AT&T Launches Picture, Video Communication for iPhone Today

Apple iPhone users likely will be putting strain on the AT&T wireless network today, Sept. 25, 2009,. as multimedia messaging service, which allows iPhone users to send and receive pictures and video, is made available for the first time.

But the issue is going to grow in significance. Pyramid Research estimates mobile video usage will grow at a compound annual growth rate of 28 percent over the next five years. By 2014, more than 500 million users worldwide will subscribe to mobile video services, equal to 8.5 percent of all mobile subscription services.

That might not seem like much, but video requires about one to two orders of magnitude more bandwidth than voice (10 to 100 times).

YouTube says mobile uploads over the last six months have grown 1700 percent. and users have grown 70 percent.

MVNO Business to Grow Outside North America, Europe

The mobile virtual network operator business is headed for growth, and most will come from regions other than North America and Western Europe, says TeleGeography.

Globally, growth in wireless subscribers has been driven predominantly by explosive growth in a small number of developing countries, such as China, India, Russia, Brazil, Indonesia, Vietnam and Pakistan. These are countries in which MVNOs are either prohibited or at a nascent stage of development, so the ultimate impact on the MVNO market is not yet clear.

In 2003 MVNOs accounted for seven percent of subscribers in Western Europe and North America. At the end of June 2009 wireless subscribers had grown by almost 60 percent in these two regions to reach 800 million, and MVNOs’ share had increased to over nine percent.

In contrast, from 2003 to mid-2009 the number of wireless subscribers in regions other than Western Europe and North America more than quadrupled to reach some 3.5 billion. However, MVNOs have yet to make much impact in these higher growth markets: outside of Western Europe and North America, their share of the market remains less than 0.5 percent.

So while MVNOs have been growing strongly in Western Europe and North America, those two regions account for an ever-smaller portion of the world’s wireless subscriber base – it slipped from almost 40 percent to less than 20 percent. That suggests that future MVNO subscriber growth necessarily will come from other regions.

In 2003, Western Europe and North America accounted for well over 90 percent of all MVNO subscribers and, despite some growth elsewhere, these two regions still account for over 80 percent of the total.

TeleGeography’s latest research predicts that MVNO growth will gain momentum all around the world over the coming five years, as MVNOs are legalized in new countries where they are not allowed at present.

Will Net Neutrality Lead to Higher Prices?

One can make some reasonable guesses about likely outcomes as the Federal Communications Commission weighs new network neutrality rules.

If new proposed rules disallow traffic shaping measures such as slowing peer-to-peer or other traffic at times of peak congestion, the problem of alleviating peak-hour congestion will still have to be dealt with.

If the goal is to manage peak traffic load, and service providers cannot shape traffic by slowing some protocols, or slowing all traffic for users who have exceeded their usage caps, then other available mechanisms will be used.

And price is one of the most-likely tools.

Customers might not like it, but it always is possible to discourage usage by raising prices. And it always is possible to boost usage by lowering prices. And it is wireless plans where the price hikes--or user policing of usage--will be most felt.

If usage caps are tightened, consumers will have the option of spending more, or using less.

That doesn't mean "unlimited" service packages will disappear. Some customers will want to buy them. But the price of such packages likely is going to rise. For similar reasons, usage-based charging is likely to increase for most other plans as well. That will encourage users to monitor their usage and make choices that will alleviate peak hour strain on networks.

As a practical matter, wired network operators already refrain from blocking access to lawful applications, and traffic shaping rules already are tweaked so the policies do not constitute "blocking" or "slowing" of lawful traffic.

But wireline operators have more access bandwidth than wireless providers do. So Oppenheimer financial analyst Tim Horan suggests that wireless usage caps will become more stringent.

Among other possible strategies is structuring pricing to encourage more usage off-peak, as is the case for voice plans.

Application blocking is less an issue than most assume on wired networks, and is a relatively minor irritant for most wireless users, but a significnat irritant for some users on wireless networks.

The real trick is how service providers will handle peak hour loading under new conditions where traffic priorities cannot be applied, as typically is the case for many private enterprise networks.

One other observation also is in order. As was the case the last time a major change in communications regulation was made, with the Telecom Act of 1996, there will be a period of legal wrangling to test and flesh out the rules.

Though most within the communications business would vastly prefer more predictability of business environment, that is not what they are likely to get.

Broadband Stimulus Bridge to Nowhere?

Since applicants have asked for $28 billion, when the broadband stimulus funds available in the funding round total around $4.3 billion, one already can predict that there will be more entities unhappy than happy about the final awards. Especially unhappy are rural telecom providers who cannot apply because of the definitions used to describe "remote" locations.

For that same reason, it might not be rational to look at where proposals are from, on a state-by-state basis, except for purposes of assuring that some funds are disbursed in every state. Nor will it make sense to evaluate proposals based on ubiquity of platform.

Mobile or satellite networks might have wide footprints. But there still are places where broadband buying lags the national average.

It likely makes more sense to look at proposals at the county level or community level. Even the satellite proposals are specifically targeting a limited number of jurisdications and areas where broadband penetration is low.

Some proposals will be better than others. But most of the proposals seem to ask for relatively small amounts of money. That likely is a good sign, as few small organizations can manage a sudden infusion of money and work very efficiently.

Some proposals do seem weak on the "cost-benefit" front. But that's why the evaluation process is so important. Reviewers are supposed to sort better proposals from weaker ones. Reviewers likely also know their decisions will come under very-close scrutiny. One therefore can hope for a rational outcome.

Publishers Moving to Mobile Distribution

Nearly 52 percent of print executives surveyed by the Audit Bureau of Circulations are distributing or formatting content for viewing on a mobile device. Newspapers are leading the charge, with almost 58 percent already formatting their Web sites for mobile devices. Business and consumer magazines are following closely behind with 45 and 42 percent, respectively.

The changes are driven by a believe that users will be getting more content from mobiles in coming years. More than 80 percent of respondents believe people will rely more heavily on mobile

devices as a primary information source in the next three years, the study finds.

Nearly 70 percent of respondents say that mobile is receiving more attention at their publication this

year than last. Of companies that track mobile impact, 45 percent report that mobility has boosted Web site traffic by up to 10 percent.

Half believe mobile traffic to their Web sites will increase by five to 25 percent in the next two years.

Among senior executive respondents, 56 percent said their publication has plans to develop

a smartphone application in the next 24 months, in addition to the 17 percent of respondents who already have an app in production.

Nearly a third of respondents believe that mobile will have a significant impact on their publication’s revenue in just three years.

What Changes Have Mobile Users Made Because of Recession?

It isn't clear whether users actually followed through with their stated plans and inclinations, but an October 2008 survey by Getjar suggests users were planning significant changes in mobile consumption. So far, we can document the slowdown in replacement phone behavior. Users, at least in Europe, have slowed the pace at which they upgrade their handsets, as 78 percent of respondents to the survey suggested they might.

The suggested parsimony on the usage front remains a bit more difficult to quantify. About 76 percent of mobile phone users who partcipated in the survey suggested they planned to reduce the amount they spend on phone usage as well.

When asked whether they had reduced spending on mobile phones in the last 12 months, more than 50 percent of respondents had not reduced their spending at all, or by as little as 10 percent, during that period.

For those people who had reduced their spending, the economy was the reason given by just over one third of respondents, while 20 percent changed their usage habits to lower expenses, and a further 28 percent had switched to using free applications to avoid charges.

But the planned reductions could have taken any number of forms. Some 35 percent of respondents said SMS accounted for the greatest proportion of their mobile phone bill. So less texting is one possible user response. So is substituting texting for calling when the tariffs favor such choices.

About 18.5 percent said voice services was the biggest cost driver and about 17 percent identified data services as the top usage cost driver. Less calling and less use of data services are other possible responses.

Premium services accounted for the largest part of the monthly mobile spend for 12 percent of the survey participants. For many users, this should have proven the easiest way to reduce spending.

Wireless Net Neutrality Will Spur Mobile VoIP

This forecast of mobile VoIP, like most forecasts, probably needs to be pushed out "to the right," but is one concrete example of what is likely to happen if the Federal Communications Commission does manage to push through rules applying wired network application non-discrimination rules to the wireless realm.

The first thing that will happen is an immediate increase in marketing of mobile VoIP apps.

Carriers, of course, can react in ways to shape adoption. For many users, lower calling prices would dampen interest in VoIP over mobile services.

Carriers also would have incentive to create their own mobile VoIP offerings, and that might offer them a way to boost data plan sales as well.

The most immediate impact of any new wireless non-discrimination rules will be to hasten the day when voice no longer is the key revenue driver for mobile operators. Mobility executives are anything but dumb. They know that day is coming. They just aren't in any hurry to see it.

Who Uses "Push to Talk"? Who Wants To?

About seven percent of U.S. mobile subscribers use the push-to-talk feature, representing about 18 million subscribers, and most of those users are in a few business verticals, says Compass Intelligence.

While 12 percent of respondents to a Compass Intelligence survey currently use PTT, nearly 69 percent indicated no interest in the service, indicating that there is a limited addressable market for this service, Compass Intelligence says.

In a 2007 In-Stat survey, for example, PTT was the only category out of six that declined between 2006 and 2007 about 17.5 percent. Researchers argue that text messaging supplies a similar value for many users.

Nokia Buying Palm?

In the category of rumors we cannot substantiate, but that the Silicon Valley Business Journal is reporting, Nokia is rumored to be considering buying Palm. It's clear why the deal would make sense. Nokia is the global leader in devices sold, but it lags in the key smart phone category, which is the fastest-growing device category as overall mobile handset sales are slowing.

The other angle is that Nokia's entire product line at the moment is based on Symbian. Palm would give Nokia not only a second operating system option, but also an operating system that has gotten favorable reviews for its social networking features and support for use of multiple simultaneous applications.

Another angle is that, though dominating global sales, Nokia is a laggard in the U.S. market. Palm would help in that regard. Palm also would benefit from Nokia's global marketing machine, as well.

Recently there has been some contraction of support for multiple operating systems. Motorola has decided to support Android, while Palm recently decided to drop its support for Microsoft Mobile. Nokia would be going the other way if it buys Palm.

Where's the Payback From Conferencing, Travel?

The traditional argument made by communications industry professionals is that conferencing techniques of various types provide a payback by reducing travel costs. But a new study by Oxford Economics suggests the reverse is true.

"For every dollar invested in business travel, businesses experience an average $12.50 in increased revenue and $3.80 in new profits," analysts say.

One is tempted to argue that the truth lies somewhere in between, given the obvious implications each argument has for each industry's health. Some travel investments boost sales, but some collaboration sessions likely are just as effective using communication tools.

“This study shows that not all spending cuts are smart cuts,” says Adam Sacks, managing director of Oxford Economics. “When companies cut their travel budgets, there are negative consequences that we can now quantify, in terms of lost revenue and profit growth, and in terms of giving competitors a distinct advantage.”

The study found that curbing business travel can have a strong negative impact on corporate profits. The average business in the U.S. would forfeit 15 percent of its profits in the first year of eliminating business travel, and it would take more than three years for profits to recover.

In the first six months of 2009, U.S. business travel is down by 12.5 percent, the study suggests. One suspects that is a conservative figure.

The study itself also reports data from a February 2009 survey of 400 corporate executives suggesting that 51 percent have decreased the amount of business travel in recent months. Those who have made cuts have reduced their budgets by an average 35 percent.

Roughly 40 percent of prospective customers are converted to new customers with an in-person meeting, compared to 16 percent without such a meeting. More than half of business travelers stated that five percent to 20 percent of a company’s new customers were the result of trade show participation.

Executives interviewed cited customer meetings as having the greatest returns, approximately $15-$19.99 per dollar invested, with conference and trade show participation returns ranging from $4-$5.99 per dollar invested.

