You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Communication models’ category.
Just installed Fring. Works like a charm. Really nice interface and a great site. I added my GTalk and MSN account. It works with Skype and SIP services aswell.
So now able to keep my twitter posts coming via GTalk account..better than SMS notifications
And I am able to doe VoIP calls.. Wow!(Well just tried to call…doesn’t work. Only the test call works..)
Where am I?
Where do I want to go?
Which way do I need to go to get there?
The Big conclusion is not to focus on triple or quad play but to break up the broadband(Pipe) business model(horizontally and vertically). By doing so create new value and differentitaion(my reasoning, argumentation is missing in the post). Well…That sounds familiar. Have a look at this presentation about 3D Valuechains. I made this presentation not specifically for operators but business in general. My personal belief is that there is little new value to create by bundling and controlling a large part of the value chain. We basically should focus on individual parts and be no more than excellent in the seperate functions.
Here are some highlights that I discovered in this map:
We want to describe some new archipelagos and islands that telcos need to explore. Our thesis is that operators need to:
- slice and dice the broadband connectivity offering in different ways, then
- package it in different ways together with devices, software, services and
- distribute it in different ways via the standard channels and sales methods.
Thus they assemble a portfolio of business models for paying off the network.
In the bottom left are free (or subsidised) community or municipal networks. For good or evil, we think that governments will see high social benefit in ubiquitous adoption, and new business models are likely to emerge to support this. Communities themselves will also work together to provide the next generation of access. (The current generation being the widespread “linksys” and “NETGEAR” open wi-fi access points bringing you this very article right now.)
The bottom-up connectivity model is epitomised by companies like FON. As femtocells and other technologies mature, carriers will embrace hybrid models of network build-out.
There is a small exception case for services like i-mode or ISP email that use connectivity charges to cross-subsidise services. This is a commercial dead-end but lives on another decade.
In the middle of the diagram are personal-area networks (PANs) and other unrouted connectivity. Existing examples might include Bluetooth, Zigbee, or even short-range Family Radio Service radios. We agree with Motorola on this one: there’s likely to be an explosion of value in this space, and operators are so attached to big centralised networks that they’re likely to miss the boat. A whole new raft of players enter based on payments, games, next-gen walkie-talkies, presence sensing, and social media sharing. One to watch.
The growth in capacity of storage media greatly outstrips that of CPUs, batteries or dynamic memory. Within a decade, you’ll be able to buy a music phone with every song every recorded. Soon after, every movie will be thrown in too. Today operators sell devices where the memory is empty. It’s like Coke selling aluminium cans with a pack of sugar syrup and instructions to “just add water”.
In reaction to the “one-size-fits-all” nature of IPTV, peer-to-peer content delivery grows — and the networks evolve to support rather than throttle this behaviour. The content delivery networks (CDNs) incorporate P2P functionality, and everyone is happy.
Two big growth stories will dominate: one is already on the radar, of ad-funded services and connectivity; the other is service-funded connectivity where the user pays the price they see — no hidden postage or package charges, no bill shock, no metered usage anxiety.
An increasing number of devices will come with connectivity embedded as part of the deal, and no recurring charges (at least initially). This is the reverse of the cellular model, where the hardware is subsidised by the service fee. In practise many of these devices will be part of bigger home or automotive services where the cost of billing isn’t worth the hassle when the connectivity only forms a small part of the overall solution cost.
Finally, the shark’s fin in the water. Various forms of tiered connectivity are going to emerge at an alternative to full-blown carrier-controlled QoS. Rather than recap everything here, go read our article on Paris Metro Pricing for some insight into the area.
yesterday i posted something on my other blog about The Value Chain. I just realized that it is also a very relevant topic to discuss on this platform. As a start a small quote from the Telco2.0 blog:
Are telcos communications companies?
The return-to-work week at the beginning of January is always a time for reflection and self-examination. We continue the theme of “What industry are we really in?” with some thoughts about personal communications.
The question for operators is: to what extent they should be innovators in their core voice and messaging products? After all, these services still account for the majority of the revenue of most telcos, be they fixed or mobile.
It’s an old debate, but one which in 2007 will take on a lot more significance as the march of technology releases us from the constraints of legacy infrastructure. Broadband has become mass-market in developed countries. Some smaller operators like Telio already have all-IP infrastructures. The leading-edge incumbent operators are getting close to launching IP-based replacements for much of their legacy equipment. Mobile operators are making similarly heavy technology investments to enable fixed-mobile products. Wi-Fi marches on and the power, QoS, security and provisioning issues start to ease. WiMax reaches the market, and creates new possibilities in markets with weak or no fixed access.
