningful ways to sustain the networks on voice or broadband access revenues, service providers do not have a choice. So look for more "channel conflict" in the years to come. It is inevitable.
No comments:
Post a Comment