Respondents suggested that customer meetings represent 34 percent of travel budgets, conferences 10 percent, trade shows 10 percent, incentive travel for sales personnel five percent and "other" purposes 42 percent of budgets.

One suspects any rational organization therefore would substitute conferencing alternatives for internal meetings, which represent 42 percent of travel spending. Indeed, respondents suggested they would be hiking visits to customer offices by 19 percent, and increasing customer meetings by three percent.

In contrast, respondents suggested they would trim travel for internal training by 22 percent, external conferences by 20 percent, internal meetings by 14 percent and external trade shows by 10 percent.

What's the Problem? Us.

Members of Congress have now surpassed corporate CEOs as the least favorably regarded profession in the United States, says Rasmussen Reports.

Just 25 percent of Americans have a favor opinion of members of Congress. Of course, shamefully, journalists are viewed favorably by just 43 percent of poll respondents, as are 42 percent of lawyers. Just 41 percent have favorable opinions of stockbrokers and financial analysts.

Bankers are viewed favorably by just 48 percent.

At the top of the ranking are small business owners, viewed favorably by 94 percent of respondents, and entrepreneurs, viewed favorably by 92 percent of those polled. Pastors and religious leaders are seen favorably by 70 percent of people polled.

Is it unreasonable to argue that those of us in any of those professions have seriously damaged our reputations with the general public by sins of commission as well as omission? Is it unreasonable to argue that ethical shortcomings, greed, corruption and even simple unfairmess are widely perceived to infect many professions?

And isn't it obvious that only dramatic changes in personal and business behavior can restore levels of trust? Isn't it obvious we are not the people we are supposed to be? Maybe it is time we stop pretending that "somebody else," or "the system" is the problem? Isn't it obvious we are the problem?

Most people in these damaged professions actually seem to believe they are behaving ethically, morally and in good faith. Obviously, people do not believe that. Time for change, indeed.

7 Useful Medical Vertical IP Telephony Apps

Some IP telephony suppliers, as well as many larger system integration companies, focus on the health care vertical. How to pitch IP telephony value to medical vertical buyers isn't so obvious to many retailers, though.

But here are seven concrete features medical vertical users might appreciate. Patient screen-pops can be used when a patient calls, providing a dashboard with general demographics, appointments and recent encounter summaries, says Houston Neal, of Software Advice.

IP faxing through the IP-PBX can be useful for primary care physicians sending a patient record to a specialist.

Appointment reminders that automatically call the patient to remind them of an upcoming appointment or the need to schedule an appointment are other examples.

Find me, follow me can be used to prioritize after-hours calls based on the urgency of the situation. Emergencies could be immediately forwarded to 911. Calls from patients that recently had an ambulatory procedure might be forwarded to the physician’s mobile phone. All others might receive voicemail or the answering service.

How to assess "urgency" is an issue, of course, but perhaps some combination of user input or recency of content or types of procedures can be part of the algorithm. A patient that recently had surgery likely is a higher priority than a call from a patient who has not had a history of severe or serious illness, or who hasn't been seen very recently.

Automated collections messages are a touchy but sometimes necessary business function for any medical practice.

Routine authorization of on-going prescriptions might be another application. Patients might call a specific number, then interact with an interactive voice response system to refill a routine prescription.

Patient-specific voice messages also are conceivable, allowing existing patients to access customized scripts related to billing, appointments or other information.

New Net Neutrality Rule Impact: Good and Bad

More use of network-delivered applications (software and applications as a service), more over-the-top VoIP, more mobile VoIP, more over-the-top video services, higher prices and more-stringent usage caps are among the likely new trends if the Federal Communications Commission extends wireline network neutrality rules to wireless companies as well, a move that seems nearly certain as the FCC begins a rulemaking on further network neutrality rules.

If traffic-shaping mechanisms cannot be used to manage congestion by selectively slowing some applications on either wired or wireline networks (the FCC already bars this practice on wired networks), service providers might have few tools to regulate use except by raising prices to discourage bandwidth-intensive use.

That likely would include a mix of new usage caps and higher prices for users who really want to use video and other bandwidth-intensive applications heavily.

What remains unclear is whether any new rules would also restrict the ability to create enhanced tiers of service that a customer wants to buy. For example, a user might want a service that prioritizes his or her own video or voice services over software upgrades or Web surfing. Business users, for example, often can buy services or appliances that allow setting of business priorities.

Sometimes those priorities include setting priority for voice traffic from desktop phones instead of Skype, for example. It isn't clear whether "positive" innovations (additional things users can do) will be prohibited by any new rules, as "negative" regulation ("thous shalt not") is put into place.

In any case, it is likely that providers of over-the-top applications in the voice, conferencing and multimedia communications areas, not to mention other forms of "software as a service," will be better placed to sell their wares.

The issues are quite tricky, though. Though the FCC rules ostensibly are aimed only at ensuring that users have access to all lawful applications, the rules also step over into the realm of business models and permissible marketing innovations.

It is not clear that network neutrality allows creation of enhanced services that work by prioritizing applications of any sort, even when that is what the consumer wants, and the service provider wishes to sell.

Most observers would agree that it is a proper regulatory effort to allow competing applications and services to have a chance to compete fairly with service and applications owned by the IPS itself.

The unknown danger is that laudable efforts to ensure competiton then overstep and retard competition and innovation by prohibiting positive innovation (new things people have the right to do) by prohibiting all forms of application acceleration.

About 1-2% of Text Messages Marketing Messages?

Some 25 percent of U.S. firms involved in interactive marketing also are using one form or another of mobile techniques, says Neil Strother, Forrester Research analyst. In 2009, about half those firms will have increased their mobile marketing spend.

Text messaging likely is a key part of most programs, in part because it reaches nearly every mobile phone. VeriSign, for example, says that in the second quarter of 2009, it delivered a total of 94.8 billion messages across its combined mobile messaging platforms for an overall growth of more than 82 percent from the second quarter of 2008.

VeriSign delivered 178.8 billion messages worldwide in the first half of 2009. To put this volume into perspective, it translates to 26 messages for every person in the world (roughly 6.7 billion).

The daily average number of messages enabled by VeriSign's combined mobile messaging platforms broke the one billion mark with approximately 1.04 billion messages per day, on average. This represents a 12 percent increase from the previous quarter and an 83 percent rise from the second quarter of 2008.

In total, VeriSign delivered 93 billion person-to-person and 1.8 billion application-to-person messages in the second quarter of 2009. As a rough calculation, if one assumes half those messages were "marketing" messages of some sort, while perhaps the other half were "informational" messages not strictly of a marketing nature, then about one percent of all text messages were of the "marketing" sort.

If one assumes all the application-to-person messages are business messages--content delivery, reminders, notices and so forth--then a bit less than two percent of all text messages had some direct business purpose.

Exclusivity Not a Problem, Time Limits Might Be, Sprint CEO Says

Sprint Chief Executive Dan Hesse says it is fair for the U.S. government to ask whether handset exclusivity deals should have time limits. But he insists that exclusive carrier deals with handset vendors are important for promoting innovation in the industry, according to Reuters.

"The legitimate question is how long the exclusivity periods need to be," Hesse says.It's a fair question."

Salvatore Tirabassi, a partner at M/C Venture Partners, agrees. Exclusivity does not harm consumers, he argues. "A lot of innovative handsets wouldn't exist without strong carrier partnerships," he argues.

There is a lot of risk for manufacturers when new handsets are introduced and the result is that preferential relationships with carrier partners are needed, he says.

Also, larger carriers get devices before smaller carriers for logical reasons. "Vendors want volume," he says. "Why do so many vendors work with Costco rather than a smaller retailer?" he rhetorically asks.

"If you want to argue that a small carrier in a rural market hasn't benefitted because of iPhone exclusivity, because they can't get it, you have to peel the onion," Tirabassi says. "There are alternatives."

Also, for practical reasons, a longer ramp is needed to recover marketing dollars, for either carrier or handset providers, he argues. Exclusivity provides time to recover marketing investments.

"Apple, for example, does not want a half committed partner," Tirabassi says.