Wireless Networks & Platforms

Covers market sizing forecasts, best practice case studies and the insights to guide profitable mobile broadband growth.

March 4, 2013 21:04 swelshdegrimaldo

Verizon's Executive VP & CFO Fran Shammo today revealed a very interesting fact about the success of the Verizon Wireless 'Share Everything' multi-device shared data plans: the plans are working - that is, they are acheiving the goal of increasing the number of connected devices per account - but it has been a different device than expected that has driven success to date.

Move over 3G/4G tablet - the MiFi is king

MiFi®

Shammo noted that when launching the Share Everything plans in mid- 2012 (see Strategy Analytics report: Shared Data Plans from Verizon Wireless "Shifting the Way We Sell Wireless"), Verizon thought that they would drive tablet subscriptions. Tablets have seen some growth in net adds, but underperformed the carrier's expectation. What has proven to be more popular and contribute more to net adds is portable mobile hotspots (referred to as MiFi after the device category was started by Novatel Wireless)

 

The Strategy Analytics View

The success of the mobile hotspot at Verizon should not be a surprise for three main reasons:

  1. the installed base of WiFi-only tablets in the US is much larger than the base of 3G or 4G capable tablets, and for people with WiFi tablets a mobile hotspot provides a better user experience than tethering from a smartphone and it is cheaper than upgrading to an LTE tablet

  2. a mobile hotspot, while costing $20/month to add to a Share Everything plan compared to $10 to add a 4G tablet, can be used to connect up to 5 devices - so multiple tablets or laptops at once
  3. 4G LTE tablets still pack a hefty price on top of a WiFi-only tablet, so even today's purchasers of a tablet may lean away from 4G

Mobile Tablet Subscriptions Will Grow, but How Much? How can Operators Succeed?

Shared data plans and LTE networks with good performance and geographic coverage have eroded some of the barriers for mobile tablet subscriptions, but the cost differential to buy a tablet with embedded mobile connectivity plus the fact that most tablet use occurs where WiFi is often available means LTE tablets subscriptions still face an uphill battle. Growth outlook for tablets subscriptions is positive, but not overwhelmingly so. On the otherhand, the mobile hotspot market seems to have outperformed industry expectations - and should have continued growth even as embedded device subscriptions grow.

What do you think? We are working on an update to our tablet subscriptions...so keep watching this site for an update and let us know what your view is.

Susan Welsh de Grimaldo

Director, Global Wireless Practice 


August 11, 2010 16:08 suerudd
August 11th 2010 Doing the FCC’s job? On Monday August 9th. Verizon and Google issued a joint ‘suggested policy framework for lawmakers’ which reads as if it had come from the FCC, leading to an appropriate response from FCC commissioner Michael J. Copps that it is “time to reassert (FCC’s) authority”. The framework endorses all the good ‘motherhood’ concepts - openness for legal content, nondiscrimination that does not block or degrade the Internet, and transparency for both wireline and wireless. And it addresses some of the traffic and network management concerns raised in my blog of May 27th . But the sting is in the tail. The fifth and sixth points posted in the expository blog carve out two major markets. The ‘Carve Out’.Two key markets are carved out for minimal FCC oversight and therefore would not be subject to many ‘net neutrality’ and access requirements. First area is ‘differentiated online services’ that integrate application services with bandwidth – “healthcare monitoring, the smart grid’ etc. i.e. vertical markets where performance and security must be guaranteed. The proposed Verizon and Google approach allows each application to be ‘nailed-up’ to a specific network - rather than the Virtual Private Networks VPNs) with Service Level Agreements(SLAs) that operate today. This could lead to significant innovation – if only it were not based on exclusive bi-lateral transport and applications vendor deals. Haven’t we been here before? Didn’t this lead to the original Enhanced vs. Basic Services split of Computer Enquiry II.  And it recreates the comparatively unsuccessful ‘Walled Garden’ approach to applications. Second ‘carve out’ is wireless broadband which is claimed to have “unique technical and operational characteristics” and to be “more competitive and changing rapidly”, so “in recognition of the still-nascent nature of the wireless broadband marketplace” Verizon and Google recommend against applying any of the “wireline principles” except transparency. Broadband is Broadband is Broadband….Although wireless has historically had special treatment, mobile broadband is rapidly reaching parity with wireline speeds and quality. Over the next two years applications will operate seamlessly across wireless and wireline networks and many users may not even be aware which network they are on. To users Broadband is Broadband. All applications require an appropriate class of service at a competitive price. Special value added networks and mobile broadband cannot and should not be carved out from the general area of FCC broadband service oversight. Reactions and Furor on both sides of the ‘pond’ In the US, Wall Street Journal welcomes this ‘Traffic Plan’ and TIA notes that the “Verizon and Google…rightly addressed important issues such as the need for network management welcoming it as a “step in the right direction … and a possible solution to the uncertainty created by the Comcast decision.” But bloggers and the New York Times Opinion page started discussing carrier/search engine business alliances and making jokes about ‘VerGoogle’ that have now prompted a strong tweet denial from Google “We've not had any convos with VZN about paying for carriage of our traffic. We remain committed to an open internet.” Wired magazine however, describes the ‘differentiated online services network’ as a “left-field proposal to anticipate an entirely new information highway for ‘fast lanes’” and believes that “Google and Verizon have proposed creating a second, paid-access-only internet” “over an unspecified global network”. Could that be Verizon’s new Packet Optical Transport Platform (P-OTP) network? Across the pond reactions are still evolving. Financial Times subtly points out that “industry insiders on Capitol Hill and at the FCC are questioning Google’s motives for an apparent about-face on its position as one of the most powerful advocates of net neutrality.” Others reflect the stronger view that the EU is taking on Net neutrality.with one blogger warning that “An obvious outcome … is that when Google is dragged backwards through an antitrust investigation by the EC or DoJ, it will find no favours from civil society after this betrayal…..Good luck, Google - you thought China was sticky in terms of political support, you'll find that was a storm in a delicate teacup.”

