Ben
23rd September 2011, 04:44 PM
This got me really fired up... http://www.mobilebusinessbriefing.com/articles/operators-must-be-key-players-in-mobile-cloud/17409/
Choice quotes are:
"A potential option could be a revenue sharing model in which operators get a slice of income from the services they provide access to. This could fund network upgrades while operators would be motivated by the additional income."
"One solution could be for operators and content providers to work together to address 3G not-spots around the world. As for urban areas, content providers could contribute to investment to provide 3G or Wi-Fi coverage on underground rail lines."
"If cloud service providers fail to work with operators and provide them with motivation to invest and innovate, there is little hope of the huge growth in mobile cloud services taking place."
1. How about MNOs build their own damn networks and figure out their own pricing models. If consumers want high speed data in order to consume content then the networks can assume that consumers will pay a fair price for it.
2. Content providers should be tackling the world's not-spots? I've heard it all now. Should Channel 4 be responsible for providing mobile phone coverage to my house just because I really fancy watching Scrubs on my mobile? Should the Financial Times invest in coverage of the highspeed line to St Pancras so I can watch their videos on the train?
3. How about if the MNOs don't build the networks that consumers are demanding (and governments, by the way, should be mandating in exchange for the immensely valuable frequencies that are allocated) then other technologies or new entrants come along and devastate them? We must stop tolerating this unbearable inertia exhibited by our mobile networks and instead create a competitive environment that favours those who invest most in their infrastructure.
Leave content providers well out of this. Governments could certainly get involved, though. It doesn't need to be hands-on either. What I want is this: Tough licence requirements as in the German LTE auctions to ensure better geographic coverage; tax breaks for licence holders on capital expenditure for LTE networks and backhaul; enforced penalties for not meeting coverage requirements and the ultimate reallocation of unused spectrum.
Choice quotes are:
"A potential option could be a revenue sharing model in which operators get a slice of income from the services they provide access to. This could fund network upgrades while operators would be motivated by the additional income."
"One solution could be for operators and content providers to work together to address 3G not-spots around the world. As for urban areas, content providers could contribute to investment to provide 3G or Wi-Fi coverage on underground rail lines."
"If cloud service providers fail to work with operators and provide them with motivation to invest and innovate, there is little hope of the huge growth in mobile cloud services taking place."
1. How about MNOs build their own damn networks and figure out their own pricing models. If consumers want high speed data in order to consume content then the networks can assume that consumers will pay a fair price for it.
2. Content providers should be tackling the world's not-spots? I've heard it all now. Should Channel 4 be responsible for providing mobile phone coverage to my house just because I really fancy watching Scrubs on my mobile? Should the Financial Times invest in coverage of the highspeed line to St Pancras so I can watch their videos on the train?
3. How about if the MNOs don't build the networks that consumers are demanding (and governments, by the way, should be mandating in exchange for the immensely valuable frequencies that are allocated) then other technologies or new entrants come along and devastate them? We must stop tolerating this unbearable inertia exhibited by our mobile networks and instead create a competitive environment that favours those who invest most in their infrastructure.
Leave content providers well out of this. Governments could certainly get involved, though. It doesn't need to be hands-on either. What I want is this: Tough licence requirements as in the German LTE auctions to ensure better geographic coverage; tax breaks for licence holders on capital expenditure for LTE networks and backhaul; enforced penalties for not meeting coverage requirements and the ultimate reallocation of unused spectrum.