That there are new rumors about Verizon wanting to acquire the rest of Vodafone’s stake in Verizon Wireless is not surprising. Vodafone recently denied any such talks were underway.
Such denials are commonplace in both politics and business. And though the denials are not always a cover for actual talks, Vodafone’s latest quarterly financial report illustrates the reasons why some analysts and executives at Verizon, might be weighing some action to change the current ownership status of Verizon Wireless.
To be sure, Verizon also has said no such talks are underway. In fact, Verizon recently said no talks about a full purchase of the 45 percent Vodafone stake in Verizon were underway.
That would still leave some room for less complicate measures, such as a gradual purchase by Verizon of Vodafone shares. Some also would say a full-blown merger is a possibility. Sure, it might be, but such a huge deal would present at least some significant regulatory issues.
Where the U.S. Federal Communications Commission would allow Verizon to become that much bigger is a valid question, even though either a buyout of the Vodafone stake, or a full merger, would not immediately affect U.S. mobile market share.
Vodafone posted a worse than expected drop in group revenue for the last three months of 2012, and Vodafone might prefer to liquify its Verizon Wireless stake to pay down debt, for example.
Beyond that, low interest rates make acquisitions attractive at the moment, in large part because organic growth opportunities are limited.
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
More Rumors about Verizon Buyout of Vodafone Stake in Verizon Wireless
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.
Monday, March 4, 2013
U.K. 4G LTE Frequency Allotments
After some trading activity, the actual spectrum allotments for U.K. 4G LTE providers appear to be set.
The middle block is the Time Division Duplex spectrum, the surrounding ones are uplink and downlink pairs
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.
There's a Good Reason Why Big Public Companies Rarely Lead Innovation
Big public companies are not often noted for their innovativeness. But there's a good reason. The pressure to perform, every quarter, tends to drive out other longer-term activities for which the immediate return is minimal.
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.
Fon, Deutsche Telekom Do a Deal
Fon, the global Wi-Fi network, is built by consumers who contribute to the network, and is not "carrier owned" or even "carrier class" in the traditional sense.
But that has not stopped Deutsche Telekom from partnering with Fon to build Germany’s largest Wi-Fi network. The "WLAN To Go" network will launch in the summer of 2013, and is inttended to provide greater Wi-Fi offload capabilities for DT and its customers.
The deal illustrates the porosity of "access" methods in a communications environment that increasingly features a mix of "carrier-owned," "carrier grade," "best effort" and "assured quality" networks.
Given the traditional carrier preference for licensed spectrum rather than unlicensed, and wires rather than wireless for backhaul, the new deal signifies a much more flexible approach to access, overall.
But that has not stopped Deutsche Telekom from partnering with Fon to build Germany’s largest Wi-Fi network. The "WLAN To Go" network will launch in the summer of 2013, and is inttended to provide greater Wi-Fi offload capabilities for DT and its customers.
The deal illustrates the porosity of "access" methods in a communications environment that increasingly features a mix of "carrier-owned," "carrier grade," "best effort" and "assured quality" networks.
Given the traditional carrier preference for licensed spectrum rather than unlicensed, and wires rather than wireless for backhaul, the new deal signifies a much more flexible approach to access, overall.
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.
Samsung Galaxy IV is Coming
In the smart phone race, installed base matters. Coolness matters. Advertising and marketing budgets matter. And Samsung is spending.
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, March 3, 2013
Will Europe Reach U.S. Scale; Will U.S. Data Prices Reach Europe Levels?
In Europe, more than 100 mobile service providers, owned by some 40 companies, serve a population of 505 million. In the United States, four national providers, with market share between 93 percent and 96 percent, serve most of a population of 314 million.
Regulatory fragmentation, in the form of 27 separate and sovereign regulatory entities is another problem service providers say has to be addressed. Service providers would prefer a single European regulator and consistent policies across EU nations.
European service providers say their situation is untenable, and are lobbying regulators very hard for permission to rationalize the business by significant merger and acquisition activity.
In a scale business, those differences probably account for the better financial performance of U.S. mobile service providers.
For U.S. service providers, there is a different sort of concern, namely a convergence of prices for mobile data services that might potentially entail EU prices rising a bit, and U.S. prices declining more substantially.
In part, that could come from more severe price competition in the U.S. market, in part from changes in device portability, in part from changes in device subsidy policies and possibly from a shift of end user mobile data demand (offloading to Wi-Fi).
Regulatory fragmentation, in the form of 27 separate and sovereign regulatory entities is another problem service providers say has to be addressed. Service providers would prefer a single European regulator and consistent policies across EU nations.
European service providers say their situation is untenable, and are lobbying regulators very hard for permission to rationalize the business by significant merger and acquisition activity.
In a scale business, those differences probably account for the better financial performance of U.S. mobile service providers.
For U.S. service providers, there is a different sort of concern, namely a convergence of prices for mobile data services that might potentially entail EU prices rising a bit, and U.S. prices declining more substantially.
In part, that could come from more severe price competition in the U.S. market, in part from changes in device portability, in part from changes in device subsidy policies and possibly from a shift of end user mobile data demand (offloading to Wi-Fi).
