Category: telcos

Eating the Old Man’s lunch

Optus’ purchase of Eatability is ironic given Fairfax’s and Telstra’s failure with Citysearch.

Optus today announced the purchase of restaurant review site Eatability for $6 million.

Eatability is one of the services that’s destroyed the business models of both the phone directory business and that of newspapers.

Thirty years ago the Sydney Morning Herald launched its Good Living section and it became the way people went found where the good places were to eat.

Diners wanting to make a reservation at the hip eating places being reviewed in Good Living picked up the phone book.

Now they do neither, they go to web sites like Eatabilty or Yelp where they get reviews, contact details and everything else they need about the venue.

Which killed the advertising revenues that newspapers and phone directories depended upon.

The sad thing is both the newspapers and Yellow Pages could have owned this space. Citysearch was setup by Fairfax to address the online market and it was sold to Telstra when the newspaper chain struggled to make it work.

Citysearch today languishes neglected and nearly forgotten under the Sensis umbrella. Optus now owning Citysearch’s biggest local competitor which must bring a hollow laugh to those involved in the early days of Fairfax’s digital experiment.

Whether Eatability thrives under Optus remains to be seen, but it illustrates just how incumbent strengths like telephone directories are being eroded in the online world.

Old men have to start moving quickly if they don’t want upstarts eating their lunch.

Similar posts:

Little disruptions

A hotel’s change to iPhones is symptomatic of a change in technology.

Seasoned travellers learned long ago to treat the phone in their hotel room with caution as massive mark ups on call charges were a nice profit centre for most establishments.

With the arrival of the mobile phone, that revenue stream started to shrink and now one hotel in Vancouver has decided to replace their room phones with iPhones.

The Vancouver Opus hotel already supplies iPads in their rooms and the phones seem a natural extension to that, particularly given the chain has a “virtual concierge” app to guide guests.

Increasingly it’s only the older hotel chains that rely on excessive charges for things like telephone calls and Internet access. Those establishments rely on the more senior business traveller who are locked into a 1970s way of travelling.

When you stay at cheaper accommodation or newer boutique establishments, you find many of the expensive extras in the major chains are available cheaply or free. It’s a quandary of travel that a backpackers’ hostel will offer free Wi-Fi while the Sheraton up the road will charge $60 for an often inferior service.

The opportunity for the Sheratons, or the Hiltons, or the Four Seasons to charge those sort of rates is dying at the same rate their older clientele is retiring. Its a dead model.

Fortunately for those hotel chains, slamming guests with fat phone charges was just icing on a very rich cake, the loss of those revenues over the last two decades has been unfortunate but not fatal.

Other businesses though might not be so lucky – if your business relies on big, unreasonable markups then right now you are in a sector very ripe for disruption.

Similar posts:

Can Singapore become a global VC centre?

Singapore’s SingTel has an interesting way of dealing with competitive threats in a new market.

While Silicon Valley grabs most of the headlines about cool new businesses Singapore has been quietly building its own position in the global venture capital industry.

SingTel, the city state’s main telco operator, setup their own venture capital fund in 2010 with Singtel Innovate investing between S$100,000 and thirty million in various ventures.

The strategy from SingTel, which is closely aligned with Singapore’s government, is a very canny one – it allows the telco to move beyond being a “dumb pipe” just providing the phone network and fits into the nation state’s aim to be one of the centres in an increasingly Asian centred global finance system.

Yesterday SingTel launched a new Australian startup venture, the Optus Innov8 Seed fund which offers investments of up to A$250,000 in new start up businesses in return for equity or other stakes.

To identify the right investments SingTel are partnering with various start up groups and incubators in Sydney and Melbourne which is an interesting way to filter out unsuitable businesses.

Being funded by a telco, the Optus Innov8 program is naturally focused on the technologies that are going to help their business in an evolving market, the areas they are currently looking at are mobility solutions and digital convergence.

For Singtel and Optus this is a long term investment as equity stakes in new technologies will position the business well as their industry evolves and margins come under pressure in their core telco market.

To businesses looking for investments, the Innov8 program is a welcome addition to the funding landscape but Singtel also offer access to Asian markets with operations in India, Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Edgar Hardless, the CEO of SingTel Innov8 says “if you’re looking at going into the Indian market, we can help with introductions. Same with any of our other markets”.

Those introductions are useful but probably more important is the market intelligence that a partner like SingTel can bring on board. Understanding foreign business conditions is a great advantage for a foreign venture.

Asian markets can be tough, particularly for Australians who have been bought up with a US centric view of the world, but there are plenty of success stories. There is a successful group of entrepreneurs catering to the massive Indonesian market while companies like Dealize have moved their head office to Hong Kong.

Dealize was part of the Pollenizer incubator which is one of Innov8’s partners. At the launch, Phil Morle of Pollenizer pointed out that his business has set up a Singapore office to take advantage of the favorable investment conditions there.

