Wednesday, May 24, 2017

Enterprises Think "Cloud Computing" Very Important

A survey of enterprise executives finds nearly-universal opinion that cloud computing is “very important” for “digital transformation,” a study released by 451 Research indicates. On a scale of 1 to 10, 80 percent of respondents ranked cloud's importance at 7 or above, and 20 percent gave it a 10.

Additionally, enterprises with a mature digital transformation strategy ranked the importance of cloud services 15 percent higher than companies in the early stages of a transformation, the study suggests.



Precisely what “digital transformation” means is debatable, but the 451 study emphasizes “competitive differentiation,” especially in four areas:


  • business agility
  • managing business risk
  • Improving operational efficiency
  • Improving customer experience

Back to the Future: Narrowband Will Drive Revenue Growth and Use Cases

For virtually all of the last 30 years, networking technologists and business leaders in the information and communications industries have rightly assumed that “faster speeds” and therefore higher data throughput rates were virtually directly related to financial outcomes.

In other words, the ability to send data faster increased the value of communication networks, made more use cases viable, and therefore drove revenues for suppliers of networking platforms, service providers.

So it is noteworthy that in the next phase of value creation and industry development, narrowband platforms might drive the next big wave of revenue.

That could well be the case if internet of things use cases develop as widely as expected. Look at the direction of standards extensions of Long Term Evolution, for example. Standards bodies that traditionally have worked to wring more performance out of networks now are working to create networks that feature less bandwidth.

Cat-1 for LTE networks tops out at 10 Mbps in the downlink, 5 Mbps in the uplink. But Cat-M1, the next development, will feature just 1 Mbps peak data rates, upstream or downstream. The Cat-NB1 standard will support just 20 kbps in the downlink and 60 kbps in the uplink.

Those developments are related directly to the expected use cases for sensor reporting, which quite often entails only uploading small amounts of data, but also communications cost and battery life.

The shift to perceived business use of narrowband platforms is a huge shift. All the direction has been towards broadband (faster speeds, more data throughput) in communications, for decades.

So 5G will be the first networking era in quite some time where, despite use cases for higher speeds, the real use case and revenue upside will come from narrowband platforms.
source: Sequans

Monday, May 22, 2017

5G Might be an Unwanted Watershed

We normally expect that each successive mobile network generation will also produce higher gross revenue or new services. That belief is held because it always has been the case in the past.

So 5G should not be different. We should see incremental revenue growth from new use cases. What we might not see is enough of that "new stuff" to keep pace with declines in revenue from legacy sources.

In that case, we might very well see 5G as a watershed, the first next generation platform that actually leads to lower total revenue, a contraction of suppliers and a reshaping of business models.

There is growing consensus that 5G could well mark a fundamental turning point in telecom industry history. If matters develop as hoped, a huge new wave of revenue growth, apps and services will be enabled.

And the biggest change of all is that the growth will come because computing actually becomes pervasive or ubiquitous, precisely as futurists have been predicting would eventually happen.

But 5G might also mark a historic change in industry dynamics for other reasons, perhaps not so welcome. It already is possible to argue that mobile data revenues and profits will follow the same path as earlier mobile services, such as voice and text messaging.

That is to say, gross revenue eventually will peak, while profit margins contract. If that happens with 4G, and if 5G represents only “more of the same,” clear problems could develop.

The biggest problem is that mobile data increasingly features a market requirement for supplying faster speeds and greater consumption, with incremental revenues that lag the increased supply.

For decades now, we have seen that average revenue per megabyte or gigabyte has fallen, dramatically. That will not change in the 5G era. Not a problem, some might argue. We will simply sell more units. Up to a point, that argument has merit.

It is the same argument suppliers have used in the voice business, and in the capacity business. It works for a while. Eventually, though, the revenue per unit sold does not compensate for the fact that consumers simply require fewer units. In other cases, usage quotas rise, while prices remain flat.

In the voice business, that shows up as declining minutes of use, declining numbers of fixed network subscriptions and declining prices per unit as well. In the capacity business, that shows up as higher usage allotments or higher speeds, at the same or lower prices.

And if that problem shows up in the 4G business, it arguably will get worse in the 5G era, in part because 5G is a more expensive network, and in part because the incremental new revenues do not justify the incremental new cost.

In other words, t is conceivable 5G actually will mark the end of a profitable business model for many mobile operators whose only real option is “access” services.

The problem is that we already can foresee a time when all current revenue streams (voice, text mesaging, mobile internet access) have past their peak, in terms of users, accounts and revenue generation. 5G is not automatically going to fix that.

For many mobile operators,, 5G will be a more-expensive platform that helps supply much-higher data consumption for human users, but at rates that lag unit growth. And though new revenue opportunities should develop in the area of machine communications, much of the upside will be reaped by platform, app, device or system suppliers, not connectivity suppliers.

So 5G is not just “the next generation of mobile.” It might be a generation of mobile that sees much of the industry disappear.

5G: The Downside

There is growing consensus that 5G could well mark a fundamental turning point in telecom industry history. If matters develop as hoped, a huge new wave of revenue growth, apps and services will be enabled.

And the biggest change of all is that the growth will come because computing actually becomes pervasive or ubiquitous, precisely as futurists have been predicting would eventually happen.

But 5G might also mark a historic change in industry dynamics for other reasons, perhaps not so welcome. It already is possible to argue that mobile data revenues and profits will follow the same path as earlier mobile services, such as voice and text messaging.

