Net Neutrality is a Regulatory ‘Trojan Horse'

"The Federal Communications Commission’s net-neutrality decision opens the FCC to “boundless authority to regulate the internet for whatever it sees fit,” the Electronic Frontier Foundation says.

The EFF favors net neutrality but worries whether the means justify the ends.

“We’re wholly in favor of net neutrality in practice, but a finding of ancillary jurisdiction here would give the FCC pretty much boundless authority to regulate the internet for whatever it sees fit," EFF says.

FCC Net Neutrality is a Regulatory ‘Trojan Horse,’ EFF Says Wired.com:

Corning Expects High Demand for Tablet, Smartphone Glass

Corning expects its annual sales to grow more than 50 percent to $10 billion by 2014, driven by surging demand for ultra-thin glass used in television monitors, smart phones and touch-screen tablets.

The world's biggest maker of liquid-crystal-display glass predicts the global appetite for flat-panel LCD TVs, computers and mobile devices will drive up industry volume to around 5 billion square feet in 2014 from 3.1 billion square feet now.

Corning estimates that tablet computer sales could grow from roughly 20 million units last year to almost 180 million by 2014.

Corning Expects High Demand for TV Glass - NYTimes.com

Verizon iPhone Might Get Lots of AT&T Customers, Survey Suggests

 It is clear that Verizon Wireless ran out of Apple iPhones on the first day they were made available. What remains unclear is how many of those switchers were already Verizon Wireless customers, and how many were switchers who had been using another provider.

A new uSamp survey suggested 47 percent of current AT&T iPhone customers were“very unlikely” to switch to Verizon Wireless right away. About 12 percent said it is “somewhat unlikely.”

Still, about 26 percent of AT&T customers say they are “very likely” (eight percent) or “somewhat likely” (18 percent) to switch to Verizon’s iPhone on the first day it is available.

The top two reasons Verizon’s current smartphone users do not plan to give up their androids or BlackBerrys in favor of the iphone: conversion costs (46 percent) and the keyboard (34 percent).  other reasons not
to switch included functions such as e-mail and messaging (23 percent), maps and GPS (23 percent), customization and widgets (20 percent), web browser (19 percent) and, for BlackBerry users, BlackBerry messenger (28 percent).

By contrast, a majority of Verizon’s current Android and BlackBerry users say they intend to head to Apple as soon as the iPhone hits the shelves. Some 54 percent are very likely (25 percent) or somewhat likely (29 percent) to
go iPhone as soon as the device is available.

About 66 percent of BlackBerry users indicated they are "very" or "somewhat likely" to switch to the iPhone immediately, as are nearly half of its android users (44 percent).

Current iPhone users on AT&T's network indicate that dropped calls are the chief driver of change. About 48 percent suggested they were going to switch to Verizon because of dropped calls. But  carrier coverage (25 percent) or product features (22 percent) also were mentioned as reasons for switching.

The survey by uSamp included more than 700 smartphone users.

read more here

Apple iPhone From AT&T or Verizon?

Walt Mossberg takes a look at the devices and the networks.

The Way "Disrupters" Think

I recently had an instructive conversation with a colleague I hadn't actually seen for more than a year, that amply illustrates how would-be "market disrupters" think. Keep in mind that "disruptors" have different business objectives than traditional executives might. A conventional approach might have companies N+1 and N+2 entering a market lead by company N because N+1 and N+2 believe they can take significant market share away from N.

Venture capitalists might fund company N+1 because the firm has technology that is 10 times better than that of company N that leads the market.

But here's another way of looking at the matter. There is an existing market worth 100x revenue and 300y usage. Disruptor firm N+1 has a business plan aimed at boosting usage to 400y but shrinking revenue to 10x. N+1 will do well because it will get a share of the 10x where N+1 now has no revenue.

N+1 knows it does not have to take share in the traditional way to disrupt the market, any more than Skype had to take away much existing international long distance to affect pricing across the entire market.  N+1 simply has to gain enough recognition as a viable supplier, with dramatically-lower retail pricing, in the customer base.

The difference is in the notion of "growing" a market compared to "destroying" a market.

"End of Profit" for Mobile Service Providers in 4 Years?

Mobile service providers in developed regions of North America, Asia, Pacific and Western Europe markets could face they are no longer profitable in about four years, according to a new study by Tellabs.

Researchers looked at mobile service provider financial performance across the globe, and the fact that the study is called "The End of Profit" should tell you most of what you need to know about the fundamental trend.

See a summary here..

The study shows that widely-held industry beliefs about rising costs and falling revenues are correct. If the trends assumed in the model do not change significantly, if the assumptions are correct, and if service providers do not change, carriers in each region can expect to see an end of profit within a four year window.

That bears repeating. In the absence of relatively significant changes, mobile service provides, arguably in a better position than fixed-line providers to capture growth, will cease to be profitable within four years. The median expectation is that U.S. mobile service providers will reach "zero profitability" by the fourth quarter of 2013.

Service providers in developed nations in the Asia and Pacific region could reach zero profitability by the third quarter of 2014.

In certain regions, this point could be reached much sooner, Tellabs believes. It is clear that carriers are facing significant challenges in balancing cost and revenue. Mobile service providers in Western Europe could reach zero profitability by the first quarter of 2015.

Western operators should position mobile broadband as a complement to fixed broadband, not a substitute, says Analysys Mason - Press releases - News | Analysys Mason

Attempts to sell mobile broadband as an alternative to fixed broadband are likely to fail in European and U.S. markets because there is a strong, and correct, perception among consumers that mobile broadband is slower, less reliable and more expensive than fixed broadband, say researchers at Analysys Mason.

Where consumers have a choice between fixed and mobile broadband, mobile broadband should not be sold as the primary means of access, but as a complement. This is based on the findings of the Connected Consumer survey 2, a study of the telecoms and media activities of 6000 consumers across Europe and the United States.

More than 70 percent of respondents who expressed an opinion agreed with statements that mobile broadband was slower, less reliable and more expensive than fixed broadband.

Customers are also becoming increasingly happy with their fixed broadband service. Of respondents who said they were not interested in mobile broadband, 72 percent said it was because they are happy with their fixed service (up from 65 percent last year).

Western operators should position mobile broadband as a complement to fixed broadband, not a substitute, says Analysys Mason - Press releases - News | Analysys Mason