While Innov8’s program is relatively small, it’s a much needed addition to Australia’s start up and venture capital scene and will help some new businesses in the app and mobile space.

Hopefully a few other corporations are looking at SingTel’s lead and thinking how they can tap into these new industries that may disrupt their own.

For Singapore, the city state has always had a number of advantages for the finance industry. By expending into new financing new sectors they are securing their own future in the 21st Century.

Similar posts:

Locking in the mobile market

Where are the next challenges for a phone industry that’s re-invented itself?

Mobile phone carrier Vodafone yesterday announced its purchase of Cable and Wireless, the company that rolled out the telegraph and phone networks that connected Britain’s empire.

Vodafone’s purchase is one of the final phases of the telco industry’s long term restructure where customers – both home and business users – have switched from land lines to mobile devices.

It’s long been acknowledged the profit in this market lies in devices and data usage which is why Cable and Wireless steadily declined over the past quarter century.

While there’s good money to be made in running undersea cables, which is what C & W did, the big profit is in delivering the data over the “last mile” to the customer.

For most customers, that last mile is the radius around a cellphone base station.

In Australia, this is best illustrated by Telstra’s undisguised glee at being able to offload their legacy copper network and backbone services to the government owned National Broadband Network allowing the former land line monopoly to focus on the mobile, data customer.

That data aspect is important too, one of the big changes in telecommunications over the last 25 years has been the rise of data.

A quarter century ago, voice communications were the main traffic of these networks. For companies like Cable and Wireless, data was a profitable sideline with services like Telex and ISDN being lucrative business niches.

Those rivers of gold distracted incumbent telcos in the early years of the public Internet as they tried to protect those expensive data plans and discouraged customers from using the net.

Over time, a new breed of Internet Service Providers rose who could supply those data services customers wanted.

Ironically, the same thing has happened with mobile phone manufacturers and the rise of the smartphone. Unlike the incumbent telcos, they haven’t adapted.

The incumbents phone manufacturers like Nokia and Motorola missed the rise of data communications and the mobile web as the iPhone and Android devices delivered the portable utility that “dumb phones” couldn’t deliver.

For Nokia, that miss appears fatal with the company rapidly running out of cash as their smartphone devices fail in the marketplace and margins collapse in the sectors they still dominate.

Research In Motion – the manufacturers of the Blackberry phone – are in the same trap. While their devices were data orientated they were more akin to corporate “feature phones” where they did one or two things well but couldn’t deliver the full features mobile phone users increasingly wanted.

The rise of the iPhone threatened Blackberry’s market and the arrival of the iPad with applications like Evernote killed most of the product’s demand.

Blackberry and Nokia’s decline while companies like Telstra and Vodafone survive – not to mention massive profits of companies like Mexico’s Telefonica – illustrate the value of government licenses to telcos and the breathing space it gives the management of these licensees.

We shouldn’t underestimate though the risks to all these businesses if they don’t adapt.

Similar posts:

Towards heterogeneous networks

Why HetNets are a great hope of the technology sectors

A new idea might cut the size of many phone bills, as usual though the devil is in the detail.

One of the hallmarks of the technology industry is the use of jargon; every few months a new buzzword or phrase comes along that captivates the industry and dominates the tech media.

A phrase that’s going to become common in the next few months is Heterogeneous Networks, the concept that mobile phones will be able to switch between phone systems and wireless networks without the user noticing.

Overnight the two major standards organisations agreed to work towards a common framework for phones to run these networks which also go by the name of HetNets.

For consumers the benefit with heterogeneous networks is they can reduce costs as phones automatically switch to cheaper, and usually faster, Wi-Fi hotspots.

The benefit for mobile phone network operators is that data demands are swamping their networks that were originally designed for voice communications. By offloading some of the load to private Wi-Fi systems they hope to manage their systems better.

Of course one should never underestimate a telco’s desire to make a buck and most telecommunications companies see the opportunity to make a few dollars out of offering the feature.

A major concern in putting together these systems is going to be security, using anybody’s Wi-Fi network requires a degree of trust and if a smart phone or tablet computer is accessing these without the owner knowing the risks are substantially higher.

These risks are even higher still if the banking and telco industries manage to convince people to use their mobile phones as an electronic wallet.

Seamlessly connecting to networks is one of the holy grails for mobile device manufacturers and software designers and it’s something that consumers will probably welcome when it becomes reliable.

For the moment we can expect to hear breathless articles about developments in the area and the promises from suppliers about the technology.

As usual the early adopters will leap in and suffer the usual disappointments and heartbreak that is life on the bleeding edge of technology.

Eventually though, long after the hype has settled down, these systems will become commonplace and expected by consumers.

Whether it makes more money for telcos though is another matter.

Similar posts:

The high stakes of Lumia

Microsoft and Nokia have a lot riding on their new mobile phone product

Yesterday Nokia and Microsoft gave a preview of their upcoming Lumia 710 and 800 phones for the Australian market. It’s make or break time for both companies in the mobile space.

