Monday, March 29, 2010

Mobile Presence-Based Services $6 Billion by 2012

The value of presence-based mobile services will increase to more than $6 billion by 2012, according to Juniper Research.  Increasing smartphone penetration in developed markets, coupled with rising global usage of mobile instant messaging will help to drive the trend, says John Levett, Juniper Research analyst.

Juniper thinks the key drivers will include presence-based text message alerts and services, geolocation applications that allow people to collaorate, share location details and take advantage of local knowledge, as well as social Web applications including social networking, user-generated content, blogs and dating apps.

Up to this point, revenues from presence-based services are almost exclusively derived from operator-billed mobile IM accounts. The amount of that activity faces two contradictory trends, one might argue.

On one hand, mobile IM will tend to fare better as end user adoption of 3G or 4G services increases. Broader adoption of 3G and 4G should therefore lead to heavier use of mobile IM, which should drive higher revenues. Mobile Web applications such as IM work best, and therefore encourage use, on faster data networks.

On the other hand, operator-billed IM revenues often are based on user inability to easily use over-the-top VoIP and IM applications that do not drive operator revenues. Over time, access to such open applications will deprive operators of the ability to profit from captive IM application access.

Juniper believes there is a way to thread the needle, as mobile broadband becomes a standard service for most developed-market customers and as operators move to embrace mobile VoIP in ways that include them in the revenue streams created by some over-the-top providers.

source

Sunday, March 28, 2010

Is Another National LTE Network Needed?


Do businesses and consumers in the United States need one more fourth-generation nationwide wireless network, aside from the existing Clearwire, soon-to-be-built Verizon and AT&T networks, as well as regional networks being created by regional mobile providers and cable companies, not to mention high-speed 3G networks running at top speeds of 22 Mbps?

Though no firm answer can be given to that question, we might find out relatively soon whether investors think there is a need for another facilities-based 4G network of national coverage.

Harbinger Capital, which recently merged with SkyTerra, proposes to build a fully integrated satellite-terrestrial network to serve North American mobile users, with a national 4G terrestrial network covering 260 million people by the end of 2013.

The planned network would launch before the third quarter of 2011 and cover nine million people, with trials set initially for Denver and Phoenix. The next milestone is that 100 million people have to be covered by the end of 2012, 145 million by the end of 2013 and at least 260 million people in the United States by the end of 2015. Harbinger told the FCC that all major markets will be installed by the end of the second quarter of 2013.

The original thinking has been that wireless services within a number of vertical markets that are highly dependent upon the ubiquitous coverage and redundancy to be provided by its satellite network would be the core of the business strategy. But Harbinger might think there is a market broader than that as well.

Harbinger actually is required by the Federal Communications Commission to provide wholesale access to third parties, and also to restrict total Verizon Wireless and AT&T traffic to no more than 25 percent of total, to provide more competition in the market.

The big issue is whether there is substantial need for additional spectrum at this point. One might argue that industry requests, as well as FCC proposals, for allocation of an additional 500 megaHertz of spectrum for mobile broadband are clear evidence of need.

But there are other issues of market structure and competition. Assuming hundreds of new megaHertz of spectrum can eventually be relocated, most observers think the buyers of such spectrum would be the largest mobile providers such as AT&T and Verizon.

The Harbinger network, by definition, would largely be a platform for other providers, as it would operate as a wholesale provider.

The key business issue is whether there actually is sufficient business demand for another national 4G terrestrial network, though. Sprint and Clearwire both have relatively lavish amounts of spectrum already, and both have shown a willingness to sell wholesale capacity.

One might argue the key differentiator would be the satellite roaming features that would be available on handsets that normally default to the terrestrial network. But the bigger test will be of investor sentiment, as Harbinger will have to raise billions to build the new terrestrial network.

The 36,000 base stations that Harbinger plans to use, along with the tower sites, backhaul and other gear associated with a terrestrial network will require billions of dollars worth of investment.

Analyst Chris King at Stifel Nicolaus estimates that Verizon’s LTE network will cost about $5 billion to deploy. Clearwire has also spent billions on its network, with analyst estimates ranging from $3 billion to about $6 billion. There is no particular reason to think the ubiquitous terrestrial network Harbinger expects to build would cost less.

Investors will have to be found first, before there is a chance to test the thesis that another facilities-based 4G network is needed.

Tesco Abandons VoIP Market

U.K. retailer Tesco, which began selling consumer VoIP service in 2006, now is pulling the plug, though it will continue to sell mobile service. Without reading more into the news than is warranted, the move is illustrative of the fact that consumer VoIP might be less an innovation than some had hoped for, and certaintly is a less-robust business than anticipated, especially compared to mobile service, at least for the moment.

That is not to say other competitors, with different assets, can fare better. But the April 27, 2010 shutoff at least suggests that the "VoIP" market has not proven to be the lucrative business Tesco once believed it was, given its ability to support and market the business, as well as the evolution of end user demand, which arguably has tipped in the direction of mobility.

Earlier in the last decade, there was much more apparent optimism that fixed-line VoIP would "change telephony forever," creating significant new opportunities for non-traditional providers.

One might argue that VoIP's primary impact has been to accelerate voice price erosion, without creating a significant new market, though it has been the way cable operators have taken market share from telcos.

Tesco says "trends in technology have moved forward since we launched Internet phone so that this is no longer a sustainable service". One might infer that means mobility now is the "hot" service.

"Tesco Internet Phone" was basically a Skype-style PC offering, though the supermarket did offer a Vonage-style terminal adapter version as well.

That is not to say further innovation in voice services is impossible, or in fact unlikely. There will be advances. The issue is whether the scale, impact and economic importance of such voice innovations is going to approach the advances being made in mobility, broadband, Internet and Web services.

related article

Friday, March 26, 2010

TV Advertising the Google Way

Google is making it easier for online advertisers to get TV-style ads, with obvious implications for both PC-based an mobile-based screens.

CBS Gets Ready for iPad

If a video content provider reauthors its content to run using HTML5 instead of Flash, what does that mean? That the content is intended to run on Apple's iPad. And that is what CBS.com appears to be doing.

None of this means the multi-channel video entertainment business is in trouble, by any means. But it is likely to be a step towards a future where that is a serious question.

related story

Smartphones a Majority of all U.S. Devices in 2011

By 2011, there will be more smartphones in use in the U.S. market than feature phones, Nielsen now projects.

The share of smartphones as a proportion of overall device sales has increased to 29 percent for phone purchasers in the last six months and 45 percent of respondents to a Nielsen survey indicated that their next device will be a smartphone.

Given normal handset replacement cycles, it is possible to project that the installed base of devices will shift dramatically over the next two years. For those of you who wonder about such things, that would likely make the United States one of the world leaders in smartphone usage.

related story

Verizon Slows FiOS Build: Implications for National Broadband Plan?

Many things have changed since Verizon Communications first began its FiOS construction program in 2004, and in the years leading up to that decision, when hot debates were held about the wisdom of fiber-to-neighborhood versus fiber-to-home networks.

Mobile broadband, especially the faster 3G and new 4G networks, now will begin to offer a serious alternative for a signficant number of end users.  Consumer resistance to paying higher prices for higher-speed fixed broadband (50 Mbps and above) has not lessened.

Cable companies have solidified their position as specialists in the consumer services segment, with the exception of wireless. Given cable's position in consumer video and voice, financial returns from fiber-to-home deployments, in the mass market, are getting harder to justify, not easier.

In many ways, leading U.S. telcos have found that their strengths in wireless and enterprise services are matched by relative cable strength in the mass market video and voice product segments.

Also, opportunity costs arguably have risen over the last 10 years, opportunity cost representing the potential gains a company might have made if capital had been deployed elsewhere,, such as wireless or software, instead of high-capacity fiber access.

In the background are concerns about the long-term relative value of multi-channel entertainment and voice revenues as well, which dampen financial returns from those two core services.

Take all of that into account and the apparent lessening desire on Verizon's part to continue investing in fiber to the home is logical, perhaps even prudent.

Given capital scarcity, burgeoning wireless and mobile broadband opportunities, as well as the slower growth for legacy services such as entertainment video, fixed access and voice, it would be hard to argue with an argument that effort is better placed squarely in the wireless arena, rather than fixed line services.

For that reason, it is not a complete surprise that Verizon seems to be slowing its FiOS program, which had been nearing the end of the major construction phase, in any case. The company says it no longer will seek to build FiOS in communities where it has not already gotten video franchises issued.

That means Verizon apparently will not undertake FiOS builds in Baltimore and downtown Boston, for example, a scenario many of us would not have predicted.

Verizon is still negotiating for franchises in some smaller communities, mainly in New York, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania, but it is not working on securing franchises for any major urban areas.

Verizon never committed to bringing FiOS to its entire local-phone service area, originally planning to make service available to about 18 milliion households by the end of 2010, a goal it will reach. Since the program began, however, Verizon also has been selling assets in less-populated areas in the Midwest and West Coast.

The recruitment of new FiOS TV subscribers slowed last year. In the fourth quarter, it added 153,000 subscribers, little more than half of the number it added in the same period the year before.

At the end of last year, Verizon had 2.86 million FiOS TV subscribers and 3.43 million FiOS Internet subscribers (most households take both).

Investors never have liked the FiOS program, which will wind up costing an estimated $23 billion. FiOS likely has been a key reason Verizon has been able to compete with cable companies.

Verizon is the only major U.S. phone company to draw fiber all the way to homes and the only one to offer broadband speeds approaching those available in Japan and South Korea. But the financial returns have not been so overwhelming that the decision to expand the program is completely clear.

Verizon's experience might be an implicit warning to policymakers that although the goal of 100 Mbps service, provided to 100 million U.S. homes, by 2020 is a fine stretch goal, but might face trouble if it means consumers have to pay significantly more for such service. Consumers might prefer 20 Mbps to 30 Mbps for $50 to $60 a month, rather than 50 Mbps for $100 a month, and certainly more than 100 Mbps for $150 to $200 a month.

related article

Directv-Dish Merger Fails

Directv’’s termination of its deal to merge with EchoStar, apparently because EchoStar bondholders did not approve, means EchoStar continue...