That is to say, gross revenue eventually will peak, while profit margins contract. If that happens with 4G, and if 5G represents only “more of the same,” clear problems could develop.

The biggest problem is that mobile data increasingly features a market requirement for supplying faster speeds and greater consumption, with incremental revenues that lag the increased supply.

For decades now, we have seen that average revenue per megabyte or gigabyte has fallen, dramatically. That will not change in the 5G era. Not a problem, some might argue. We will simply sell more units. Up to a point, that argument has merit.

It is the same argument suppliers have used in the voice business, and in the capacity business. It works for a while. Eventually, though, the revenue per unit sold does not compensate for the fact that consumers simply require fewer units. In other cases, usage quotas rise, while prices remain flat.

In the voice business, that shows up as declining minutes of use, declining numbers of fixed network subscriptions and declining prices per unit as well. In the capacity business, that shows up as higher usage allotments or higher speeds, at the same or lower prices.

And if that problem shows up in the 4G business, it arguably will get worse in the 5G era, in part because 5G is a more expensive network, and in part because the incremental new revenues do not justify the incremental new cost.

In other words, t is conceivable 5G actually will mark the end of a profitable business model for many mobile operators whose only real option is “access” services.

The problem is that we already can foresee a time when all current revenue streams (voice, text mesaging, mobile internet access) have past their peak, in terms of users, accounts and revenue generation. 5G is not automatically going to fix that.

For many mobile operators,, 5G will be a more-expensive platform that helps supply much-higher data consumption for human users, but at rates that lag unit growth. And though new revenue opportunities should develop in the area of machine communications, much of the upside will be reaped by platform, app, device or system suppliers, not connectivity suppliers.

So 5G is not just “the next generation of mobile.” It might be a generation of mobile that sees much of the industry disappear.

What Will the Future "Former Telco" Sell?

If Steelcase is not a furniture manufacturer, and Ford wants to stop being an “auto” manufacturer and become some kind of “mobility” company, one naturally wonders what it will take for former “telcos” to become something else, and what term we will eventually create that captures the nature of the change.

One framework is that telos become enablers of services and apps, more so than the creators of apps and services, more on the model of a “platform” than a provider of vertically-integrated services.

“I think the technology is probably already there. What isn’t yet there are the business models and the market structures and the ecosystems that need to cooperate with each other, need to be orchestrated in order to turn these things into a real business,” says Martin Creaner, corporate strategy advisor for Huawei.

All that is one other way of illustrating why the “don’t be a dumb pipe” argument is so important. Even if and when a telco “becomes something else,” that “something else” will still involve use of a network to create a business model and value for customers of some type.

Steelcase, for example, describes itself as providing “architecture, furniture and technology products and services designed to unlock human promise and support social, economic and environmental sustainability.” But its $3 billion in annual sales still revolve around what we call furniture.

In the same way, it is hard to imaging at least some telcos creating revenue streams where communications networks are not embedded or underpinning elements.

Sunday, May 21, 2017

Has Mobile Price Competition Driven Half of U.S. Inflation Drop in 2017?

This probably is a first: low U.S. inflation rates might well be driven in substantial part by new competition in the mobile business.

Nearly half of the  decline in core consumer price index inflation in 2017 can be traced to a single item: mobile services, according to Paul Ashworth, Capital Economics chief economist.  

Mobile service plan prices dropped seven percent  in March 2017 and fell an additional 1.7 percent  in April 2017, according to Labor Department data.

From April 2016, mobile service prices were down 12.9 percent the largest decline in 16 years.

Core inflation—prices excluding the volatile categories of food and energy—rose just 1.9 percent in April 2017 from a year earlier, decelerating from 2.3 percent growth in January 2017, as measured by the U.S. Labor Department’s consumer-price index.


Saturday, May 20, 2017

Uber Applies Artificial Intelligence to Create Pricing System for Uber Pool

Practical uses for artificial intelligence continue to proliferate. Uber Technologies, for example, now uses machine learning (a type of artificial intelligence that provides computers with the ability to learn without being explicitly programmed) to predict how much a particular rider is likely willing to pay for a specific trip, on a specific route.

In fact, Uber has used AI to create a new fare system based on machine learning. Called “route-based pricing,” the system charges customers based on what it predicts they’re willing to pay.

In the past, Uber calculated fares using mileage, time and multipliers based on passenger demand at a particular moment.

The change likely is related to the “upfront pricing” system Uber introduced in 2016, where riders are guaranteed a set fare before they book. That obviously places a premium on any intelligence Uber can use to incorporate willingness to pay in a more granular way, since the whole business model is premised in substantial part on variable pricing.

The trick is optimizing market clearing transactions, essentially matching what a rider is willing to pay and what a driver is willing to accept.

The value of such machine learning is one reason why Uber launched its artificial intelligence laboratory.  Though AI will be needed as Uber moves into the era of automated vehicles, the lab’s work apparently already has paid off in terms of using machine learning to tweak the far offering system.

Beyond that, the researchers will be working on developing forms of machine learning that need less data. That obviously would allow greater use of AI, with faster learning. Faster learning means AI can be applied in a wider range of cases.

The labs also are said to be working on machine learning systems that can explain the reasoning behind decisions. For a firm under much scrutiny, that makes sense. Uber itself, and others watching the company, will want explanations for “why” pricing rules are set the way they are.

Uber’s existing business apparently already benefits, as in the case of price predictions for the Uber pool service, where the new machine learning system is in use.

Many Winners and Losers from Generative AI

Perhaps there is no contradiction between low historical total factor annual productivity gains and high expected generative artificial inte...