The phone itself is quite nice – Windows Phone 7.5 runs quite fast with some nice features such as integrated messaging and coupled with good hardware it’s a nice experience. Those I know who use Windows Phones are quite happy with them (I’m an iPhone user myself).

Whether its enough to displace the iPhone and the dozens of Android based handsets on a market where both Nokia and Microsoft have missed opportunities remains to be seen.

The battle is going to be on a number of fronts – at the telco level, in the retail stores and, most importantly, with the perceptions of customers.

Probably the biggest barrier with consumers is the perceived lack of apps, to overcome this Nokia have bundled in their Maps and Drive applications while Microsoft include their Mixed Radio streaming features along with Microsoft Office and XBox integration.

As well the built in services, both parties are playing up their application partners with services like Pizza Hut, Fox Sports and cab service GoCatch. Although all of these are available on the other platforms.

While application matter, the real battle for Nokia and Microsoft is going to be in the retail stores where the challenge shouldn’t be underestimated.

Apple dominate the upper end of the smart phone market and Android is swamping the mid to low end. How Windows Phone devices fit remains to be seen.

In Australia, if they going to find salvation it will be at the tender hands of the telco companies.

The iPhone is constant source of irritation for the telcos as not only do Apple grab most of the profit, but they also “own” the customer.

On the other hand, Android devices are irritating customers who are bewildered by the range of choices and frustrated by inconsistent updates that can leave them stranded with an outdated system.

So the Windows Phone does have an opportunity in the marketplace although one suspects commissions and rebates will be the big driver in getting sales people at the retail coal face to recommend the Microsoft and Nokia alternatives.

Overall though, it’s good to see a viable alternative on the market. For both Microsoft and Nokia the stakes are high with the Lumia range – it could be Nokia’s last shot – so they have plenty of incentives to get the product right.

Microsoft has consistently missed the boat on mobile computing since Windows CE was launched in 1996 while Nokia were blind-sided by the launch of the iPhone in 2007 and have never really recovered.

To make things worse for Nokia, the market for basic mobile phones where they still dominate is under threat from cheap Android based devices. So even the low margin, high volume market isn’t safe.

For both, the Lumia range is critical. 2012 is going to be an interesting year in mobile.

Similar posts:

The business of baffling choices

Why do computer and phone companies offer so many plans and models?

In his Daring Fireball blog, John Gruber’s takes to task the view that Apple suffers through not having a wide product range.

John makes the valid point that Samsung seems to stealing market share from HTC rather than Apple but the whole theory of offering too many choices strikes to the heart of two industry’s business models.

Those two industries are the mobile telco business and the Windows personal computer sector.

In the PC world, the wide range of models has been both an advantage and a weakness; it’s allowed Dell and others to create custom machines to meet customer needs but also leaves consumers – both corporate and home buyers – confused and suspicious they many have been taken advantage of.

All too often customer were being had; frequently buyers found they’d bought an underpowered system stuffed with software that either was irrelevant to their needs or an upgrade was necessary to get the features they hoped for.

The entire PC industry was guilty of this and Microsoft were the most obvious – the confusing range of operating systems and associated software like the dozen version of Microsoft Office was deliberately designed to confuse customers and increase revenue.

For the PC industry, the “baffle the customer” model reached its zenith, or nadir, with Windows Vista where Microsoft deliberately put out an underspecced ‘Home’ edition designed to push sales up the value chain.

Compounding the problem, most of the manufacturers followed Microsoft’s lead and put out horribly underpowered systems in the hope that customers would upgrade with more memory, better graphics card and bigger, faster hard drives.

Most customers didn’t upgrade and as a result the Vista operating system – which was horrible anyway – enhanced its well deserved reputation for poor performance.

In the telco sector, consumer confusion lies at the heart of their profitable business model; a bewildering range of phones and plans often leaves the customer spending too much, either through an overpriced plan or paying punative charges for ‘excess’ use.

Having a hundred different types of Android phone adds to the confusion and, by restricting updates, they can cajole customers into ‘upgrading’ to a new phone and another restrictive plan every year or so. This is why you get phone calls from your mobile phone company offering a new handset deal 18 months into a two year plan.

Apple’s model has been different; in their computer range there has never been a wide choice, just a few configurations that meet certain price points. The same model has used for their phones and iPads.

For Apple, this means a predictable business model and a loyal customer base. They don’t have to compete on price and they don’t have to fight resellers and telcos who want to ‘own’ the customer. It’s one of the reasons mobile phone companies desperately want an alternative to the iPhone.

Companies using the baffling choices business model – Microsoft, HP, Dell and your local mobile telco – may well continue to do okay, but that business model is coming under challenge as new entrants are finding new niches.

For all of us as consumers all we can do is make the choices that are simple are reject complexity. Warren Buffett has always maintained he doesn’t invest in businesses he doesn’t understand, perhaps we should have the same philosophy with the purchases we make.

Similar posts: