In the U.S. communications business, some things don't change, and among those unchanging realities is that competitive local exchange carriers believe they should have widespread rights to use access facilities owned by the former Regional Bell Operating Companies (Qwest, Verizon and AT&T), paying wholesale prices with healthy discounts.
The former RBOCs just as vociferously argue that such access should be available, but not on a mandated basis, and only at market-based rates. Those fights were particularly fierce earlier in the decade, but have been relatively muted over the past several years. But nothing is ever completely settled in the communications business.
Eight competitive communications providers and Comptel have asked the Federal Communications Commission to adopt rules that would lead to lower prices for broadband access and transport. The petition for "expedited rulemaking" will not, as its name suggests, result in anything actually happening very soon.
The request must, by law, be circulated for response, and those responses will be vigorous. The request also comes at a time when larger issues, especially the shape of a new national broadband policy, are being weighed as well.
Comptel, 360networks, Broadview Networks, Cbeyond, Covad Communications, NuVox, PAETEC, Sprint Nextel and tw telecom have asked the FCC to create new procedures that would require the former Bell Operating Companies to offer wholesale access at "going-forward rates," plus a "profit margin or markup" of about 22 percent.
The concept is arcane for anybody who is not a communications policy expert or communications attorney, but essentially boils down to a competitor belief that prices are too high, and that the changed political complexion of the FCC will allow changes more in line with CLEC thinking both on mandatory wholesale and robust discounts on wholesale facilities used by competitors.
The perhaps unstated hope is that the forthcoming national broadband plan might address terms and conditions for mandatory wholesale access to optical broadband facilities owned by the former RBOCs, something competitive providers would dearly like to win, and which existing rules do not support.
Still, the petitioners do not expect immediate action, as the request has to be circulated for public comment, and will, as usual, face heated opposition from Qwest, AT&T and Verizon.
Still, it has to be noted that elections have consequences. The new petition might not have been deemed to have a chance of upside in the previous presidential administration.
Monday, November 9, 2009
Elections Matter: Competitive Carriers Challenge Telco Wholesale Pricing
Labels:
360networks,
att,
Broadview Networks,
Cbeyond,
Covad,
NuVox,
PAETEC,
Qwest,
Sprint Nextel,
Verizon
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
Why Droid is Important
Lots of people position the new Motorola Droid, available on the Verizon Wireless network at the moment, as the first, or the best, competitor to the Apple iPhone. We can argue about that. What seems much less contestable is the possibility that many of Verizon's 86.5 million subscribers now will begin to create a new critical mass of users for location-based marketing initiatives.
Until the total number of smartphone users on particular operating systems or devices is reached, it will be difficult to create mobile marketing campaigns with reasonable prospects of success. And make no mistake, mobile marketing has to be different than the interruption-based advertising we are used to with place-based media.
Mobile users are not likely to appreciate mobile advertising that they haven't asked for, or worse, must pay for. The difference between mobiles and TVs, radios, DVD or game players is that mobile devices are uniquely seen as "personal" devices. Peoploe use the other devices, but only the mobile is always with a user, and typically is seen as a personal and private device.
The other important angle is that mobile media typically is consumed as a byproduct of some other activity; it is not a primary destination or activity.
Virtually any mobile marketing message is, by definition, catching users in the middle of doing something else. So the value of the messages must be situational, in context, or relevant to those other activities. On the other hand, the key change is that devices such as the iPhone and Droid incorporate location information.
Potential message senders will know whether a user is at home, at some other indoor location or moving. If moving, message senders potentially will know whether a user is moving at high speed (in an auto) and should not be interrupted, or is moving at pedestrian speed, when a contextual message might be safe to send and also relevant to current location.
Presumably it will be possible (with permission) to determine whether a person is using public transportation, even when moving at high speed, and might be amenable to messages.
It will take a bit more work, and more opt-in detail, to determine whether a business person is presently trying to figure out where to get a cab, take a client to dinner, or find their way to their hotel, or whether a person might be trying to figure out what social venue to attend after work.
So why is Droid important, beyond simple creation of critical mass? Droid, as are all Android devices, are part of a larger effort by Google to tap mobile advertising potential. Google has unusual incentives to create the sort of detailed opt-in processes needed to create granular messages of high relevance to end users.
The reason this is important to end users is that if mobile network providers and the rest of the mobile ecosystem can create self-sustaining revenue streams based on mobile messaging, the providers can justify perpetual investments in the quality of the mobile networks and devices, potentially holding down end user costs as well.
Until the total number of smartphone users on particular operating systems or devices is reached, it will be difficult to create mobile marketing campaigns with reasonable prospects of success. And make no mistake, mobile marketing has to be different than the interruption-based advertising we are used to with place-based media.
Mobile users are not likely to appreciate mobile advertising that they haven't asked for, or worse, must pay for. The difference between mobiles and TVs, radios, DVD or game players is that mobile devices are uniquely seen as "personal" devices. Peoploe use the other devices, but only the mobile is always with a user, and typically is seen as a personal and private device.
The other important angle is that mobile media typically is consumed as a byproduct of some other activity; it is not a primary destination or activity.
Virtually any mobile marketing message is, by definition, catching users in the middle of doing something else. So the value of the messages must be situational, in context, or relevant to those other activities. On the other hand, the key change is that devices such as the iPhone and Droid incorporate location information.
Potential message senders will know whether a user is at home, at some other indoor location or moving. If moving, message senders potentially will know whether a user is moving at high speed (in an auto) and should not be interrupted, or is moving at pedestrian speed, when a contextual message might be safe to send and also relevant to current location.
Presumably it will be possible (with permission) to determine whether a person is using public transportation, even when moving at high speed, and might be amenable to messages.
It will take a bit more work, and more opt-in detail, to determine whether a business person is presently trying to figure out where to get a cab, take a client to dinner, or find their way to their hotel, or whether a person might be trying to figure out what social venue to attend after work.
So why is Droid important, beyond simple creation of critical mass? Droid, as are all Android devices, are part of a larger effort by Google to tap mobile advertising potential. Google has unusual incentives to create the sort of detailed opt-in processes needed to create granular messages of high relevance to end users.
The reason this is important to end users is that if mobile network providers and the rest of the mobile ecosystem can create self-sustaining revenue streams based on mobile messaging, the providers can justify perpetual investments in the quality of the mobile networks and devices, potentially holding down end user costs as well.
Labels:
Droid,
mobile marketing,
Verizon
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
News Corp. to Block Google Indexing?
The Wall Street Journal is the salient exception to the rule that users will not pay for newspaper content online. It now appears we might find out whether the Wall Street Journal also is an exception to the rule that one wants leading search engines to find and index one's content.
News Corp., which owns the Wall Street Journal, apparently is planning to block Google from indexing content from the Wall Street Journal and other web sites, unless Google pays for the right to do so.
No matter what the outcome, this is a major test. Google obviously prefers not to pay rights holders for the right to crawl and index content. But the company gradually is finding it must, or would benefit from, do so in some cases. The ability to offer popular TV or movie content through YouTube is one example.
News Corp., which owns the Wall Street Journal, apparently is planning to block Google from indexing content from the Wall Street Journal and other web sites, unless Google pays for the right to do so.
No matter what the outcome, this is a major test. Google obviously prefers not to pay rights holders for the right to crawl and index content. But the company gradually is finding it must, or would benefit from, do so in some cases. The ability to offer popular TV or movie content through YouTube is one example.
Labels:
business model,
Google,
News Corp.
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
What Will Enterprises Buy in 2010?
It always is dangerous to make predications about what enterprises will do when extrapolating from what they did last year, and what executives say they will do in the coming year, and doubling difficult at transition points, which is where enterprise IT managers likely will find themselves in early 2010.
As IT spending clearly was under pressure in 2009,. the issue is how much growth will happen in 2010 as postponed projects must be started, and how much top-line revenue growth enterprises actually can eke out, since it is hard to see a sustained increase in IT spending without top-line revenue growth. Up to this point in 2009, profitability increases at most enterprises have come because of cost cutting, not revenue growth, and that cannot continue indefinitely.
