AT&T Don’t Text While Driving Documentary
Tag Archives: AT&T
Net Neutrality
Net Neutrality has been in the news lately thanks to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski recently adding to 2 principles to the existing 4. Net Neutrality, in general, is the idea that all data traveling over the internet should be treated equal. Opponents, including major internet providers AT&T and Verizon, say allowing some bandwidth hogging application, such as YouTube, degrade the experience for everyone else. Proponents say Net Neutrality is necessary for innovation.
The big question is Why Should We Care? The reason is innovation. If the Net were restricted services such as YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and many more useful items may never have gotten off the ground. I think the best compromise is to allow the carriers to do as they please with their networks as long as they:
- Provide 100% full disclosure of what they are doing
- Extremely stiff penalties are in place for anything less than full disclosure
- The disclosures need to be posted on their website with a link as large as the main services they offer
- The disclosure needs be written in plain English
Analog & High Definition & Minutes
This week there were 3 significant technological developments. The first was the disconnection of most analog cellular signals. Basically the original cell phone has died. AT&T and Verizon, the big, and essentially only, two in the mobile game turned theirs off. Number 3, Sprint, never had an analog network.
The second comes from Japan. Toshiba has announced the end of the HD DVD and declared Sony’s Blu-Ray the winner. Hopefully this will allow Sony to stop focusing on the competition with Toshiba and start advancing the format.
The third is back in the mobile arena. AT&T, Verizon, and T-mobile, have announced unlimited minute plans for roughly $100. Sprint is expected to join the party, but some beleive their plan will be between $60-75 dollars. Hopefully this turns into a larger developement than I’m giving it credit for.
February 1st
I’ve been gone for a while, but I have a new philosophy on posting. My plan now is to post more often, but make them a lot shorter, occasionally adding one of my typical multi-paragraph posts. That’s almost it for now, but I also want to comment on Microsoft’s unsolicited bid for Yahoo. Why? I don’t see much advantage in combining two companies that are losing to Google. Microsoft needs to continue its path of smaller acquisitions that pick at Google one piece at a time while Yahoo would be better in the hands of a company that doesn’t currently have a significant online presence; think IBM or AT&T.
By the way, just so everyone knows, I haven’t stopped writing during my break, I just haven’t posted. I have over a dozen drafts that haven’t found there way to the website, but may slowly appear post dated.
Google Wireless
There have been recent articles on eWeek and other sites about the possibility of Google buying Sprint. Although I have said for the past few months that this is something Google should at least look in to, if not do, I’m no longer sure I think its a good idea. Sprint has 2 assets Google should want, Wireless Spectrum and a Tier 1 Network. Most articles and rumor sites I have read have focused on the Wireless portion of the deal because Google has already announced plans to enter the upcoming 700 Mhz auction, which is considered prime for wireless internet , and Wireless Spectrum would allow Google to ensure people can get online everywhere, therefore search from anywhere. Buying Sprint and renewing the plan to build a WiMax network is probably the quickest way to make Google’s dream of everyone having internet access from anywhere come true.
I think the Network is a key, often overlooked, part of a potential deal because of Net Neutrality. If Google owned one of the 9 Tier 1s and promised to be Net Neutral, it may force the other Tier 1s to remain/become Net Neutral in order to stay competitive. Google has openly campaigned for Net Neutrality, including publishing an Open Letter from CEO Eric Schmidt. Buying Sprint would allow Google to put its money where its mouth is, so to speak. Google has bought an undisclosed amount of Dark Fiber, but probably not enough to impact Net Neutrality. Buying Sprint would probably get them there.
There are a few problems with the potential deal. First Sprint’s market cap is roughly $45 Billion. That is a hefty price tag for a struggling company. Second, Sprint uses CDMA and IDEN on their Sprint and Nextel networks, respectively, instead of GSM, which I believe Google would prefer. In addition, Sprint has baggage, such as long distance and a terrible customer service reputation, Google probably doesn’t want to deal with. Google could go for Clearwire, with market cap of roughly $2.5 Billion, instead. Google would save enough money by purchasing Clearwire instead of Sprint, to build the wireless network.
What about the Tier 1 Network I thought was so important to ensuring Net Neutrality? Well, there are other options. AT&T (market cap of $240 Billion), Verizon ($127 Billion), and AOL ($63 Billion) are likely out of the acquisition question because of their price and the number of assets they have that Google wouldn’t want and NTT ($32 Billion) and TeliaSonera ($44 Billion) are likely out of the question because of their ties to foreign governments. Qwest ($12 Billion) is a possibility, but unlikely because there are 3 better options; Level 3 ($5 Billion), Savvis ($2 Billion), and Global Crossing ($1 Billion). Google could buy Clearwire, Level 3, Savvis, and Global Crossing for less than $15 Billion, leaving twice that amount to complete the wireless network before reaching Sprint’s price tag. This plan would allow Google to acquire wireless expertise, in the form of Clearwire, without the baggage of Sprint. It would also allow Google to impact the Net Neutrality debate by becoming one of the largest data carriers in the World.
Andre