June 4, 2010 20:06 David Kerr
sa photo dk

 

 

 

The inevitable movement to tiered pricing which started with Verizon Wireless acknowledging its plans to do so for LTE and has been accelerated with the much anticipated data plan announcement by AT&T this week.  So, what next?

    • Will we see significant priced based competition for mobile data among the top US operators?
    • Will we see significant movement in share of adds for AT&T as iPhone wannabees are tempted by a plan of only $15?
    • What impact will lower data plans for smartphones have on AT&T’s Quick Messaging Devices and Verizon Wireless equivalent?
    • How long before we see family data plans and shared usage across multiple devices?

The move by AT&T is a smart play to extend the smartphone momentum as the low hanging fruit of Apple aficionados, multimedia techies and style seekers willing to pay top dollar has been significantly penetrated.

There is no doubt that the iPhone remains the coolest device on the marketplace and the end to end user experience remains easily the best in class. So, reducing the TCO to attract the next 20% of customers to a paid data plans while educating customers about data usage levels and managing the traffic risk is very smart business in my opinion.

The lower price points will help AT&T maintain its current leading share of smartphone users and may be attractive to casual social networkers

  • Although the 50 photos allowance is not exactly generous! For casual messenger, and social network status checking and moderate email the new DataPlus plan is quite attractive overall and will likely attract a portion of customers who would otherwise opt for a Quick Messaging Device from AT&T or a competitive offering from Verizon Wireless.

I do expect to see some modest price competition among the big operators

  • with T-Mobile most likely to drive prices lower given their need for scale and to protect their predominantly youth centric customer base. but also expect an increasingly strong Verizon Wireless handset line up to compete strongly.

The impact on Quick Messaging Devices is in my opinion likely to be modest

  • as a traditional qwerty remains overwhelmingly the input of choice for heavy messengers in the US although there is definitely room for lowering the $10 mandatory data plan on featurephones

Family data plans and data plans which allow access across multiple devices are in the pipeline

  • but will probably not make an appearance until 2012+ as part of LTE offerings.

From a device vendor perspective, the move to lower priced iPhone plans is likely to put further pressure on vendors like LG who have yet to make a credible offer in this space as well as RIM who will find more competition in the consumer space.

The lower pricing on data plans will be music to the ears of ambitious new entrants like Huawei, ZTE who plan to bring mass market priced devices to the US & Europe. The lower TCO of smartphones as a result of downward pressure on service prices boost their addressable market.


March 30, 2010 00:03 David Kerr

sa photo dk Returning from CTIA in Las Vegas last week and with only 2 days before going off on vacation to Florida, I found myself reflecting that two of the most interesting meetings I had at the show were with mobile operators.

During CTIA I spent some time with AT&T emerging devices and T-Mobile M2M teams and was impressed with how both these units had managed to cut (or at least untie) the cord to the mother ship and avoid having innovation stifled by the Borg up at Corporate.

    • AT&T’s efforts to encourage a broad range of new applications and devices has definitely paid dividends with Mr. Lurie and his team adding an impressive 1M users in Q409 as a result of new device categories (mostly PND and EBR).
    • T-Mobile revealed a somewhat unheralded pedigree in M2M.

Partnership is the order of the day.

AT&T highlighted partner applications ranging from location enabled pet collars (Apisphere) to glow cap bottles to aid compliance with medication schedules (Vitality) to a very cool new tablet from Openpeak which is very different to the announced but apparently supply side challenged iPad.  Verizon Wireless and Sprint are of course also praying at the alter of open development but perhaps with less public presence.

When I think of enterprise mobility, AT&T and Verizon Wireless are top of mind but T-Mobile has in fact quietly been developing strong competency in the M2M space over the last 7-8 years.

T-Mobile offers four different SIM form factors to suit specific applications and have enjoyed triple digit growth for the last four years. T-Mobile US has quietly activated “hundreds” of different device types on its network with only a handful of devices being rejected or pulled due to network unfriendly characteristics. These devices span Telematics, Connected Energy, Telemedicine and several other applications.

So what is the common DNA of two very different operators that has allowed them to innovate and focus on new opportunities? Separation and operational autonomy to facilitate and open funnel approach to partners and speed of execution not normally associated with US carriers.

In the case of AT&T, the Emerging Devices group was chartered with developing a new space and freed from the legacy of voice & data consumer tariffs and prepaid/postpaid categories which just don’t cut it in the new connected reality where users will have multiple devices connected but used in very different ways. Mr. Lurie and his team have been able to streamline device certification and experiment across the spectrum of business models for new connected applications.

For T-Mobile, speed of certification (days not months) and the independence of being a self-contained unit (own engineers, own sales although linked to broader enterprise group) reporting to Finance & Strategy have allowed them to pursue their “easiest to do business with” approach to the M2M markets.

So, the takeaway? Innovation is alive and well at US operators but separation from the collective corporate mind is essential.

David Kerr