Customer expectations are rising
The rising Digital Youth generation of users aren’t going to stick with 1990s telephony and messaging products forever. The decision time is approaching:
- Invest in core communications service innovation, define differentiated software and devices, build channel.
- Partner with someone else who has these capabilities, and be a platform enabler for payments, service, logistics, etc.
- Exit the services space, and focus on pipes — or diversify into other areas.
At the moment we see a confusing mix of these in the market — as our survey results have confirmed. So, if you do engage in services innovation, where should you focus your money? We think we’ve got a slightly different angle on the problem.
So you understand the problem operators around the planet are facing. The Telco2.0 blog in their post gives the answer. I believe it is not their job to give the answer..
My goal is to give tools so that the operators can make the decision themselves.
Many operators have lost their focus their Value Chain has become a Profit Chain. Serving not the customer but themselves.
We need to create TRUE VALUE again. How to this? Watch the powerpoint: 3D Value Chains
Well here after couple of days that the news broke my ideas about X-series..
Finally someone who dares to make the jump. The jump of the ‘steady’ docks of voice on to the rocking(no IMS) boat of data.. Brave people! Question is ofcourse: Were they pushed on the boat or are they like Columbus brave explorers with vision and hope. I hope the later. I so hope they have an insight into the future. A telescope reaching beyond the horizon.
The idea of such a simple proposition makes me very enthousiastic as a customer..Well that is a good sign. I wonder what the big thing will be in X-series. Will P2P services like Peerbox fly? Can we start Podcasting on mobile phones? Will we Skype? Will me use offboard navigation apps? Mobile TV? Mobile blogging? Music Download? Content sharing? Will it encourage the development of new services and apps?
Oh if this proposition does not work…..we are truely *@#$%^*&
Seriously! We should all hope that this works..because really if the customer doesn’t want this.. We Probably need to wait yet a couple of years again until services are so intelligent(context aware) that using them is as intuitive as riding a car. “phone please download …” “phone please search …” “phone please bring me home” etc.. If this doesn’t work I really start to question if the mobilephone can be used by a large group of users for internet known services with the according distributionchannels(Browsers, ODP, apps).
If anybody from 3 is reading this…please keep me informed 😉
God bless and all the best on your data voyage! Watching with anticipation!
Hi, here an excerpt from a blog entry over at Telco 2.0. I put the two most relevant lines for me in bold..
Who finances broadband access networks? End-users, municipalities, content providers, merchants, advertisers?
Broadband is heralded as the golden growth opportunity for fixed and mobile telcos and a driver of economic and social well-being for local and national communities.
However, recent studies of the advanced markets in Japan and South Korea are demonstrating that the costs of providing broadband access rise faster than revenues.
This leads to a.) an unsustainable business model for network operators and b.) causes them to be a bottleneck in many internet value stacks with major repercussions for all parties.
This is driven by five key trends:
– Growth slows as the broadband access market saturates
– ‘Flat-rate’ pricing models continue
– Inability to capture enough value-added services to cross-subsidize
– Per-subscriber usage increases, possibly significantly
– Bandwidth costs don’t drop as fast as usage rises
This problem will soon heavily affect fixed line operators, cablecos and ISPs in most of Developed Markets and mobile operators too as they increase adoption of HSPA and 3G.
The key questions, then, are:
– How can we provide a return on network investment without discouraging innovation by users?
– In the short term, what are the alternatives to ‘flat-rate pricing’?
– What architectural changes are needed to the internet?
– How should we think more creatively ‘downstream’ (about users, communities, and municipalities) as well as ‘upstream’ (content providers, merchants, and advertisers) to develop more sustainable business models?
Some inspriring stuff on the Telco 2.0 blog. It tells about the shifting of control between handset vendors, operators and users. Conclusion: the user gains control.
The question I have is what impact does the increasing power of the user have for both the handset vendor and the operator. Seems to me that when your traditional control weakens your brand will be a key asset!! Sounds pretty healthy to me..It will be preference and cost which will drive the decision. So efficient and high quality distribution of communication services and an appealing brand. Here comes the problem. Do the big global operators have appealing brands? I don’t think so. They have to reach a broad audience with many messages. I believe that we will see segmented and targetted brands. Coming from MVNO’s??
Just been reading up on “Voice 2.0” on Alec Saunder’s blog. I am very interested to understand how AOL is changing their business model. I fully agree that traditional incumbent operators don’t have the speed and skills to develop 2.0 apps.
I am just wondering if the operator who embraces the voice 2.0 model can still be a strong brand to the end users aswell….
Originally uploaded by Alec Saunders.
Hmm….interesting way of looking at it…