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.
Potential New Rules, Taxes Illustrate Regulatory Pressures
In most countries, voice communications, Internet communications, broadcast media, cable TV and broadcasting have been governed by distinct sets of regulations. That made more sense in an era when each type of service was provided by a distinct and purpose-built network.
These days, as all media types can be delivered by all or most networks, there will be a bigger discontinuity between the older forms of regulation and the ways services are created and delivered, across networks.
Sweden's new policy of taxing use of PCs and tablets to watch the state-owned TV service, and a German decision on copyright fees, neatly illustrate some of the regulatory challenges that accompany changing communications and entertainment ecosystems.
Traditionally, Swedish households owning televisions have paid a monthly tax of SEK173 ($27) per month to support Sveriges Television, Sveriges Radio and educational broadcasting known as Utbildningsradion.
But Sweden's Radiotjänst collection agency now is collecting the fee even from Internet-connected computers. The logic is that, in some cases, PCs are used as “TV devices.”
German lower house of parliament separately approved a copyright bill that protects Internet search firms from payment of fees to newspapers and other print publishers when snippets of stories are included in search engine results.
The bill's original draft would have allowed newspapers and other print publishers to stop search companies from showing text snippets, unless they paid licensing fees. The bill still has to win approval in the upper house, which is expected to oppose the current version of the legislation.
The other angle is that the bill does not fully settle the issue of whether search engine applications might have to pay publishers if news aggregators publish bigger amounts of content.
The move by Radiotjänst effectively makes a key form of broadcasting regulation applicable to PCs, notebooks and tablets, in a real sense, even when owners of tablets or PCs do not watch TV. The tax is applied to a households that own Internet connected PCs, but not TVs, whether or not people in the household actually watch television or not.
Smart phones have been exempted from the law, at least for the moment, on grounds that the primary function of a smart phone is communications, not “watching TV.” Obviously, that distinction will be virtually impossible to maintain over the long term. But there is an existing principle that the “TV tax” applies to a “household,” not devices.
Presumably, that means Swedish households without TVs, but using Internet-connected PCs or tablets, will pay the fee only once, and will not have to pay for smart phone use, in addition to tablet or PC access.
Households that do not own PCs or tablets (possibly only a small fraction of all households), and do use smart phones, might ultimately be forced to pay the fee as well. The point is not whether it is “fair” or “right” for Sweden, the United Kingdom or Denmark to tax owners of TVs.
The point is that rapid changes in user behavior and device capabilities are changing the actual environment within which regulatory policy is conducted. Any nation that has distinct regulatory regimes for broadcasting, communications, Internet and print media will increasingly have to confront the growing contradictions and irrationality of older forms of regulation.
These days, as all media types can be delivered by all or most networks, there will be a bigger discontinuity between the older forms of regulation and the ways services are created and delivered, across networks.
Sweden's new policy of taxing use of PCs and tablets to watch the state-owned TV service, and a German decision on copyright fees, neatly illustrate some of the regulatory challenges that accompany changing communications and entertainment ecosystems.
Traditionally, Swedish households owning televisions have paid a monthly tax of SEK173 ($27) per month to support Sveriges Television, Sveriges Radio and educational broadcasting known as Utbildningsradion.
But Sweden's Radiotjänst collection agency now is collecting the fee even from Internet-connected computers. The logic is that, in some cases, PCs are used as “TV devices.”
German lower house of parliament separately approved a copyright bill that protects Internet search firms from payment of fees to newspapers and other print publishers when snippets of stories are included in search engine results.
The bill's original draft would have allowed newspapers and other print publishers to stop search companies from showing text snippets, unless they paid licensing fees. The bill still has to win approval in the upper house, which is expected to oppose the current version of the legislation.
The other angle is that the bill does not fully settle the issue of whether search engine applications might have to pay publishers if news aggregators publish bigger amounts of content.
The move by Radiotjänst effectively makes a key form of broadcasting regulation applicable to PCs, notebooks and tablets, in a real sense, even when owners of tablets or PCs do not watch TV. The tax is applied to a households that own Internet connected PCs, but not TVs, whether or not people in the household actually watch television or not.
Smart phones have been exempted from the law, at least for the moment, on grounds that the primary function of a smart phone is communications, not “watching TV.” Obviously, that distinction will be virtually impossible to maintain over the long term. But there is an existing principle that the “TV tax” applies to a “household,” not devices.
Presumably, that means Swedish households without TVs, but using Internet-connected PCs or tablets, will pay the fee only once, and will not have to pay for smart phone use, in addition to tablet or PC access.
Households that do not own PCs or tablets (possibly only a small fraction of all households), and do use smart phones, might ultimately be forced to pay the fee as well. The point is not whether it is “fair” or “right” for Sweden, the United Kingdom or Denmark to tax owners of TVs.
The point is that rapid changes in user behavior and device capabilities are changing the actual environment within which regulatory policy is conducted. Any nation that has distinct regulatory regimes for broadcasting, communications, Internet and print media will increasingly have to confront the growing contradictions and irrationality of older forms of regulation.
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...