Investments for cost cutting for that reason appear to have been a big priority for enterprises in 2009. About 24 percent of those polled say cutting telecom and network costs were a critical priority, and 48 percent say it was a high priority.
But some underlying trends likely will re-emerge in 2010. Data center consolidation has been a high priority for cost and disaster recovery reasons, with 24 percent of respondents. saying that is a “critical” priority and 43 percent saying it is a “high” priority.
About 40 percent of enterprise executives say mobility, collaboration and voice over IP continue to be high or critical priorities.
Desktop IP telephony migration continues, while other VoIP technologies of high interest also will get attention. Some 34 percent of enterprises say they already have implemented or are implementing desktop VoIP, and an additional 14 percent are expanding or upgrading their VoIP environment.
IP conferencing, including Web, video, and audio, while not yet implemented widely, have high interest as well.
Cost savings, faster communication, and decision speed are values that drive UC adoption, says Ellen Daley, Forrester Research analyst. UC adoption continues to see traction, as well. About 21 percent of firms report that they are already, or are currently implementing, a UC solution, while nine percent are expanding or upgrading their current UC solution.
About 15 percent say they are piloting one. An additional 39 percent of firms are interested in or are considering UC solutions.
The top motivation for adopting UC is cost savings, followed by increasing communication between users. It appears enterprise executives are more comfortable with UC as well.
Some 51 percent of executives say they understand how UC will affect the way their companies do business. Still, about 32 percent of respondents say they still have some questions about UC value.
Integrated voice, email, and instant messaging top the list of the most desired features for UC.
Web conferencing and audio- and videoconferencing capability come in second while presence, allowing others to see coworkers’ status, comes in third.
Almost half of enterprises buy managed services, and though cost savings are a factor, freeing up time to focus on core business issues has grown as a driver of perceived value.
About 62 percent of respondents say that they have already purchased or are interested in purchasing managed or outsourced telecommunication services.
Unlike in past years, the top reason isn’t cost savings, although it is still high on the list. Instead, firms are opting for managed services to enable them to focus on their core business competencies.
Telecom and network buyers are also interested in managed services beyond physical networks and telecom services like multiprotocol label switching. Web conferencing and or collaboration are the most popular managed services among respondents.
About 52 percent of those polled say they are very or somewhat interested in the technology.
Firms also are interested in network-based security services (46 percent), storage and backup services (44 percent) and data center services (43 percent).
About 51 percent are using IP technologies for contact centers. About eight percent are piloting IP contact center implementations, 31 percent are implementing now and
12 percent say they are upgrading or expanding their existing IP contact center capabilities.
So far, though, enterprise executives have lukewarm interest in hosted contact center solutions, Daley says.
Close to half of firms (49 percent) expect their overall number of contact center seats to remain about the same over the next year, with similar portions either increasing (23 percent) or decreasing (24 percent) seats.
Outsourcing of contact center seats is a different matter, though, says Daley. About 30 percent of firms report planning to outsource more of their contact center seats, while 51 percent of firms anticipate no change.
Both MPLS and Ethernet wide area networks are popular. About 36 percent of those polled say they already have completed their firm’s migration to MPLS. Ethernet adoption is which is growing fast as well, but has not yet reached use of MPLS, Daley says.
Managed MPLS is also popular, with 30 percent of firms already using it, and 22 percent of firms using managed Ethernet service.
Cost is the most important criterion when choosing landline data service providers, respondents say. About 60 percent of buyers say that is a very important consideration.
Service level agreements are important to 49 percent of respondents. Vendor pricing models, especially clarity on service elements and options, are very important to 43 percent of buyers.
Nearly 65 percent of respondents say they have, or are implementing, wireless local area
networks. And while SMB respondents generally are not that interested in public data networking, enterprise executives are much more interested both in fixed WiMAX (23 percent) and mobile WiMAX (25 percent) of respondents.
