Hardware Sales Flat, Software up 4.8%, Telecom up 2.3% in 2010, Says Gartner

Providers of information technology solutions likely will have to emphasize customer retention more than customer acquisition in 2010 and 2011 because of a sales environment that will remain challenging, says Richard Gordon, Gartner Research VP. That said, sales of IT hardware and software will grow about 3.3 percent in 2010, about in line with telecom service provider revenue growth of 3.2 percent.

Enterprise hardware sales, for example, will show zero growth in 2010, compared to 2009, Gartner forecasts, in part because hardware lifecycles have lengthened.

Software sales, on the other hand, should grow 4.8 percent, says Gartner.

Motorola Seeks to Sell Set-Top Unit

Motorola is looking for buyers for the part of its business that makes cable television set-top boxes, and is seeking about $4.5 billion, the Wall Street Journal reports.

For anybody who has been in the cable TV industry any length of time, the potential sale brings back memories of a company headquarters in Hatboro, Penn. and known as "Jerrold." Few companies have roots in the U.S. cable industry as deep as Jerrold did, in its later incarnation as General Instrument representing one of the two big names in the old cable TV business, in addition to Scientific Atlanta, whose assets now are part of Cisco.

The big attraction for any buyer is the chance to become a major player in the cable TV infrastructure business overnight.

Logical potential buyers would include the ranks of any number of major electronics companies who want major exposure to the U.S. cable TV industry.

It makes you realize just how long it has been since you were in the cable business.

Metered Internet Access Plans Coming?

Time Warner Cable CEO Glenn Britt says in a CNBC interview that the question of how consumers pay for their broadband is "an evolving thing." Britt still does not believe the existing flat rate for unlimited usage pricing plans are going to exist universally, indefinitely.

Verizon EVP Dick Lynch also has noted that Verizon would have to consider some form of tiered or metered bandwidth in the future.

One might argue that such plans will be available, with a premium price. But many, if not most other plans likely will move to some pricing format more nearly resembling the way people now buy buckets of wireless minutes or text messages. Consumers nearly universally dislike true metered usage plans, but have shown a level of comfort with "buckets." That suggests buckets will be the path forward for broadband services that must take some account of drastic bandwidth consumption patterns imposed by video content.

Some idea of the need for such plans, sure to be initially unpopular with some consumers, is the cost of continually providing more bandwidth, with modest increases in new revenue. At least some independent service providers have argued for years that fiber-to-home investments cannot be justified in tradtional "five year return on capital" criteria.

In that view, operators need to invest in FTTH "to keep their businesses," essentially. Yankee Group analyst Vince Vittore says that sort of refrain was current at the most recent Fiber to the Home conference.

Cable competition is a primary motivator in that regard. But experience so far continues to show that the financial return from an FTTH network is not assured nor easy. Nobody expects a return on invested capital in five years, as once was possible for many types of network investments.

Nor does anybody seem to believe it is possible to earn a return on FTTH networks based principally on incremental revenue from optical access, or even from providing video entertainment services. One need look no further than that to discern the industry emphasis on new applications, services and revenue.

Usage that is more closely tied to actual usage will happen. That doesn't mean it will be as strictly metered as electricity or water. But think about wireless buckets of use and one can conceive of metered service plans that consumers do not find inherently objectionable.

T-Mobile USA Moves to 7.2 Mbps, Plans 21 Mbps

There are times when being late to market is actually a benefit. The latest entrants in any technology-based market have access to the latest technology, and can build their business plans around that fact. There are other times when it's a bit difficult to characterize a particular competitor's position.

That is where T-Mobile USA now sits, for example. T-Mobile USA was the last of the top-four U.S. mobile providers to build a 3G network, and it has uncertain plans for 4G. But the company is on track to have faster versions of 3G up and running before some of its major competitors.

The company had no 3G customers in the second quarter 2008, though it had acquired 3G spectrum. But the 3G network now covers 240 cities and passes 170 million people, with plans to extend coverage to 200 million people by the end of 2009, at which point nearly all major urban areas will be covered.

So here's where the "last shall be first" principle applies.T-Mobile is using the faster 7.2 HSPA air interface, running at 7.2 Mbps downstream, on all its 3G nodes by the end of 2009.

