Friday, December 07, 2007
What would you want from your wireless carrier?
Sometime in 2009, at least one new brand of wireless carrier is likely to emerge on the scene in various parts of Canada.
Access to spectrum is just one of the challenges for a new entrant. Building the network, establishing market channels, establishing their brand and their image will take even more effort.
Increased competition usually means lower prices, more choice, more product innovation. Over the past few months, we have seen aggressive reductions in data services prices and a wide variety of new devices - and that is 18 months before we see at least one more service provider per area.
What would you want to see from a new wireless player?
Will we see the end of System Access Fees? The end of national long distance and domestic roaming charges? Fixed mobile convergence? Open access to "all" devices and applications? What about casual access to competitive long distance providers? A new provider joining the Android open handset alliance?
As long as new entrants need to rely on roaming on an incumbent network until they physically extend their network reach, will "open access" be anything more than a slogan. In fact, is the recent announcement from AT&T just such a slogan? Of course, from a marketing perspective, why does "open access" need to be more than a stated philosophy?
What would you do to establish a new wireless brand?
Technorati Tags:
AWS, spectrum auction
Access to spectrum is just one of the challenges for a new entrant. Building the network, establishing market channels, establishing their brand and their image will take even more effort.
Increased competition usually means lower prices, more choice, more product innovation. Over the past few months, we have seen aggressive reductions in data services prices and a wide variety of new devices - and that is 18 months before we see at least one more service provider per area.
What would you want to see from a new wireless player?
Will we see the end of System Access Fees? The end of national long distance and domestic roaming charges? Fixed mobile convergence? Open access to "all" devices and applications? What about casual access to competitive long distance providers? A new provider joining the Android open handset alliance?
As long as new entrants need to rely on roaming on an incumbent network until they physically extend their network reach, will "open access" be anything more than a slogan. In fact, is the recent announcement from AT&T just such a slogan? Of course, from a marketing perspective, why does "open access" need to be more than a stated philosophy?
What would you do to establish a new wireless brand?
Technorati Tags:
AWS, spectrum auction
Posted by Mark Goldberg @ 12/07/2007 07:31:00 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
I want a wireless carrier that doesn't charge access fees, doesn't charge extra for legitimate voice mail, eliminates long distance and roaming fees, and provides sufficient minutes per month that I'm not always up against the cap. I want these things at a price that does not make me reconsider having a mobile phone when I pay the bill. And, while I'm being greedy, I want a mobile data plan that actually allows me to use the browser on my phone without wondering if I'll have enough left for the car payment.
Basically, what I want is a mobile carrier that offers me a plan like I had when I lived in the U.S....five years ago!
Everyone knows what a monopoloy is, and the detrimental impact it has on the consumer and related markets. This is why we have regulatory controls.
Now Canadians need to learn the word oligopoly. Please bring some real competition to the game!
Basically, what I want is a mobile carrier that offers me a plan like I had when I lived in the U.S....five years ago!
Everyone knows what a monopoloy is, and the detrimental impact it has on the consumer and related markets. This is why we have regulatory controls.
Now Canadians need to learn the word oligopoly. Please bring some real competition to the game!
Sorry, forgot to weigh in on the AT&T nonsense. It's just PR misrepresentation. They have changed exactly nothing. One more reason people consider AT&T the most hatable carrier in the U.S.
per Gizmodo
per Gizmodo
geoff
Essentially you are asking for a carrier that will never make money. We had that in Microcell and the government was faced with either letting them go broke and all the jobs dissolving or letting Rogers buy them out saving some of the jobs. The government agreed on the latter and there is no reason this will not be the scenario down the road.
Competition would be alive and well in Canada if 2 or more providers had GSM. Rack it up to the short term thinking of Telus and Bell in deciding to go with CDMA earlier this decade.
GSM has the better network internationally as well as the better selection of phones. Put the two together and Bell and Telus are operating with a hand tied behind their back.
Post a Comment
Essentially you are asking for a carrier that will never make money. We had that in Microcell and the government was faced with either letting them go broke and all the jobs dissolving or letting Rogers buy them out saving some of the jobs. The government agreed on the latter and there is no reason this will not be the scenario down the road.
Competition would be alive and well in Canada if 2 or more providers had GSM. Rack it up to the short term thinking of Telus and Bell in deciding to go with CDMA earlier this decade.
GSM has the better network internationally as well as the better selection of phones. Put the two together and Bell and Telus are operating with a hand tied behind their back.
Posted by 
: 6:15 PM, December 07, 2007
: 6:15 PM, December 07, 2007 << Home
Syndicate