The majority of respondents have deployed wireless email or BlackBerry applications. Customer-facing applications dominate, though there is interest in line-of-business apps as well, though little buying as of yet, says Daley.
The majority of enterprises buy vendors’ mobile versions of existing packaged applications (41 percent), but a large portion also are developed in-house (35 percent) or are custom-built by third parties (33 percent).
Cost is the most important criterion (68 percent) for choosing a mobile network service provider, followed by domestic coverage (56 percent).
Labels:
collaboration,
enterprise communications,
unified communications,
unified messaging,
web conferencing
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
AT&T, Verizon Will Gain Video Share in 2010
AT&T and Verizon are slowly gaining share in the U.S. multi-channel video market, while satellite providers DirecTV and Dish Network are holding their own, with Comcast and Time Warner Cable under a bit of pressure, but possibly facing more erosion over the next year, new surveys by ChangeWave Research suggest.
A key factor is simply that AT&T and Verizon now are able to market video services to millions more customers every year as they build out their new networks. Given a choice, some customers will exercise that choice, and switch from a current provider to one of the telco-provided services.
To the extent that customer satisfaction has a direct effect on churn behavior, Verizon, AT&T and DirecTV also stand to benefit, as their customer satisfaction ratings are at least three times higher than those of Comcast and Time Warner Cable, according to a recent Changewave Research survey of nearly 3,000 end users.
Still, market share changes relatively slowly in the video entertainment market. When asked whether they planned to switch TV providers in the next six months, about 12 percent reported they’ll be switching.
That works out to about two percent of the customer base a month, a figure quite consistent with what video operators have seen in recent years. But users rarely behave precisely as they say they will. One might expect churn to wind up being less than two percent a month, but more than one percent a month.
Also, service providers recently have found churn levels lighter than usual, in part because of slower housing starts, in part because of “save” offers made when customers call to disconnect, in part because bundles save customers money.
But prices seem to have very-high importance. According to the Changewave survey, price is the reason half of the “switchers” plan to make a change. Only about 10 percent indicated they would switch to get a bundle.
If price drives half the changes, rather than some other service attribute, many users who plan to defect will wind up staying because of a “save” offer that addresses the price objection.
Market share changes over the last year show just how stubbornly service providers are fighting to prevent churn in a saturated market that mostly is a zero-sum game.
For the U.S. market as a whole, cable TV operators retain dominant market share of 65 percent while satellite providers have 25 percent market share. Telcos now have 11 percent market share.
Comcast, with 23 percent share, slipped about one percentage point over the last year.
Time Warner Cable, with 11 percent share, gained one market share point over the same period.
DirecTV, with 13 percent market share, was unchanged over the year. Dish Network, with nine percent share, lost one share point over the last year.
Verizon’s FiOS has five percent share of the national market, while AT&T U-verse has three percent of the national market.
About 54 percent of the Changewave respondents who say they intend to switch providers say they will choose a fiber-optic service, an eight-point increase in three months.
Verizon FiOS TV remains the top provider that switchers plan to move to in the next six months. But AT&T’s U-verse service has jumped seven percentage points since Changewave’s March survey and is currently showing the most momentum among providers.
By way of comparison, just four percent of switchers saying they’ll sign up with Comcast and one percent say they’ll buy from Time Warner Cable.
Changewave researchers think cable and satellite providers will, for these reasons, face headwinds as the telcos gear up.
Fiber TV providers boast a big lead when it comes to customer satisfaction levels. Some 38 percent of subscribers say they are “very satisfied.” About 27 percent of satellite subscribers say they are “very satisfied.”
About 13 percent of cable subscribers say they are very satisfied. So satellite subscribers are twice as satisfied as cable customers while fiber TV customers are three times as satisfied as cable customers.
The difference is even more evident at the individual company level, where Verizon has the most satisfied customers. About 47 percent of Verizon FiOS TV customers say they are very satisfied, while 39 percent of AT&T’s customers say they are very satisfied.
Some 34 percent of DirecTV customers say they are very satisfied. Just 11 percent of Comcast and Time Warner Cable customers say they are very satisfied.
