Tag: Vodafone Page 6 of 7

Vodafone Germany envious of T-Mobile's iPhone deal?

German news reports say that Vodafone Germany has sued T-Mobile over its exclusive iPhone arrangement with Apple. Vodafone challenges the “combo” of iPhone and a 2-year-contract and asserts that this might be contrary to fair competition laws. Vodafone Germany’s chief describes the iPhone as the “fall of man”, which is pretty funny, come to think of it. The manager says they would fear that the likes of Nokia and Motorola would follow the example and do the same, which would heavily distort the market. Hmm. Who had this thing with its logos on handsets again? Who was the only carrier distributing Sharp handsets? Ah… Given Vodafone’s approach with the rather successful Sharp GX series, which was exclusively (sic!) available to, yes, Vodafone customers, the suit does not feel entirely sincere. One might plead that Vodafone fails on the “clean-hands” doctrine (which, alas, is unknown to German law).

This is of course also noteworthy as Vodafone Global CEO Arun Sarin went on record saying that the iPhone makes for a “pretty poor experience” (unless you are in a WiFi area) and all.

Why then do they insist this is such a bad thing? Do we take it as a sign that the lost iPhone deal might after all have a certain sting to the mighty carrier? This is in spite of it still possibly proving to have been the right decision, with Apple’s share in user fees and all. It may well all come down to branding: Vodafone is thought to have spent hundreds of millions on trying to build its Vodafone Live! brand, which it all but abandoned recently. It was the first big carrier to partner with Nokia on the latter’s Ovi initiative (see here), which in itself may be seen as an admission of failure of its own service.

Whilst I understand Vodafone’s move from the view of the German lawyer I (also) am, the overall approach has something of a child envious of another one’s toy.

UPDATE: Further reports shed more light onto this. T-Mobile may be forced to sell unlocked phones and also give up the 2-year tie-in, i.e. offer consumers to buy the iPhone without a contract. This would be a major blow to the Apple business model and one that might force others to open up, too: MoCoNews reports that French laws have similar provisions.

Most importantly perhaps, European laws on the freedom of goods and services would prevent anyone stopping grey imports into other EU member states where Apple struck other exclusivity deals (e.g. with O2 in the UK), which might become a real threat to Apple’s business model altogether.

Vodafone walks through the Ovi with Nokia

Following their relatively recent announcement of a multimedia initiative, Nokia reports a big win with Vodafone having agreed to carry their Ovi platform on Nokia devices that are distributed through the operator. Ovi, which is Finnish for door, was to be Nokia’s next big push towards becoming a multimedia company. One of its flagships under that umbrella, the Nokia Music Store, will now run alongside Vodafone’s own music service.

Nokia’s risk with the introduction of Ovi was that operators would reject having the Ovi links on the phones that they were distributing (not uncommon for them to do), so to have the “world’s largest operator by revenue” amongst their ranks is no small feat. Otherwise, Nokia would have seen limited distribution in markets where handset prices are subsidised by carriers, which is true in most!

With Nokia having bolstered its portfolio of offerings in recent months even more (the acquisition of Navteq being the biggest one), this opens the pipeline to a much richer content experience, and this is what might have pursuaded the good folks at Vodafone: with carriers struggling to come to terms on the “right” treatment of content to maximise sales and user experience, a door to a fully-packed store of content and applications must sound tempting.

It might actually mark a turn in the market: could it become the handset manufacturers who will take the lead in the content space and become the funnel through which content providers feed their wares to the consumer? It would make sense in that it is arguably easier for an OEM to ensure that there is optimal performance for a product on a device (after all, they manufacture the device). Such a model would bring relief to the operators who would continue to control the billing relationship with the consumer and hence alleviate fears of removing that bond but they would be a big step closer to becoming the dreaded bit pipe as had happened to ISP on the Internet. I have argued before that this process would – in any event – take longer, so that might alleviate fears.

It is breaking into the control-driven model of operators, and that is a significant development in itself. Nothing will of course change for the content providers, at least not in the short term: it is just that they need to ring a different doorbell now (or rather an additional one…).

Motorola loves UIQ

US handset maker Motorola acquired half the shares in UIQ, the smartphone software unit, from Sony Ericsson. Sony Ericsson had bought UIQ from handset OS maker Symbian last year. UIQ is essentially a graphic interface adding components to the Symbian OS. Symbian in turn is 47.9% owned by Nokia. Under UIQ, native programming can be made in C++ although the software does support the – in the mobile games space – ubiquitous J2ME standard. Motorola’s new flagship Z8 (nicknamed “MotoRzr” as in “riser”) is running on it already. The battle of the OS giants begins…

It is an interesting move since Moto has been the most active OEM for the use of Linux Mobile: it has released a whole range of phones for the open source OS featuring the penguin. It is also one of the founding fathers of the LiMo Foundation, an initiative it embarked on together with industry heavyweights NTT DoCoMo, Vodafone, Samsung, NEC and Panasonic (and which was recently joined by LG, McAfee, Broadcom, Ericsson and others). Now, I understand that Linux and C++ work together but must admit that my knowledge is more than limited here. It is in any event noteworthy that Motorola goes with a UI based on Symbian rather than straight-forward Linux. Motorola was quick to state that UIQ would only be “one of the actions to support [a] strategy” adding more investment in multimedia product segments.

With hundreds of millions in development cost at stake, it is probably too early to tell but it certainly is a new twist in the quest to uproot Nokia‘s top position with the Symbian s60 platform. So, what’s next?

Mobile Mesh Networks: now we're talking…

Swedish firm TerraNet is trialling a mobile mesh network, we read. In a mesh network, each handset works like a little base station, too. It is a peer-to-peer technology without the need for a base station and, hence without a network operator or carrier. TerraNet’s devices currently have 1km range, i.e. unless there is another device within a range of 1km, it will not work.

However, should this technology become robust and sufficiently scaled, the new Vodafones and Verizons would probably be Ericsson and Nokia Siemens Networks, i.e. the big network vendors. Incidentally, Ericsson is said to have invested $3m in TerraNet. At present, a maximum of 7 hops can be done, and this would be limiting the distance that can be covered. However, the company apparently also offers a network node via a USB dongle and this could then connect to a VoIP system to bridge long-distance and go into another mesh network closer to the recipient.

Would this technology be available on a larger scale (and perhaps ultimately without the constraints of so many hops), this would then result in lower cost for users because there would be one less mouth to be fed in the value chain, and it so happens that this is the hungriest mouth at present. Terranet is said to be recognizing that the telcos won’t be delighted about this (multi-media evangelists like Nokia’s Anssi Vanjoki will however be uber-excited as it will boost multimedia offerings and the opportunities over there). Oh, dreaming of the future…

At present, the offering is geared to scarcely populated areas (the company runs trials in Tanzania and Ecuador), and the above-described problems might not be an issue there. In the contrary, it could be that operators would embrace the technology to expand coverage. The company also targets urban areas where people make lots of local calls, which would then be virtually free.

In those more urban areas, there may be problems with having enough available frequencies, and the struggle with the regulators in the space might indeed slow the deployment down significantly. This would probably be made even harder due to the political concerns of many countries when it comes to weakening some of their economic powerhouses (because this is what carriers also are).

Other commentators are also concerned with battery life but also note that, if the phones are replacing landlines, they can be left plugged into a power source (which would be defeating the purpose of the notion of being mobile though, I guess). Surely this would be solvable though.

Very interesting indeed, I think!

Amp'd files for Chapter 11 – Revisiting MVNO's

One down… Amp’d files for Chapter 11, citing the need for more time to ramp up its systems for demand. I wonder: shouldn’t $360m in VC monies be enough to build systems that can cater for 200,000 customers? Given that Verizon provides the network and Motorola the handsets, that would mean that they took $1,800 per customer on all the rest; a bit stiff. Verizon is the biggest creditor with some $33m in receivables. So their wonderful ARPU wasn’t that great after all, huh?

It’s a bit of a bleak outlook, and whilst the offloading of debt might work this time, it puts some serious question marks behind the model of MVNO Amp’d tried to implement, namely one that tries to build a full infrastructure other than the actual base stations. Now, the question is old: is this really necessary? It has failed often: they are not the first to stop. ESPN did it. Has anyone ever heard of Extreme Mobile again? To remind you: they had announced a Vodafone-powered MVNO in the UK… and the site still says “coming soon”.

Might perhaps be the call for a network provider that possesses some smart backend infrastructure allowing printing of customised invoices, sending of customised messages and provision of customised content be the way out? It would arguably be dramatically cheaper to have a network that rides on the back of a) a brand, b) retail distribution through the likes of Carphone Warehouse, BestBuy, MediaMarkt, FNAC, El Corte Ingles (depending on where you live) and c) “soft” customisation (i.e. through packaging rather than retail channel, etc).

What would be in it for the Vodafones and Verizons of this world? Lower churn! It is hard to get to real numbers but lore has it that the cost of one Mannesmann D2 customer when Vodafone bought them was a whopping $7,800 and that with – allegedly – 30% or so churn p.a. Surely no customer can use their phones enough to make that money back, me thinks… If churn could be reduced by, say, half if customers would stick with the brand due to higher loyalty, then the supporting carriers would make a killing! Customers are way more loyal to the football club they support, their politicial party of choice, the National Trust, U2, their Almer Mater, their home town – you call it affinity marketing, a concept that has been a great success for years e.g. for credit cards. Wouldn’t a combination of this make a lot of sense? The thing that killed the market so far is greed: everyone wanted to own the customer front to end – when all the customer really wanted was good service, etc and this fuzzy warm feeling.

Get onto it. I believe it would work. Anyone here to try?

Real Networks buys Sony NetServices

Real steps it up again: After their acquisition of WiderThan last year (ring-backs, music-on-demand, etc) catapulted them to the forefront of mobile music services, they have now acquired Sony’s NetServices division that runs Vodafone’s audio-streaming services in Germany, Ireland, Italy, Greece, Portugal, Romania and the UK as well as the one for TeliaSonera in Finland.

The whole audio-streaming thing still puzzles me though: the original commercial model for ringtones was clear but it was based on hardware barriers and constraints rather than the fantastic content (let’s face it, monophonic ringtones were pretty horrific). However, with Bluetooth and memory cards now being on virtually every phone and storage of 1GB and more not raising an eyebrow anymore, this would seem doomed (also see my post on declining sales here).

One could argue that it is sensible to then move on to streaming but can anyone explain to me why I should pay for what basically is radio when even a shabby old Nokia 6230 comes with a stereo FM receiver that does the trick, too, and for free? That, I believe, is the difference to ringtones: I do have alternatives to getting to basically the same content – it then comes down to packaging, ease of use, etc and carriers haven’t been particularly good at that, have they?

A whole Armada: Nokia, Vodafone, Sony BMG! And for what?

One of my true favourites, Groove Armada, have teamed up with all the heavyweights to bring their music, more specifically, their new album “Soundboy Rocks” to the very cutting edge of digital: whenever you b uy a Nokia N76 in a Vodafone store, you will get 1) a voucher and 2) a PIN to take to 3) a website to 4) download a song (you can store 1 copy on your computer and 1 on your phone, sorry, multimedia device). Easy, isn’t it?

I would hope this will work (if only to help the good folks from Groove Armada) but the whole approach would appear a wee bit cumbersome: with every click, you lose consumers. With every change from one media to another (retail to mobile, mobile to web, retail to web, etc.) you lose them tenfold. So why on earth don’t they just run and show off a mobile download service and/or pre-install some content to demonstrate the superb capabilities of Nokia’s really fine devices? I don’t get it…

When one reads on, it becomes clear, that this is clearly more a PR affair for both sides: the remainder is a hilarious marketing blurp: Nokia loves Sony who love Nokia who love everyone else… Vodafone’s role, other than providing the retail space and being represented on the rather lame microsite with a logo – below the fold – isn’t entirely clear. Executives showing their superiors that they actually do “something” in mobile? Is it just me or does this appear somehow pieced together?

Page 6 of 7

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén