(keitai-l) Re: Tired of Keitai Hype?

been saying this for over a year--check out:

http://www.jup.com/jupiter/profile.jsp?source=sample&doc=bws00-16 you'll
have to register to get the document. Was interviewed about this on
www.mformobile.com do a search under mcateer.

Fully concur with your sentiments. Part of the reason that carriers in Japan
and to a lesser extent Korea (LG Telecom) can execute is because they own
the channel. This doesn't excuse tardiness in rolling out packet
infrastructure--the GPRS spec has been around for at least four years. Don't
reckon that subs. in EU or US will be comfortable paying on a per packet
basis--but carriers can easily charge $5 to $10 monthly flat rate for packet
requests from a WAP browser or Java client software routed thru their
gateways. Would also give the carrier more leverage as such requests must be
routed thru their infrastructure, subs would have to pay per packet for
trying to forge a direct connection with a third party gateway.

Seamus McAteer
Research Fellow, Jupiter Media Metrix

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel & Michiyo Helmer [mailto:helmers@iprimus.com.au]
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 4:15 AM
To: keitai-l@appelsiini.net
Subject: (keitai-l) Re: Tired of Keitai Hype?



 Hi all,

 Sounds like we are revisiting the old 'i-mode vs. WAP' or indeed 'Japan vs.
rest of the world' discussion,

In a forthcoming strategy paper, targeting operators here in Australia who
are doing miserably with their WAP services, I'll argue that success of the
mobile Internet (and lack thereof) has really not much to do with the
technology platform, but everything to do with the business model.

 Therefore;
Operators may well keep the WAP platform (which they have invested too much
money in anyway), implement a packet-based network (OK, this is technology),
and copy the i-mode business model (eg. pay-per-bit, micropayment scheme to
allow content providers to make money, hence ensuring compelling content,
etc. etc.)

 ...and voila; a successful mobile Internet service.

 Should perhaps the WAP-operators of this world look at EZWeb instead of
i-mode for a model that can be replicated outside Japan? Or the South Korean
operators perhaps (9m using WAP-based services)?

 Any comments on all this?

 Cheers,

 Daniel Helmer,
 Consultant, Communications & Content
KPMG Consulting

 -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Shore [mailto:jshore@e-shuppan.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 1:50 PM
> To: keitai-l@appelsiini.net
> Subject: (keitai-l) Re: Tired of Keitai Hype?
>
>
>
> There is no question that mobile will eat into other communication
> infrastructures.  HK, for instance, was way ahead of the game;  6 years
ago
> when I first went there could not find any public phones in central areas.
> Was told that because wireless was so prevalent public phones were for the
> most part unnecessary.
>
> I think there are still a good number of people mystified as to why
"i-mode
> is so much better than their wap based counterparts".  Certainly, aside
from
> handsets, i-mode does not present any technological leap.  Arguably i-mode
> infrastructure is weaker from a number of respects in fact.  So what is it
> that makes it successful?  As has been discussed many times before,
> probably:  pricing, social factors, time&place, consumer content focus.

[ excessive quoting removed ]


[ Did you check the archives?   http://www.appelsiini.net/keitai-l/ ]

[ Did you check the archives?   http://www.appelsiini.net/keitai-l/ ]