Labels:
att,
comcast,
Time Warner Cable,
Verizon,
video
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
MiFi: What's the point?
By most accounts, MiFi is getting a warm end user reception. Novatel Wireless, which makes the MiFi, posted a third-quarter profit, reversing last year's loss, as strong sales of its MiFi personal Wi-Fi hotspot. Novatel recently surprised Wall Street analysts by revealing it had received $100 million in orders for the MiFi in the first two months.
Novatel executives think the MiFi could be a new product category someplace between a dongle and a smartphone. That remains to be seen, as consumers ultimately will decide what the value is, and how big the value is.
The MiFi creates a mobile, personal hotspot for up to five devices using a single 3G connection. For some, it might be a more-convenient dongle or aircard for PCs. If so, the difference might turn on such simple issues as whether a device that requires use of a USB port is less functional than a device that doesn't require use of a port.
For others, the advantages will be the ability to connect devices without USB ports to a Wi-Fi network. Dual-mode smartphones might provide one example, but they probably don't provide the biggest obvious benefit, especially when those smartphones have 3G connections.
More obvious value will be garnered by users of iPod "Touch" or other devices that operate only on Wi-Fi, not mobile broadband, and who already pay for a 3G connection, in any location other than the home or office.
Perhaps the more obvious application is a temporary Wi-Fi hotspot for business users in a workgroup setting. But I'd be willing to be that is only one of many uses consumers will find for the MiFi.
For some, the only additional required value might be the ability to use their 3G access device without tying up a USB port. For others it is the ability to access the Internet from their Wi-Fi devices wherever they can get a 3G signal, without needing separate 3G connections for each discrete device.
The point is that hard dollar savings will drive the value for some users, while for others it might be something as simple as "not tying up a USB port." Along the way, clever users will figure out other ways why a MiFi connection adds more value for a mobile broadband connection than using an aircard or dongle.
Novatel executives think the MiFi could be a new product category someplace between a dongle and a smartphone. That remains to be seen, as consumers ultimately will decide what the value is, and how big the value is.
The MiFi creates a mobile, personal hotspot for up to five devices using a single 3G connection. For some, it might be a more-convenient dongle or aircard for PCs. If so, the difference might turn on such simple issues as whether a device that requires use of a USB port is less functional than a device that doesn't require use of a port.
For others, the advantages will be the ability to connect devices without USB ports to a Wi-Fi network. Dual-mode smartphones might provide one example, but they probably don't provide the biggest obvious benefit, especially when those smartphones have 3G connections.
More obvious value will be garnered by users of iPod "Touch" or other devices that operate only on Wi-Fi, not mobile broadband, and who already pay for a 3G connection, in any location other than the home or office.
Perhaps the more obvious application is a temporary Wi-Fi hotspot for business users in a workgroup setting. But I'd be willing to be that is only one of many uses consumers will find for the MiFi.
For some, the only additional required value might be the ability to use their 3G access device without tying up a USB port. For others it is the ability to access the Internet from their Wi-Fi devices wherever they can get a 3G signal, without needing separate 3G connections for each discrete device.
The point is that hard dollar savings will drive the value for some users, while for others it might be something as simple as "not tying up a USB port." Along the way, clever users will figure out other ways why a MiFi connection adds more value for a mobile broadband connection than using an aircard or dongle.
Labels:
broadband,
MiFi,
mobile broadband,
WiFi
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Quantifying the Carrier Wi-Fi Hotspot Business Model
Customer retention--not direct customer fees--might be the biggest part of the carrier public hotspot busimess model, says Stephen Rayment, CTO, BelAir Networks.
"Churn reduction is where lots of the value is," is Rayment. Assume churn per month of two percent a month, which means a typical customer provides 50 months of revenue, he says.
Adding metro hotspot access can provide a 10 percent churn reduction, he adds. Assume the 10 percent churn benefit on a typical subscriber relationship of 50 months, meaning the typical account now remains active for 55 months. Assume a typical customer average revenue per user of $130 a month.
That suggests an extra $650 of subscriber revenue over the length of a relationship. For a service provider with 100,000 subscribers that works out to $65 million in extra revenue.
If the average customer value is $2,000 per customer, and that service provider can use public hotspot service to reduce churn 10 percent, it adds about $200 per subscriber in terms of equity value.
For a service provider with one million subscribers, that's $200 million in incremental equity revenue.
For a service provider with one million subs, making an investment of $40 million to cover all the high-traffic spots, there is a five-to-one return on investment.
There arguably could be other revenue contributors as well, though none likely approaches the value of enhanced retention. There might be an opportunity for a small amount of additional revenue. Some customers will be willing to be stand-alone hotspot subscriptions.
Service providers might make some money from other carriers by offering hotspot access to customers roaming into the local area. There could be some advertising upside or some commercial upside from providing services to public utilities or public safety organizations, he says.
Some service providers also might look at public Wi-Fi as a way to add some mobility features to their landline service.
Mobile providers also likely will find public hotspots a useful way to offload traffic from the 3G and 4G networks to the fixed network, Rayment says.
"The networks are just choking" because of heavy new smartphone traffic, says Rayment. "People really did not see this until the iPhone, but 3 in the U.K. market also saw skyrocketing demand when it started selling the iPhone," says Rayment.
Up to this point, aircards and dongles used for mobile PC connections have been driving new bandwidth demand on the 3G and WiMAX networks. But that is changing. "Dongles drove the initial demand, but will be overtaken by the smartphone," he says.
"Churn reduction is where lots of the value is," is Rayment. Assume churn per month of two percent a month, which means a typical customer provides 50 months of revenue, he says.
Adding metro hotspot access can provide a 10 percent churn reduction, he adds. Assume the 10 percent churn benefit on a typical subscriber relationship of 50 months, meaning the typical account now remains active for 55 months. Assume a typical customer average revenue per user of $130 a month.
That suggests an extra $650 of subscriber revenue over the length of a relationship. For a service provider with 100,000 subscribers that works out to $65 million in extra revenue.
If the average customer value is $2,000 per customer, and that service provider can use public hotspot service to reduce churn 10 percent, it adds about $200 per subscriber in terms of equity value.
For a service provider with one million subscribers, that's $200 million in incremental equity revenue.
For a service provider with one million subs, making an investment of $40 million to cover all the high-traffic spots, there is a five-to-one return on investment.
There arguably could be other revenue contributors as well, though none likely approaches the value of enhanced retention. There might be an opportunity for a small amount of additional revenue. Some customers will be willing to be stand-alone hotspot subscriptions.
Service providers might make some money from other carriers by offering hotspot access to customers roaming into the local area. There could be some advertising upside or some commercial upside from providing services to public utilities or public safety organizations, he says.
Some service providers also might look at public Wi-Fi as a way to add some mobility features to their landline service.
Mobile providers also likely will find public hotspots a useful way to offload traffic from the 3G and 4G networks to the fixed network, Rayment says.
"The networks are just choking" because of heavy new smartphone traffic, says Rayment. "People really did not see this until the iPhone, but 3 in the U.K. market also saw skyrocketing demand when it started selling the iPhone," says Rayment.
Up to this point, aircards and dongles used for mobile PC connections have been driving new bandwidth demand on the 3G and WiMAX networks. But that is changing. "Dongles drove the initial demand, but will be overtaken by the smartphone," he says.
Labels:
broadband,
business model,
mobile broadband,
WiFi
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Directv-Dish Merger Fails
Directv’’s termination of its deal to merge with EchoStar, apparently because EchoStar bondholders did not approve, means EchoStar continue...
-
We have all repeatedly seen comparisons of equity value of hyperscale app providers compared to the value of connectivity providers, which s...
-
It really is surprising how often a Pareto distribution--the “80/20 rule--appears in business life, or in life, generally. Basically, the...
-
One recurring issue with forecasts of multi-access edge computing is that it is easier to make predictions about cost than revenue and infra...