Mobile Diner® where wireless and washington meet….

A few weeks ago I discussed GooG’s growing dominance in the mobile web and why they will bid in the upcoming 700 MHz auction. Most folks seem to agree that they will participate in the auction.

On a related note, it looks like GooG is moving aggressively to reap the benefits of the mobile opportunity (whether they are successful in the auction or not successful). There are many reports on the internets that GooG has a prototype phone that – in theory – can compete with the iPhone. As I read over the rumored specs, it does look intriguing and it will be offered at a low cost.

Once again, the writing is on the wall. Consumers are interested in applications and devices not necessarily the service provider. The business model is rapidly changing and the incumbent carriers must evolve quickly or face the consequences.

What do YOU think? Would YOU buy a Gphone?

Bookmark to:

Congress returns to action next week and the FCC has a meeting scheduled for Tuesday, September 11.  Public safety orders are likely the focus of the FCC meeting with 800 MHz rebanding and E911 on the Chairman’s mind. 

With regard to E911, it is likely that Chairman Martin will put new location requirements on the carriers.  Specifically, he will seek to impose location requirements based at the PSAP (public safety answering point) level instead of the current statewide averaging standard.  Not great news for GSM carriers who struggled (and we struggled at AT&T Wireless) to find an accurate Phase II E911 solution a few years ago (CDMA carriers utilize a handset solution – GPS).

With regard to Congress, policymakers clearly have an appetite for wireless.  Since the beginning of Congress, House Subcommittee Chairman Markey has held many hearings on FCC oversight and wireless issues.  Chairman Markey has used these hearings to spread his worldview of the wireless industry.  In many instances, he has been able to paint an image of an industry that needs a major overhaul.  I have no doubt that more hearings are on the horizon.

Buckle up…  The fall should be interesting and we look forward to the conversation ahead… 

Bookmark to:

Interesting interview with Mavs owner Mark Cuban.

As diners know, I like Mark and his opinions on technology. It was great meeting him in May when he testified at a House Commerce Committee hearing… and he wore a suit!

Enjoy!

Update – Mark added some more insight on this topic on his blog last night…

Bookmark to:

When I think about astroturf, it reminds me of my college lacrosse days.  As a goalie, I enjoyed playing on turf.  I liked when a shooter would take a bounce shot because the ball would take a “true” bounce.  On a grass field, the bounce might not always be clean.  In any case, there is nothing “true” or authentic with astroturfing in PR. 

Astroturfing seems to be increasing these days.  Most recently, a PR firm retained by Comcast had an employee leaving tailored remarks on Big Ten Sports blogs.  The remarks were spurred by Comcast’s disagreement with the Big Ten on whether or not the Big Ten Network goes on the basic tier or sports tier.  In this instance, the “MSU Fan” remarks were from the PR firm.  Yes, the guy may have gone to Michigan State but disclose that you work on the issue!

Another famous astroturfing incident emanated from Edelman and the “Wal-Mart across America” campaign.  The whole thing was bogus and I think it just added to Wal-Mart’s public perception woes – not that they needed another one. 

Good News  – The acknowledgment by companies and PR firms that social media, social networks, and social marketing are important. 

Bad News - These firms are not being authentic and that strikes at the heart of what this medium is about. 

Overall, a client hires a firm to help them in this new world of communications.  For those agencies who are engaging in this behavior – in many instances, by folks who don’t participate themselves – STOP.  You are doing more harm to your company and the credibility of your firm.  You also are doing a disservice to your client.  It takes time to earn trust and credibility among consumers.  Once you lose your credibility with your audience, it takes ten times the effort to regain it.

What do YOU think?  Is Astroturfing on the rise?  Could a community developer help these firms?

Dish Disclosure – Our firm represents Comcast

Bookmark to:

Congress is gone and DC is very quiet. However, social media and social networking continue to grow in the Nation’s Capitol.

LinkedIn is clearly catching on in Washington. I routinely like to cross-reference my Outlook with my contacts on LinkedIn – and then invite a few folks to Linkedin. In any case, more and more of my DC contacts are appearing on LinkedIn.

On a related note, there has been a great deal of discussion about the potential collision of LinkedIn with Facebook. Ashley discussed her take on it last month. I plan on providing my own assessment – since I recently joined Facebook – in the coming weeks.

In any case, I heard about Mario Sundar’s blog from our favorite community developer – Chris Brogan. I’m not sure if Facebook has someone like Mario but he is doing a great job of reaching out to folks on building community and discussing LinkedIn in other venues (not just his blog)…. Check it out!

Bookmark to:

Where’s all the outrage?  What if someone had to make a 911 call during the last 24 hours and just relied on Skype?

Chairman Markey (D-MA) better look into this matter in September….

Bookmark to:

It is no secret that GooG is interested in the mobile market.  Most recently, they pushed their vision for how the 700 MHz spectrum auction should be managed.  As we know, they got some of what they wanted (open access and open devices) but not everything (wholesaling).  We also know that they have been in talks with other carriers and recently reached a deal with Sprint to provide services on it Wi-Max network. 

The question I get asked most frequently now that the auction and service rules have been adopted is: “do you think GooG is going to bid?”  The answer – YES.     

Google has to bid in the upcoming auction from both a policy and business perspective.  They were very aggressive in their advocacy and they have to make an effort to demonstrate to the policymakers and regulators that they are “true” to their word.  Some will argue that they didn’t get everything they wanted and shouldn’t feel forced to bid.  That isn’t going to cut it.  GooG tried to depress interest in the C block by advocating to policymakers that conditions on the licenses will bring a new competitor.  They didn’t get everything but they got enough.  Accordingly, as a winner in the auction, they can implement wholesaling.  In fact, one reason Chairman Martin gave in consideration of the automatic roaming order, was not adding broadband to the mandate because he believes that would undermine efforts of a new competitor offering broadband roaming as part of a business model. 

With regard to the business, extending GooG’s market dominance in search and web advertising to the mobile sector is a no-brainer.  With 62.5% of smartphone users (in April) visiting GooG, the mobile internet could start with a “G” too.  GooG has every incentive to dominate the mobile web market while it is still in the embryonic stages.

Whether or not GooG is successful in the 700 MHz auction – I just can’t answer.  However, I can say they have made a difference in wireless policy and stoked the creative juices in the carriers regardless of the outcome.

What do YOU think?  Will GooG bid in the auction?

Disclosure – I represent CTIA and the Wireless Broadband Coalition on spectrum policy.

Bookmark to:

Chris guest blogged on Geoff Livingston’s The Buzz Bin this morning, discussing how wireless carriers can better connect with consumers.  Check it out!

Bookmark to:

This summer has seen a welcome lull in the heated rhetoric of the net neutrality debate compared with last year. But now, the issue may begin percolating again, both on and off the hill, thanks to an incident that has absolutely nothing to do with net neutrality. In a recent Pearl Jam concert that was webcast live by AT&T, some anti-Bush statements were censored out. The band and some interest groups were upset by the censorship, understandably, and criticized AT&T (who claims that the censorship was accidental and was monitored by a third party vendor). But instead of criticizing the company on the grounds of creative infringement alone, the band and other groups are accusing AT&T of violating net neutrality, and are using the incident to promote the importance of the issue. This claim is not just inappropriate in that net neutrality does not deal with data prioritization based on content but rather on type, but also ironic in that quality video delivery – like the Pearl Jam webcast – is exactly the kind of content that companies seek to improve with data prioritization.

Even though this is not really an instance of anti-net neutrality practices, this incident reveals the vast disadvantage service providers have in this debate. It doesn’t take much to rally the troops on this issue, and as we saw last year, their messaging on the hill is pretty effective. The net neutrality debate is not over, and companies should have a messaging arsenal at the ready in preparation for a potential ramp-up. They have their work cut out for them.

Edited

Bookmark to:

As Congress passed new lobbying laws last week, I checked my junk email box.  As usual, it was full from the overwhelming solicitations I receive as an advocate for the wireless industry.  This is just email.  I’m not going to discuss the amount of faxes (our office has gone digital to save paper) or fundraising calls that come to our office on a weekly basis.

I’m still chewing on the new law – which has not been signed by President Bush.  However, I have a few thoughts on the general rules – not the earmarking provisions (our firm is not in the earmark business). 

Bundling rule – new law requires candidates to disclose lobbyists who raise $15,000 or more in a six-month period.  For many lobbyists in Washington, this will be akin to giving them a trophy.  Many folks will want to be listed all over the place because they will utilize it to demonstrate to clients (and prospective clients) that they have access. 

On a related note, every contribution an individual makes (over $250) is listed on candidate reports.  Does anyone look at these reports – no.  Will anyone look at candidate reports that show who is raising money for them – no (well, maybe other fundraisers so that they can get the bundler to raise money for them).  The only thing this rule is going to accomplish is giving folks an official “badge” to showcase around town.

One final point on this provision.  The Washington Post has a story highlighting “bundling” this morning.  I was not surprised but found it disturbing that senior level folks are asking their assistants – “those who can’t say no” to write large checks to candidates.  According to the story, this practice seems to be getting worse.

 I have the great privilege of talking about technology that the majority of Americans use everyday, in an industry that continues to evolve to meet growing consumer demand.  Accordingly, I enjoy discussing policies to ensure that we are enabling the carriers to deliver and unleash the full power of wireless broadband networks.  We can do better and that is why the mobile diner exists.  A place where folks who have a passion for wireless can mind-share and provide ideas on products and services.  It also is a place to let consumers know that the industry is working for them and I’m happy to let consumers know what issues I’m working on for the wireless industry (follow me on twitter). 

The problem with politics is the money and the addiction by many politicians to it.  Enacting rules to punish staffers for having a cheeseburger with a friend or someone they are dating is not fooling anyone.  Perhaps, the internet can become just as powerful as money and community developers for candidates can become more important than a fundraiser at Capital Grille.

What do you think?  Should we go to public financing of campaigns as intervention?

Dish Disclosure – I represent CTIA, The Wireless Broadband Coalition and Comcast in Washington D.C.

Bookmark to:

Jeff Pulver recently discussed highlighting some “sticky” blog posts for the month.  Accordingly, here are some good leftovers from July:

- the Apple effect

- mobile dining with Chris Brogan

- a national regulatory framework will unleash wireless

- the biggest loser in 700 MHz – rural wireless carriers 

- Community Developer – a critical need of 21st century business

If you like the grub – please consider subscribing here…

Bookmark to:

I thought this post by Randolph May (Free State Foundation) on 700 MHz was juicy…

Enjoy…

Bookmark to:

The FCC voted and adopted a revised 700 MHz band plan and service rules yesterday.  There were really no surprises.  We knew Chairman Martin had the votes and we heard him justify his proposal last week in the House Commerce Committee.

With regard to the rules, I thought an interesting take-away from the meeting was majority concern with the Chairman mandating a reserve price on the spectrum auction.  As you may know, Martin has put a reserve price on the C-block spectrum of $4.6 billion and the whole auction at $10 billion.  Martin has taken this step to make sure that the auction brings the miniumum expected proceeds to the federal treasury (which Congress will use for deficit reduction and other initiatives).

Here’s what they said:  

Adelstein – “the reserve price and second auction requirements set out in this item leave open a real potential for gaming and may result in unintended consequences.”

Copps – “the item now imposes reserve prices on each of the individual spectrum blocks, something without precedent in previous auctions and something, it seems to me, rather at odds with letting the market pick the auction block winners.”

McDowell- “with respect to auction reserve prices, I believe these are best left to market forces.”

Micro-managing competition is never a good idea.  Trying to satisfy one large company’s business model at the expense of other carriers (especially small rural carriers) is not in the public interest.  at&t and Verizon will survive the tailored 700 MHz rules – the small guys will sell.  The auction process is not perfect but it has proved to be better than any beauty contest the FCC has held.  Chairman Martin may have cooked up a recipe that nobody seems to be craving - only time will tell…

Dish disclosure – Our firm represents CTIA and the Wireless Broadband Coalition (at&t and Verizon Wireless are members) on spectrum issues.

Bookmark to: