5-10 years from now, when LTE is widespread, VoIP is standard, & 2G/3G networks are gone.
Excluding branding, combinations of mins/msgs/MBs, billing what will differentiate mobile carriers?
The short response: to the technical network engineer, technology will evolve, same concept. To the lay person, do they even care - all they want is a good connection, with no interest in how it happens so long as it's good service. Interesting times for the carriers - potentially a lot will depend on retaining customer loyalty/branding (e.g. cars).
Since telecoms in general is rapidly becoming a commodity, the biggest differences are likely to be found in: Pricing, Link quality (congestion, bandwidth, data integrity) and capabilities of the network and support systems (i.e. flexible billing models, combinations with alternative infrastructure like cable, wifi etc) in combination with a choice of privacy options for the end user. Content provisioning is likely going to be another angle to explore for the network owners. Whether this is going to happen or not, depends on i.e. ownership rights (DRM) of the content (and the preferred route to market for the content owners) and the (National) legal frameworks.
I realize there will be 5+G by then, but my interest is specifically about what will really be different between Carrier A's LTE tower network vs. Carrier B's LTE tower network? There will always be performance/coverage/capacity/roaming/reliability differences between the carriers! But that sounds like an infrastructure build issue, not an actual difference between towers. Right? The difference is not between the towers, the difference in the tower's contents, functions, intelligence, capacity and service. Service especially! Frankness and timely responses toward users,
I also think the difference will be set of services. Within 10 years only the second difference barrier could be financial support (like Russian or UAE magnates) so the infrastructure. Thus - in the billing area we could see different prices for quality (QoS, SLA, MTBF) and for contents. Customers will be able to change carriers upon access to specific (patented) services like refrigerator's online shopping or ubiquitous telemedicine. You see - in Europe it is still huge area to be focused. However, within 20 years ... that’s another story.
But let’s talk about hardware/infrastructure about the differences between carriers' LTE towers (excluding the actual frequencies used). Like I said, there will be 5+G technology. How good it is? Is yet to be known, ff we look only on LTE, what differentiates the Telco is more on the services & quality of the network + the attractive packages they may offer to the subscriber. Don't forget, the incoming roamers, currently, in most countries, the incoming roamer has difficulty in selecting good packages that meet their demand in term of duration stay & visit purpose. The trend now, mobility is not only within country it will cover major areas in the globe. Content becomes more of an enabler and differentiator between operators.
Everything being equal there is still the tower location and hence the coverage area it services. On a train ride from location A to B, I prefer the operator with his towers closer to the tracks because that leads to higher bandwidth and less dropped calls for me as a consumer. No matter what service I use or from whom, it impacts my perceived quality. I believe what will differentiate (not significantly though) Carrier A's LTE tower network vs. Carrier B's LTE tower network would be dependent on the carriers' Network Optimization factors (coverage, congestion, interference, etc.), and hence, solutions employed/deployed to mitigate the effects of such factors.
As 4G-LTE networks evolve to 4G-LTE-A & then 5G-LTE where carrier spectrum utilization becomes a challenge, I believe densely populated urban & suburban mobile network areas may have to employ/deploy additional evolving micro-cell cloud-based wireless technologies, like Artemis Network's Advanced DIDO "pCell" solutions integrated with LTE macro cell site towers, for provision of optimum carrier data bandwidth coverage and service utilization. Ericsson Radio Dot system does indeed redefine the small cell network solution integrated with the macro cell network. This solution is marketed more for indoor/in-building network optimization. However, my reference to the Artemis Networks "pCell" solution is really w.r.t. outdoor optimization network factors, where there are coverage (including "dead-spots") issues & data (bandwidth) capacity issues associated with "dense" building infrastructure in urban environments, as well as similar dense suburban infrastructure environments - The Artemis pCell solution could be integrated with existing macro cell site tower infrastructure. See the following URL for more info: http://www.gizmag.com/artemis-pcell-mobile-network/31191/
The same question applies to any legacy networks and how the networks have always evolved. All the carriers work with the same international standard but their services are more or less different in terms of qualities, product features/combinations, service provisioning methods, etc. LTE is specifically different as it uses All IP networks providing the voice and data through the common network infrastructure from the access network, offering HD voices, all controlled by PCRF, etc. The carriers can make all the differences in how to take advantage of all these uniqueness while eliciting and satisfying the customers potential needs based on them.
The OTT services will matter more and more but this does not mean - and it should not mean - that telecom companies become content providers themselves. Instead, they have to enable and facilitate OTT services and this will help them differentiate in the market, whilst enhancing the use of their networks at the levels allowed by the new technologies - and I refer to an increased usage of data, of course. For some useful ideas on the changes the industry must undertake see this study, prepared by Vision Mobile and Ericsson -http://www.visionmobile.com/product/telco-innovation-toolbox/. As content enablers, the telcos will need to offer ubiquous and reliable access.
