Hello Ma Google - The worst news ever for cell-phone carriers(portfolio.com)
portfolio.com
Hello Ma Google - The worst news ever for cell-phone carriers
http://www.portfolio.com/views/columns/2007/09/17/Cellphone-Carrier-Breakups/
13 comments
I don't know if I'm the only one, but I'm getting increasingly worried that Google will become too big and too powerful. Google already knows more about me than I'm comfortable with, but damn it if gmail isn't great. I would really prefer to keep them as a content provider and not a service provider. Sure they're friendly now, but as they grow they lose their initial purpose and guiding principles. Remember "Don't be evil"? Where has that rule gone, now that they help the Chinese government censor information?
It is understandable why you think that way, given Google's aggressive ventures into other areas such as mobile services. But I personally think they will bring good things for both users and startups. The reason being that Google is committed 100% to openness. I think their interest in the 700Mhz spectrum is an example of this commitment. The fact that they are willing to spend the money to purchase the spectrum and then build out an open access network for others to freely use (including potential competitors) makes me think very highly of them and their efforts.
As far as the Chinese censorship issue, that is a tricky situation. China is a gold mine of growth potential, which Google obviously has interests in tapping. They cannot risk losing access to that market over censorship issues. In a business sense, censorship seems justified to me given the situation. China is just that important.
Apple is the company who I worry will become too big and powerful. The difference between them and Google is that they are decidedly NOT in favor of open access. They are exactly the opposite from google, building walled gardens around their stuff to prevent competitors from sharing in their glory. The iPhone is a perfect example. As someone interested in wireless startups, I lose sleep over the Apple and their iPhone. Its hard to compete with Apple when they dont let anyone else in on that platform. I think there are a few things startups could do better than Apple on the iPhone, but as it stands right now this is a nut that just cant be cracked.
As far as the Chinese censorship issue, that is a tricky situation. China is a gold mine of growth potential, which Google obviously has interests in tapping. They cannot risk losing access to that market over censorship issues. In a business sense, censorship seems justified to me given the situation. China is just that important.
Apple is the company who I worry will become too big and powerful. The difference between them and Google is that they are decidedly NOT in favor of open access. They are exactly the opposite from google, building walled gardens around their stuff to prevent competitors from sharing in their glory. The iPhone is a perfect example. As someone interested in wireless startups, I lose sleep over the Apple and their iPhone. Its hard to compete with Apple when they dont let anyone else in on that platform. I think there are a few things startups could do better than Apple on the iPhone, but as it stands right now this is a nut that just cant be cracked.
Instead of saying something cynical about the fact that you see business models as trumping human rights, I'll just link you to a more-balanced-than-I-can-be post about the sort of caution we should have regarding Google:
http://rconversation.blogs.com/rconversation/2006/01/google_...
As far as Apple is concerned, they'll crack their own nuts. Biology 101 tells us that if you refuse to let anyone get near your nuts, you can't reproduce.
http://rconversation.blogs.com/rconversation/2006/01/google_...
As far as Apple is concerned, they'll crack their own nuts. Biology 101 tells us that if you refuse to let anyone get near your nuts, you can't reproduce.
Thanks for the link!
"As Greg Butz, a senior vice president at cable operator Comcast..."
That company has multiple kinds of vice presidents? Jesus christ. Try getting a straight, plain English answer out of them about the difference between a senior VP and non-senior VP.
That company has multiple kinds of vice presidents? Jesus christ. Try getting a straight, plain English answer out of them about the difference between a senior VP and non-senior VP.
I really hope Google ends up controlling the old TV frequencies, just because it will be so much more interesting than the alternative.
Same here; I, for one, welcome our new Googly overlords. I bet there are some interesting startup ideas in this space, even (relatively) late in the game...
I do wonder about the author's offhand assertion that Google are the "odds-on favorite" to win the auction. Does anyone know if there's any evidence to back this up? Last I checked, Google were only willing to conditionally meet the opening auction price if their conditions were met, let alone whatever they'd need to pay to win the auction.
I do wonder about the author's offhand assertion that Google are the "odds-on favorite" to win the auction. Does anyone know if there's any evidence to back this up? Last I checked, Google were only willing to conditionally meet the opening auction price if their conditions were met, let alone whatever they'd need to pay to win the auction.
Google initially claimed they would only bid if all of the open access standards they proposed were accepted by the FCC. Not all of the rules were accepted, and the ones that were are now being challenged in court by the Telcos. It is rumored that FCC chairman Kevin Martin is now working on a proposal to at least partially reverse some of the open standards that were ratified, in response to the Telco's uproar. It is not looking good... Despite this, Google has publically stated that they will "most likely" still bid in the auction.
I have read of at least one analyst who believes that the Telcos are more likely to win the auction than Google. Possibly out right by a single carrier or through collusion between multiple. As much cash as Google has, It could be difficult for them to justify spending >$10B on a wireless spectrum when they are still perceived as an internet search company. Investors may not be very happy about that. For the Telcos, this is their core business and the expense is highly justified. While this is all speculation at this point, the consensus so far does not paint a very pretty picture for open access unfortunately. We will just have to wait a few more months and see how things play out.
I have read of at least one analyst who believes that the Telcos are more likely to win the auction than Google. Possibly out right by a single carrier or through collusion between multiple. As much cash as Google has, It could be difficult for them to justify spending >$10B on a wireless spectrum when they are still perceived as an internet search company. Investors may not be very happy about that. For the Telcos, this is their core business and the expense is highly justified. While this is all speculation at this point, the consensus so far does not paint a very pretty picture for open access unfortunately. We will just have to wait a few more months and see how things play out.
Here's the contrarian (and in my opinion the more realistic) view:
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20070727_0025...
Google is in very a dangerous position right now... taking on the telcoms is different from taking on MS
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20070727_0025...
Google is in very a dangerous position right now... taking on the telcoms is different from taking on MS
I'm somewhat tempted to load up on underwater put options on Verizon.
Agreed. Going short on the wireless Telcos is starting to sound like a good idea :)
Will there be Google Phone along with their spectrum(if they win)?
There will be a Google phone regardless of the outcome of the wireless auction. Most reports suggest it is just a few months away from being unveiled.