Slashdot Mirror
Why Google Doesn't Need To Win the Bid To Win In January
explosivejared writes "TheStreet discusses Google's possible strategy options in the bid for the 700 mhz spectrum. The end goal of getting the government to put an open access stipulation on the spectrum, Google's end goal, is almost a given — in the author's opinion. At this point, he says, Google hardly even needs to win to 'win.' From the article: 'Rather than actually winning the auction, Google's participation is likely intended to secure what it sees as the real reward: ensuring that whoever ends up owning the spectrum allows the open access of applications and devices. Indeed, as long as this goal is met, it's hard to see why Google would want to take on the costly task of building and running its own network. But given how much is at stake when it comes to the mobile market, Google's vigilance is shrewd, even if it never planned to own the spectrum.'"
Google has become self aware. In one month it will initiate a massive nuclear attack on its enemy?
liqbase
It probably doesn't help that assertion that I have two articles on the home page that highlight potential success for the company, but I still realize that they are a company designed to make a profit.
:(
As for the article, I agree that is one of the shrewdest business moves I've seen (that wasn't underhanded, repressive, bookcooking, etc.). They're getting essentially who will be their competition with Android to fund the infrastructure on which Android will make money. All the while the consumer is starting to benefit like crazy from the atmosphere of competition.
It's times like these that almost make you want see some good in the world. Yeah, but then another wiki scandal or RIAA atrocity will pop up on the firehose to dampen then mood.
I got a catholic block.
Thats what I love about this whole situation - google has MASSIVE resources to throw at this. If they do get outbid, whoever does so will have to do it with a massive pricetag. Also, google doesn't have the constraints of having to maintain a current telecom network, which all of the other bidders do. The other bidders can't go "all in" because they have too damn much to lose, where google really does not. I believe, just like most of the other posters, that AT&T, Verizon, and the rest all are realizing that they're going to lose the bidding war - hence the sudden 'open network' craze.
I am inclined to believe that you are right. But there is another clear winner here. Google supports the F/OSS paradigm in ways that are not overtly apparent. By mild manipulation of the marketplace for the benefit of the Google platform, they have begun the destruction of all that came before. There is NO carrier or phone manufacturer that is currently prepared to deal with F/OSS competitors. I repeat; There is NO carrier or phone manufacturer that is prepared to compete with F/OSS competitors. This will have far reaching implications across the telecommunications industry.
.... advertising based services.
1 - Open handsets means no more lock-in (revenue loss for carriers) and handsets become cheaper.
2 - No lock-in reduces wireless carriers to common carrier status, effectively, allowing for wider provision of wireless data services... AND
3 - Carriers will be looking to replace lost revenues as airtime is further comoditized. This may come as a form of wireless broadband access, driving carriers further into the digital networks services arena. Read this as getting the new Razor 3000ip Yahoo! service from Verizon, or perhaps the NoDRM Earthlink Freedom plan with a Nokia handset from AT&T. Or even the 12Gauge ESPN Sports plan from Sprint, with free ESPN handset.
4 - Enhanced choices will instigate further A&M in telecommunications as they fight to get customers on the quadracular or pentacular service plans. The entire thing based on selling ad clients air time on your cell, home phone, television, radio, home entertainment, fridge, car entertainment, and perhaps even your dogs remote finger collar service. While Verizon has a head start with tons of bandwidth to the house to provision all those services, the others are soon to follow. For more information on this, find stories in the way back machine about dark fiber being bought up.
5 - If legislation in North America allows joe bloggs to build and sell handsets, the number of wireless applications could possibly explode, but that greatly depends on UI and functionality. Not something that current clamshell handsets are very good at.
Either way, it looks like the real winner will be the consumer... Thank you Google
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
I believe net neutrality may be a key factor in Google's willingness to become a network provider. If the traditional telcos start putzing with the packets, placing artificial barriers on the flow of data, then the only way to break the barriers is to either enact legislation, or by-pass the networks having the barriers.
If memory serves me, wasn't Google buying up gobs and gobs of dark fiber networks? If this is the case, then couldn't they light the fiber, using it as a backbone, and use the wireless spectrum for the endpoints - creating a massive Googlenet?
Now, add the much talked about gPhone and Google's demonstrated desire to offer free WiFi and you have a very enticing way to attract customers - which is really what Google wants...more eyes on more advertisements.
Either way, it is a win-win-win situation for Google.
People forget the advantage of the 700mhz spectrum. It provides close to a 30 mile range, whereas cellular towers in the other parts of the spectrum top out at a few miles. If Google takes all their dark fiber, light it up and build towers, or better yet hook into the current TV transmision towers the capital expense will be 1/4 what it takes to build out a cellular network, simply because they will need 1/4 the towers. Set a price of $30 a month for unlimited access (VOIP and data) and they will absolutely kill verizion, att, comcast and every other internet and phone provider. Not only that but they would probably make a fortune on the investment. All these articles about Google NOT bidding is simply stock analysts trying to convince the market that Google won't enter the market and that the incumbent providers are still a good investment.
Frankly I think they will bid, and it will be a very serious bid meant on winning. And after they win and build the network out no other provider will be able to go against network neutrality as if they do Google will run ads about switching to Google Internet for unrestricted internet. Not only that but they will likely drive the price of mobile internet down such that everyone can afford it, something they VERY much want (think google maps and search for local businesses, competition against the local yellow pages). Think about cheap unlimited mobile Internet that just happens to be google based and serves advertisements based on where you are. Imagine driving by a store and having your phone pop up and advertisement (to that store) for a product you were searching for on the Internet earlier along with a map of the store to show you where it is in the store and how much it costs.
I think it would be crazy for them NOT to make a serious bid and win.