First thing is - thanks for your long reply.
Keitai-l@appelsiini.net writes:
>It means that NTT DoCoMo will not get the newest handsets exclusively
>first and for some time before competitors will also be able to offer
>them on their networks and thus it would improve competition.
Japanese companies are selling a service (i-mode, for example) - of which
the handset is just one component. That is why they basically do quite
well - they take responsibility for the user experience from start to
finish. I have just spent a fair few hours messing around with the latest
sha-mail handsets and the latest 504 handsets - and if Docomo gets the
latest and greatest handsets it is really not noticeable. They may be
"technically as handsets" superior, but the "look and feel" is no better -
and often worse. But the handset it just the thing that gets you to the
content. If that is not compelling, and integrated with the capabilities
of the handset, the handsets will not sell.
Part of Docomo`s PROBLEM of late is that they have focussed on getting the
latest and greatest technology out of the door without creating a
compelling service to make use of it. FOMA being a prime example of this.
So now they are playing catchup with an OK bit not compelling sha-mail
handset - and charge a minimum of 2.5 times what J-phone charge to send a
sha-mail. J-Phone concentrates on the basics (add on flash, for example)
and does it well and cheaply. J-Phone have sha-mail, AU have voice quality
- but what does Docomo have that is compelling? 3D polygon capable
handsets? Possibly - but that is not exactly setting the world on fire yet.
So let's talk about competition. Competition is good if it benefits the
consumer. I bit of competition is excellent - too much, badly handled,
often leads to an inferior experience for the consumer. The UK rail
network privatisation with its splintering of routes and carriers springs
to mind here...
>Although, admittedly the deeper problem is PDC itself, because it is
>owned by NTT DoCoMo. Manufacturers have to dance to DoCoMo's music or
>risk being shut out.
YUP - and as long as that means the user has a better experience of the
SERVICE - long may it continue. You have an address at mac.com. You may
well believe (if not, many other people do) that the mac user experience
is more compelling - and you can work more quickly, on a mac - even though
other "handsets" (intel boxes) may have faster CPU's. (Let's not get into
powerpc and intel comparisons - the point is that even if intel chips were
always faster, many people would still use a mac because they WORK faster
on a mac.) I do not give a tinker's curse about whose tune the
manufacturers are dancing to - but I DO want a decent SERVICE - and that
is Docomo's, J-Phone, AU's responsibility.
>
>
>The example of GSM shows that a standard which is equally accessible to
>all market participants - service providers and manufacturers alike -
>benefits the entire industry and end-users through economies of scale
>and competition.
Er - is this a theoretical statement about what SHOULD happen according to
economic theory - are a statement of what HAS happened - a description of
the market? I have heard these kind of statements before - oh - about 12
years ago - when Mad Maggie and her minions were playing fast and loose
with British Rail. As CJS pointed out - if what you say is true, how come
we have better handsets in Japan a more compelling and more useful user
experience?
>If the Japanese government had been as wise as the Korean government in
>the mid 90s when they not only allowed but encouraged the predecessors
>of KDDI to migrate from PDC to CDMA, they would have forced the entire
>industry to migrate to CDMA and to do so in a manner that it was
>compatible with CDMA as it is used anywhere else.
As a consumer, I do not care. It would be nice to have good voice quality
- but I can buy a CDMA phone if that is what I crave (from AU).
>While DoCoMo was still in government hands and while the industry was
>still expanding, this would have been achieveable and it would have been
>a blessing for the economy.
A blessing for the economy? The Japanese economy needs far more than a
blessing - it needs an outright miracle. (There is an old joke "What is
the secret of the Japanese Economic Miracle?" Answer "There is no secret -
it was a genuine bloody miracle. Praise the Lord! (and beg Him for
another...)") . I am not sure the economic effect would have been all that
great - and once again - as a consumer - I do not care.
>
>es, there would be a strong presence of non-Japanese vendors in the
>Japanese handset market, but the Japanese vendors would have become more
>competitive and probably be on par with Korean vendors in the
>international CDMA handset market.
>
We seem to have gone from discussing SIM cards to whether or not there
would be benefits from using CDMA. I go back to the main point - as a
consumer I DO care about the quality of service I am being offered - I do
NOT care about how many handset makers there are if the material I can see
with those phones is not compelling. It is the old "Which is best - two
channels of BBC broadcasting or 9876 American cable TV shopping
channels.?" Real choice is the former, not the latter.
So - if there was the kind of competition that you envisage - would the
user experience and content on Japanese keitai be as compelling? I think
the answer is no.
1) Such a competitive model would imply low or no handset subsidies. That
is a BAD THING. It is bad because it implies lower handset churn. High
handset churn means getting new tech into users hands quite quickly. not
just AVAILABLE to users, but actually in the hands of a decent number of
them. It also gets new users onto the service quickly - with a 1 yen phone
of necessary.
So in the long run it costs more - but as a consumer I would rather "pay
as I go along". Whether that is economically rational or not is moot - I
place an economic value on being able to do so, and the economists can go
jump.
2) Docomo, J-Phone etc can currently pretty much guarantee that any
phone "for" their service meets a certain quality standard. Since they run
the gateways, they can also ensure that J-Phones can reasonably well read
Docomo websites, etc etc. They can guarantee the user experience. As a
user, I am prepared to "pay" for that. It "just works" and lets me do
"useful stuff" with pretty hitech handsets and a low bar to entry.
>es, DoCoMo's lead would be significantly smaller or they might even
>have lost the number one spot, but Japanese consumers would be better
>off.
>
You keep making these bald statements. HOW would the be better off? They
would be paying less for a crappier service? That is not "better off".
>
>You may think just because DoCoMo is being seen as a phenomenon
>overseas, that would automatically qualify everything and anything about
>the Japanese mobile environment to be perfect. B
I am a bad tempered, skeptical Englishman. I regard nothing as perfect -
starting with the works of Lord God Almighty and working down. The
Japanese mobile environment is less crappy than the European environment
from the consumers point of view. Do we pay more for what we have ? -
probably - but then we HAVE more.
>
>owever, the point is that under protectionism advantages may seem to
>outweigh disadvantages in the short, but in the long term it is
>competitive markets that keep industries thriving.
>
Well - that is true enough in itself - but 1) in the long term we are all
dead and 2) we can slowly move to a competitive model when the term starts
to become longish. We do not need to do it from the start.
regards nick
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Fri Jun 14 12:15:51 2002