> >So here's what I really don't get - that 3G is justified in terms of
> > >needing extra bandwidth for more calls, despite the fact that mobile
> > >penetration is nearer saturation in Europe than in Japan? That's true
> > >if and only if 3G cannibalizes landline operations, though, right? Is
> > >this good or bad for incumbents saddled heavily with landline
> > >operations? (Bad, I suspect, at least to the extent that the landline
> > >infrastructure hasn't been fully paid for yet. If so, are they being
> > >compensated in any way?)
>
> In order: yes, yes, very bad, and no. Were the movie studios 'compensated'
> by TV networks? Did Ford compensate buggy-makers?
Bad analogy! (I copped that move from Nick :-) None of the above
industries had a history of being dominated by regulated monopolies.
By contrast, AT&T was able to get tax relief when unanticipated
changes in regulations rendered some of their long-term investments a
bad business proposition. Not compensating AT&T would have left
it at an unfair disadvantage. Surely, there are European incumbents
who have (and may still be) in the same position?
> 'Investment per customer' is impossible to extrapolate from -things like
> marketing and handset subsidy vary from business model to business model,
> not from technology to technology. Given the way DoCoMo chisels its
> customers...
I'd like to be able to offer an extrapolation-free prediction, of course,
but then, how well is anyone doing in that department?
> Again, the existing operators are far better situated than the new
entrants.
> For the leading operators, a lot of 3G spend is really substitutional -
> they're filling in capacity in their networks, which they would be doing
> anyway.
Is this another way of saying that incumbents have their bets hedged
on 3G investment because they don't really require 3G mobile phone
take-off? If so, this is sounding more and more like the Japanese
situation all the time....in which case, perhaps we can expect Japanese-
style delays and foot-dragging as well? And upstarts dying on the
vine?
I don't doubt that somebody will win. I'm just wondering if investors
will lose. In that case, it will have been "anti-hype" as in "antidote
to hype" rather than "unnecessary fear, uncertainty and doubt."
-m
leap@gol.com
[ Did you check the archives? http://www.appelsiini.net/keitai-l/ ]
Received on Fri May 25 13:17:47 2001