I think that the rebellion against the high cost of higher education will compel individuals to start seeking distance education alternatives in larger numbers. Larger, big name Universities (the Harvard’s and the Yale’s) and Training outfits will start to feel the pinch when they begin to see some serious competition from the smaller brands - this may lead them to seek partnerships with Carriers for Cloud-based training delivery - this will become the next big thing, as Cloud, the Mobile Enterprise, and Analytics enter into a maturing phase and QoS by itself will no longer be the key differentiator. I can see online education starting to mature - why would I pay $50,000 to get an MS Degree in Data Science from Berkeley when I can get a data science certificate online from Cloudera, delivered from Johns Hopkins, for only $500 today? The demand from Asia and the rest of the world for this kind of training will increase. Carriers will smell the money when they see the numbers; it will only be a matter of time.
Thinking as a consumer and not a professional in the industry:
Content is always drivered but how to differentiate? Perhaps it is access to "special" content for premium customers. Meaning...before anyone else, unique, custom! Gaming has always done this and it works. Expand on it.
What about "intelligent" and secure bandwidth? If I'm a premium customer, don't make me have to think about my settings. Know which device I'm using and which service and allocate the bandwidth accordingly. Seamless, ubiquitous access wherever I am and the ability to perform the desired task at optimal performance. WiFi when appropriate and big bandwidth when needed. From my house...to my car...to my job.
CUSTOMER SERVICE. Stop repeating the adage "it costs more money to win a customer than it does to keep one" if you aren't going to do anything about it. If you make it easy for me to direct all my services through you, I will. Don't lock me. Don't exploit my "data"...use it to your advantage. You have all that information...use it accordingly and anticipate my needs. Reward me for staying with you.
Carriers who are able to stop scratching consumer's wallets and start scratching other's wallets like content providers, etc. will probably make a big difference. Cheaper service where the cost goes more to the content distributors who are able to offer cheap services because their wallets aren't truly touched by mobile operators yet.
Other big difference will probably be carriers able to do true mobile payments in more developed countries (we know mobile payments are used a lot in countries where banking is not so trustworthy). Do mobile payments in countries where banking is very powerful. Eliminate some middlemen between merchants and end users. Mobile payments and banking without dependencies on the big banks themselves.
Coverage and bandwidth, including indoor too, will win the TELCO that really understands who his customer is, where he is at a given time and how much bandwidth is enough for him to realize that he is happy with the carrier chosen.
Imagine 6 friends going to a nightclub and 2 of them are not able to connect with enough bandwidth to upload their selfies and or check updates and the other 4 can do that with a different carrier. Excluding costs, for sure there is a very high probability that those 2 will migrate to a different company in the next morning, and not only that, they will spread the coverage issue all around.
Also the TELCO with more desire to provide a decent service will always track network bottlenecks and sporadic events that could compromise quality and act in advance. Also some marketing of all this effort will be necessary, make your customer be proud of his carrier coverage.
I believe that the customer is least bothered with the underlying technology to deliver a service. What is important for the customer is the quality of experience that he gets. The customer's expectation for high quality of experience will certainly be high speed access with minimum downtime and ubiquitous coverage. These basics will still be valid after 5 to 10 years but expectations from customers will increase. Telecom operator will have to trade more services for the bandwidth capacity or network pipe provisioned for the customer. Internet bandwidth will be like a utility service or a basic need and not an option. The pace of technology advancement is really high and lot of exciting changes are expected. But certainly the differentiation for the carriers will be the quality of experience that they can deliver to the customers. But what is exciting to see is whether LTE will be able to address the bandwidth expectations 5 to 10 years from now even when 5+ G may come. In 10 years all these technologies may be widely deployed, but then it does not stop there. One can assume other emerging technologies will appear.
I often think about how LTE will effect carrier differentiation in future years. Elective services such as Cellular and Cable/Sat/ipTV are becoming more like an essential utility; think of electricity or the Internet. LTE and future advancements could become “The Grid” through roaming agreements, a shared resource among all carriers.
Running a network is not easy and I don’t take away from the innovation, planning and execution required delivering quality service; however, coverage, call quality and speed may take a back seat in the coming years.
As product pricing get capped/shrinks and North American markets get saturated, the North American carriers will continue to find new revenue streams. Digital wallet is one of the newer enhancements, with some Telcos obtaining bank status.
Aside from B2C and B2B, M2M is finally here. I can remember AT&T Wireless/McCaw looking at CDPD in the 1990s. At one time I reviewed the AT&T strategy against Ericsson's Mobitex. Aside from a coke machine calling home when it needed to be refilled, are current monitoring needs outside of a wireline footprint. e.g. pipeline integrity is a hot item with aging gas/oil pipelines and remote oil wells. So larger footprints of wireless versus wireline will be an upcoming arena (competing with satellite offerings like older VSAT).
However, consumer volumes versus corporate volumes are still larger. But commoditization will be a negative factor. Look at IBM selling its PC division to Lenova, when PCs became a commodity. IBM decided to focus on its consulting division due to higher margins. Many of the carriers now entertain consulting practices (e.g. Verizon) and infrastructure outsourcing (everybody and his brother). This includes the new CLOUD outsourcing wave.
Wireless BYOD will become more prevalent. As such corporate usage will move into the consumer space. The mobile employee is becoming more prevalent, with longer work commutes as an alternative. IBM has used Mobility centres versus dedicated employee offices for over a decade. VPN has been around since the 1990s.