At least one of T-Mobile's primary competitors is upgrading less-capacious 3.6 HSPA networks to 7.2 HSPA, but will not have that conversion completed until the end of 2011.

Likewise, T-Mobile plans to upgrade even the 7.2 HSPA network to HSPA+, a 21 Mbps network. The company says it will start rolling out HSPA+ in 2010. T-Mobile says the upgrade will be a relatively low-cost and relatively easy upgrade.

Of course, the reason T-Mobile's position is complex is that it has not yet announced a specific method for deploying a 4G network, which will require additional spectrum.

Both AT&T and Verizon are building their 4G networks for substantial coverage by 2010, while AT&T will have substantial coverage in 2011. Sprint is banking on the Clearwire network for 4G.

Still, competition in the mobile broadband market might not primarily be about "feeds and speeds." Coverage, pricing, application stores and device exclusivity arguably are more important.

Nor is it yet entirely clear that 4G will offer an entirely new consumer marketing proposition, beyond "faster." European 3G networks languished for years with sluggish uptake because the compelling new services requiring a 3G network were not in place.

In the U.S. market, it has been the mobile Web that has driven an upsurge of 3G uptake. But that adoption was based in part on applications and capabilitiesm, in part on use of particular devices, which require use of the 3G network.

The question for 4G networks is what new value or application will drive uptake.

Perhaps no new discrete driver will be required. Maybe "more" will be sufficient. But as Verizon has so far discovered with its FiOS fiber to the home feature, consumers still need a reason to buy fiber access as compared to hybrid fiber-copper access.

Providers can be last or first. Either way, the applications and device capabilities will remain the drivers of adoption.

Only 1 More Broadband Stimulus Round

As expected, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Rural Utilities Service and the Commerce Department’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration say they are streamlining the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act’s broadband grant and loan programs by awarding the remaining funding in just one more round, instead of two rounds.

The agencies expect to begin announcing funding awards for the first round in December 2009. The original plan had been for three rounds of funding, and observers noted that this would be valuable for applicants as they would have a chance to see what got funded, what did not, and then tweak their subsequent proposals accordingly.

Now they will get one chance to do so, not two chances. But “stakeholders will have the opportunity to provide us with well-informed feedback on how the first round worked for applicants, the agencies will be able to make improvements to the process, and potential applicants will gain more time to form partnerships and create stronger project proposals, the two agencies say.

In a Request for Information released today, the agencies are seeking feedback on procedural and policy aspects of BIP and BTOP. While inviting general input on the programs, the agencies identified specific areas for comment.

In terms of procedural matters, for example, the RFI seeks input on ways to streamline the application process. The RFI also asks whether the agencies can better balance the public’s interest in transparency and openness with stakeholders’ legitimate interest in maintaining the confidentiality of proprietary data.

The RFI also seeks comment on how to best target the remaining funds. Commenters proposing a more targeted approach are asked to quantify the impact of their proposal based on metrics such as the number of end users or community anchor institutions connecting to service, the number of new jobs created, and the projected increase in broadband adoption rates.

The RFI asks whether to focus second round funding on projects that create “comprehensive communities” by installing high capacity middle mile facilities between anchor institutions that bring essential health, medical, and educational services to citizens.

The RFI also invites input on various other issues, including whether the definition of “remote area,” which is used to determine grant eligibility under BIP, is too restrictive, how the agencies can best ensure that investments are cost effective, and ways the programs might impact regional economic development and stability.

RUS and NTIA will utilize the feedback received in response to the RFI to set the rules for the second funding round, which the agencies expect to announce through a Notice of Funds Availability early next year.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act provided a total of $7.2 billion to NTIA and RUS to fund projects that will expand access to and adoption of broadband services. Of that funding, NTIA will utilize $4.7 billion for grants to deploy broadband infrastructure in unserved and underserved areas in the United States, expand public computer center capacity, and encourage sustainable adoption of broadband service. RUS will use $2.5 billion in budget authority to support grants and loans to facilitate broadband deployment in primarily rural communities.

Quantifying the Carrier Wi-Fi Hotspot Business Model

Customer retention--not direct customer fees--might be the biggest part of the carrier public hotspot busimess model, says Stephen Rayment, CTO, BelAir Networks.

"Churn reduction is where lots of the value is," is Rayment. Assume churn per month of two percent a month, which means a typical customer provides 50 months of revenue, he says.

Adding metro hotspot access can provide a 10 percent churn reduction, he adds. Assume the 10 percent churn benefit on a typical subscriber relationship of 50 months, meaning the typical account now remains active for 55 months. Assume a typical customer average revenue per user of $130 a month.

That suggests an extra $650 of subscriber revenue over the length of a relationship. For a service provider with 100,000 subscribers that works out to $65 million in extra revenue.

If the average customer value is $2,000 per customer, and that service provider can use public hotspot service to reduce churn 10 percent, it adds about $200 per subscriber in terms of equity value.

For a service provider with one million subscribers, that's $200 million in incremental equity revenue.

For a service provider with one million subs, making an investment of $40 million to cover all the high-traffic spots, there is a five-to-one return on investment.

There arguably could be other revenue contributors as well, though none likely approaches the value of enhanced retention. There might be an opportunity for a small amount of additional revenue. Some customers will be willing to be stand-alone hotspot subscriptions.

Service providers might make some money from other carriers by offering hotspot access to customers roaming into the local area. There could be some advertising upside or some commercial upside from providing services to public utilities or public safety organizations, he says.

Some service providers also might look at public Wi-Fi as a way to add some mobility features to their landline service.

Mobile providers also likely will find public hotspots a useful way to offload traffic from the 3G and 4G networks to the fixed network, Rayment says.

"The networks are just choking" because of heavy new smartphone traffic, says Rayment. "People really did not see this until the iPhone, but 3 in the U.K. market also saw skyrocketing demand when it started selling the iPhone," says Rayment.

Up to this point, aircards and dongles used for mobile PC connections have been driving new bandwidth demand on the 3G and WiMAX networks. But that is changing. "Dongles drove the initial demand, but will be overtaken by the smartphone," he says.

The point is that the business model for public hotspot networks frequently is indirect.

Mobile is Not "Too Big to Fail"

Some people set up straw men that are easy to knock down, such as the big, rich telcos and mobile providers. Reality is more complex. They still are big, but they also are businesses facing cannibalization of their core revenue stream, voice, and will have to replace most of that revenue with something else.

We as a nation have made this sort of mistake before, trying to bring more competition to the landline voice business precisely as that business was entering a serious period of decline. Mobile providers now are in the same predicament. No matter how big they are, their base business is going to go away, for the the most part, meaning every single cent of revenue they now earn will have to be replaced.

If you think the telecom business is in great shape you don't work in the business. Granted U.S. wireless data revenues grew five percent quarter over quarter in the third quarter of 2009 and 27 percent year over year, to reach $11.3 billion by the end of the third quarter of 2009, according to analyst Chetan Sharma.

But overall service provider average revenue per user decreased by 14 cents during the third quarter. Average voice ARPU declined by 57 cents per user while the average data ARPU grew by 43 cents.

The point is simply that the communications business already is in the midst of a necessary transition from its traditional revenue models to new models, none of which are assured. It is going to take a great deal of very-hard work to pull this off and while consumer displeasure with such providers is understandable at times, they are not "too big to fail."

Most of that gain in data revenue was realized by Verizon and AT&T, which between them accounted for 80 percent of the increase in data revenues in the third quarter. AT&T and Verizon also now account for 68 percent of the market data services revenues and 61.5 percent of the subscriber base, Sharma says.

AT&T experienced the most growth with a six-percent increase quarter over quarter,  followed by Verizon and Sprint with five percent revenue growth each.

Overall mobile service provider revenue grew about two percent year over year. On an annualized basis, data represents about 28 percent of total mobile service provider revenues.

Analyst Chetan Sharma estimates that by end of 2009, U.S. mobile data traffic is likely to exceed 400 petabytes, up 193 percent from 2008.

Smartphones also now represent 25 percent of U.S. devices in service, says Sharma, while mobile penetration stands at about 91 percent.

The average number of text messages used in the U.S. market now averages almost 568 messages per subscriber per month.