The idea that faster mobile networks can displace some amount of fixed network broadband is not a new idea, just an idea that is more realistic as networks beginning with Long Term Evolution become widespread, allowing mobile substitution to replicate the experience of fixed network access, if not the same pricing, terms and conditions of service.
The Federal Communications Commission itself plans to examine wireless substitution as part of its wider studies of transition issues from the legacy public switched network to new IP networks.
In fact, the FCC wants to conduct an actual field trial, where a mobile network would provide a home wireless voice product or data product or both, intended as a replacement for
a customer’s existing home voice and broadband data services.
The FCC wants to test such a mobile substitute offer in at least one geographic area within each participating local exchange carrier’s service territory and at least one geographic area outside of each participating LEC’s wireline service territory.
That sort of flexibility, though not universally welcomed, could eventually result in a more flexible policy towards “ends” rather than “means,” allowing service providers to use any mix of network technologies that make sense in any area, instead of requiring use of specific platforms.
In an environment where users essentially are integrating their own access from multiple sources (fixed, mobile, public Wi-Fi, work networks), that makes sense.
None of that means mobile networks or fixed wireless networks everywhere and always will be complete substitutes for fixed network access. Gigabit networks will be expensive for all ISPs, but will be especially challenging for users of wireless approaches (satellite, mobile, fixed wireless).
That suggests providers of fixed gigabit access service and mobility access will be complementary as much as substitutes. The greater challenge will lie in between. Either full mobility (with reduced bandwidth) or huge bandwidth (gigabit networks) are the easy segments of the market.
Offers in between will have to work to define the specific value propositions. That's typical in most markets, though. The easiest positions are "high value, high price" and "reasonable value, low price."
It's offers in the middle that have to work at establishing a clear position in the consumer mind.
No comments:
Post a Comment