CRM initiatives have been an area of interest since the 1990s; with customer stickiness (loyalty/retention initiatives) finally being look at as a last resort. Churn predictors like Lightbridge's ChurnAlert has been around since the 1990s. So Telcos' customer satisfaction will be become serious. Monopolies will become more infrequent. Look at the old Cable companies introduction to competition. What a culture shock. Though the younger generations lack of product loyalty, will make price and convenience the main carrier differentiator.
LTE, 3G, 4G etc. are of interest to the carriers from network efficiencies driving profit. But unless they include service differentiators they are invisible to the consumer (subscriber count). Mr. Consumer doesn't care whether he has an older TDMA or CDMA handset versus GSM. Unless the handset provides more bragging rights, due to glitz and applications.
Another concern is the eventual decrease of importance of the North American market. Asia Pacific markets (India and China) have 10x the consumer base. Telecom manufacturers will note this.
My expectation is that speeds and feeds will become fixed price/commodity and LTE provides such high line speeds that the average punter would be able to differentiate in most circumstances, so, in the same way that fixed line operations moved up the stack to monetise the network, so will mobile providers.... I expect to see mobile TV delivered via mobile network to be common-place - so content (BT-Sport, ESPN, SkySports) wars will probably move to mobile.
From the tower's perspective my belief is that Equipment vendors have to align with newer research to satisfy customer expectation especially since VOIP has its own set of QOS issues.
From the End user's perspective wonder what kind of mobile devices we will look at and with kind of power back up we need to keep those running, all the while connected to SGGN+Backbone. Voice as a core business will die as we move towards NGN's and free voice service worldwide.
If you look at the current situation, mobile operators are essentially selling mobile handsets by bundling them with their packages (free mins/SMS/international calls) that is currently their only unique selling point. Hence they are competing with the other retail shops which are selling unlocked mobiles. Therefore, they are competing against other mobile operators by providing more attractive packages with mobile apps like whatsapp, and telegram, SMS revenue for mobile operators is virtually nil, their international voice revenue is declining steadily thanks to Viber, Tango and others. Their local voice revenue is stagnant, and eventually will decline thanks to Apple Facetime, Skype and others... they have to look at new ideas to generate revenue...
We are heading towards NEXT GENERATION infrastructure and services. So let’s end discussing if it it 4G or 5G or 5+G. By then, the telecom networks would be an ALL-IP packet switching network technology at the core with a host of services at the application layer. There would be no separate voice and data networks, in fact one unified network that offers voice, video or any application services.
So the basic difference would really be in the service levels, quality of service and such parameters. The services providers / operators would find a lot of stuff to differentiate by turning into application service providers, the more innovative services they provide, more value they offer. It’s basically all about creating perceptions and how to capitalize on them.
Off course, at telecom level they would need more bandwidth for speed and higher data rates, but at business strategy level, I believe, they would need to build perceptions that really differentiate Carrier 'A' from Carrier 'B'.
Perhaps the future of mobile will utilise shared network assets including mast/tower and antenna and possibly shared backhaul capacity. At this point I envisage that MNO's will then have an exclusive core service platform which offers differentiation depending on their target market. I envisage that there will be a common suite of content services and the challenge then will be to offer exclusive content to grow market share and/or revenues. I then expect this exclusive content to become a commodity that is traded between MNO's at a premium. The most successful operator will be the one that is capable of adapting the service portfolio to new requirements in a most flexible way. Content is one part of it, network services to utilize content the other part. So finally it will be a good blend of extended SDN and NFV.
I sold Industrial Tools at one time--- so how do you differentiate between "Hammer A" and Hammer B"? They can both look and feel the same--it is the Manufacturer, the "People", and the Support behind the product. Kind of like Telecommunications today. When they all look the same - look at the people behind the product!
Maybe there is no one truth for a moment. But, we are moving toward from tactical business to strategic business, where operators are competing more with content and bundle. OTT is a interesting case, what comes to neutrality of Internet, but how long if streaming eats up today over 80% of capacity and we are not even there yet.
It would make sense that operator own ecosystems comes first, what comes to owning a customer. Cloud neutral OTT is a rich add on to us users. I believe that those who invest frequently money to users linking networks do have a aggressive plan to earn back before others. One part is comes from access, another part comes from own offering content and attractive bundle.
A couple of years ago Thimoteus Hoettges, CEO of Telekom announced that he felt being treated unfair, as services like Googliath and Whatsapp can do their thing without being regulated, although they offer "telco-services". This may sound a bit like someone who desperately wishes to get on the endangered species list, but the example given does indeed make a bit of sense: Try calling a Viber number from Skype directly and you get the drift of his thinking.
Where now big money is earned through connectivity in future connectivity will just be me to component of a service. So if a carrier is not changing focus on services delivered over their network they will be degraded to a me to product provider and the only difference is the price. Ask yourself on what Apple earns their money. They earn the biggest amount of money over their services provided over their hardware and not the hardware it selves. Other companies are copying this. Next step is involving the data connection into this concept to take away the data connection costs and bandwidth limitations.
Post A Comment:
0 comments: