Monday, July 19, 2010
Making TV interactive
URL http://www.cable-quest.in/interview_nov_09_2.asp
Provides a good idea of the video market in India.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
IPTV in India
Interactive and personalized Televiewing. The URL to the article provides more info.
http://www.expresscomputeronline.com/20090504/technology01.shtml
http://www.expresscomputeronline.com/20090504/technology01.shtml
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Improving broadband penetration
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Verizon Plans to Provide Open Access
Per the FT at http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d72cea8a-9d1a-11dc-af03-0000779fd2ac.html
And the Wall Street Journal at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119617188870905241.html?mod=telecommunications_primary_hs
It appears Verizon decision is probably in reaction to the Google Android plans. But then to come up with such a plan within such a short time without the possible thought of it before does not make sense – which makes me think that Verizon had something in process already and the Google decision just accelerated that process.
In a wireless world, the customer is owned by a service provider. Per this announcement from Verizon, devices one chooses to operate remains at the discretion of the end users. This will reduce the distribution costs of service providers at the same time reach out to users who were not their customers by providing them choice of handsets.(Not sure the revenue lost from giving away the distribution channel, as the operators will still distribute the most popular models.) This could result in increased competitive intensity and change in channel mix for mobile devices manufacturers.
By announcing the program it appears Verizon wants to control the user experience. Verizon could then use this to negotiate with Google and other application vendors to share the revenue from online advertising and usage of applications.
A better option would be for both Google and Verizon to work on a converging framework for the software that would be incorporated in the mobile devices – this would help reduce the investment needed by both Verizon and Google, reduce time to market for mobile devices, make available lot more innovative applications that could be accessible via the mobile device – all this is a possibility so long there is an agreement on the revenue split online advertising and use of other tools and applications. Depending on the perception of who owns the customer will shift the balance of power at the negotiating table. Android of Google and the ‘Open Access’ plan from Verizon is trying to do just that – prove that each has plans to own the mobile user. Time will tell who gets the better of the other.
And the Wall Street Journal at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119617188870905241.html?mod=telecommunications_primary_hs
It appears Verizon decision is probably in reaction to the Google Android plans. But then to come up with such a plan within such a short time without the possible thought of it before does not make sense – which makes me think that Verizon had something in process already and the Google decision just accelerated that process.
In a wireless world, the customer is owned by a service provider. Per this announcement from Verizon, devices one chooses to operate remains at the discretion of the end users. This will reduce the distribution costs of service providers at the same time reach out to users who were not their customers by providing them choice of handsets.(Not sure the revenue lost from giving away the distribution channel, as the operators will still distribute the most popular models.) This could result in increased competitive intensity and change in channel mix for mobile devices manufacturers.
By announcing the program it appears Verizon wants to control the user experience. Verizon could then use this to negotiate with Google and other application vendors to share the revenue from online advertising and usage of applications.
A better option would be for both Google and Verizon to work on a converging framework for the software that would be incorporated in the mobile devices – this would help reduce the investment needed by both Verizon and Google, reduce time to market for mobile devices, make available lot more innovative applications that could be accessible via the mobile device – all this is a possibility so long there is an agreement on the revenue split online advertising and use of other tools and applications. Depending on the perception of who owns the customer will shift the balance of power at the negotiating table. Android of Google and the ‘Open Access’ plan from Verizon is trying to do just that – prove that each has plans to own the mobile user. Time will tell who gets the better of the other.
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
AT&T and Echostar combo could be deadly for the cable operators in US
AT&T has been building capabilities for its video offering, U-verse that will offer IPTV. The acquisition of Echostar will add a lot of value to AT&T’s video offering. Specifically, Echostar will get the expertise of content negotiation and relationship that is so crucial for a successful video offering. The Echostar’s Direct to home (DTH) service will be a very good complement to the IPTV offering.
As a stand alone business Echostar may have limited options as they will need to partner to offer bundled services - broadband and phone (both wireline and wireless) services. And if the market direction is to offer bundled services, a pure play video services business will have its limitations.
Cable operators and Telecommunication service providers have been at war as each enters the forte of the other. Cable operators are already eating into the phone business. And the Telcos have been aggressively upgrading their networks to offer video services. With Echostar DTH, AT&T could potentially hurt revenue growth and profitability of cable operators. AT&T could also tier their video services – DTH and IPTV. DTH could be priced to mimic the cable operators business in region and IPTV could command a premium based on its interactivity and time shifted TV.
Also with the number of scribers of Echostar (approx. 13.7 Million as opposed to AT&T 126,000) will give AT&T additional room for bargaining with the content providers – could reduce cost.
Similar thinking must be going through the Verizon video services strategic team.
As a stand alone business Echostar may have limited options as they will need to partner to offer bundled services - broadband and phone (both wireline and wireless) services. And if the market direction is to offer bundled services, a pure play video services business will have its limitations.
Cable operators and Telecommunication service providers have been at war as each enters the forte of the other. Cable operators are already eating into the phone business. And the Telcos have been aggressively upgrading their networks to offer video services. With Echostar DTH, AT&T could potentially hurt revenue growth and profitability of cable operators. AT&T could also tier their video services – DTH and IPTV. DTH could be priced to mimic the cable operators business in region and IPTV could command a premium based on its interactivity and time shifted TV.
Also with the number of scribers of Echostar (approx. 13.7 Million as opposed to AT&T 126,000) will give AT&T additional room for bargaining with the content providers – could reduce cost.
Similar thinking must be going through the Verizon video services strategic team.
Monday, November 19, 2007
Radio spectrum freed could be a great win for the WiMAX proponents
The Financial Times and FT.com (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2ece0dd2-962c-11dc-b7ec-0000779fd2ac.html) reported that radio spectrum 698-806 MHz will be available immediately for service providers to offer mobile broadband services immediately in America and much of Asia including China and India. In Europe, Africa and the Middle East it will be available after 2015. This was put together under a United Nations agreement on Friday, Nov 16, 2007 by governments of over 160 countries.
The article makes a great case for Ultra High Frequency (UHF),
1. Support for high speed mobile broadband connections – encouraging the development of new internet-based services
2. UHF signals can penetrate buildings and travel long distance, reducing the cost of rolling out wireless services
This is certainly great news for all the WiMAX proponents (Google, Clearwire, Intel, Motorola, Samsung etc.). The adoption and improved penetration of wireless services would also be of great benefit for end users as it is believed in a more connected world – individuals benefit through the dissemination of information and enable trade and commerce. This will directly add up to the GDP of a country. Improved GDP will further improve the lives of people and will surely be desired virtuous cycle for people in the emerging markets.
The article makes a great case for Ultra High Frequency (UHF),
1. Support for high speed mobile broadband connections – encouraging the development of new internet-based services
2. UHF signals can penetrate buildings and travel long distance, reducing the cost of rolling out wireless services
This is certainly great news for all the WiMAX proponents (Google, Clearwire, Intel, Motorola, Samsung etc.). The adoption and improved penetration of wireless services would also be of great benefit for end users as it is believed in a more connected world – individuals benefit through the dissemination of information and enable trade and commerce. This will directly add up to the GDP of a country. Improved GDP will further improve the lives of people and will surely be desired virtuous cycle for people in the emerging markets.
Friday, November 16, 2007
Tipping in WiMAX favor
It appears that there are two things that tip the balance in WiMAX’s favor,
1. Internet’s open-standards approach - This will allow them to address a sizeable internet ready market instantly.
2. Popularity with Infrastructure vendors - Intel – Montevina chips (also called Centrino Duo) to get to the next billion users, Motorola offering WiMAX modems, PC Cards, and multimode phones. And am sure there are other vendors with similar intentions. It is the investment by the vendors that drives the next round of infrastructure upgrade.
The game changer for WiMAX could be Google since Sprint has its own problems and Clearwire may not have the deep pockets to go on their own. Google is using negotiating tactics to get to the wireless operators who do not want to open up their network (and making it difficult for Google to make money). By bidding for the wireless spectrum Google’s motivation would be either to
1. Increase the price of spectrum for the wireless providers. This would surely be an aggravation for the mobile operators, OR
2. If they win spectrum, then use that to provide WiMAX to promote the mobile Internet and other service plans they may have based on the Android platform. In this case, Google will monetize the mobile internet the way they did it with the wire-line internet.
Clearwire will need a partner and for a really win-win situation, this partner could be any of the Internet companies with deep pockets - Google is what comes to my mind.
1. Internet’s open-standards approach - This will allow them to address a sizeable internet ready market instantly.
2. Popularity with Infrastructure vendors - Intel – Montevina chips (also called Centrino Duo) to get to the next billion users, Motorola offering WiMAX modems, PC Cards, and multimode phones. And am sure there are other vendors with similar intentions. It is the investment by the vendors that drives the next round of infrastructure upgrade.
The game changer for WiMAX could be Google since Sprint has its own problems and Clearwire may not have the deep pockets to go on their own. Google is using negotiating tactics to get to the wireless operators who do not want to open up their network (and making it difficult for Google to make money). By bidding for the wireless spectrum Google’s motivation would be either to
1. Increase the price of spectrum for the wireless providers. This would surely be an aggravation for the mobile operators, OR
2. If they win spectrum, then use that to provide WiMAX to promote the mobile Internet and other service plans they may have based on the Android platform. In this case, Google will monetize the mobile internet the way they did it with the wire-line internet.
Clearwire will need a partner and for a really win-win situation, this partner could be any of the Internet companies with deep pockets - Google is what comes to my mind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
