8 ms·

Semi-related question: How difficult would it be to disrupt the cell phone market? I used AT&T for a few years and now I have been using Verizon for 2 years, i

Semi-related question: How difficult would it be to disrupt the cell phone market? I used AT&T for a few years and now I have been using Verizon for 2 years, in my dealings with these companies I have found them to be much more scummier than almost any other industry out there. They have the most complicated policies where even if you try to do everything right, you will still get dinged with fees every now and then. Are these companies really scummy or is it just the nature of the business? I know certain industries are very difficult to operate due to specific issues like scammers and online payments (I believe PayPal were the first ones to get it right and they are one of the most hated companies). Is it possible for a company, let's say Google, to provide an unlimited data/calling plan for a reasonable cost without all of the hidden fees and charges?

pavel_lishin 14y ago
> How difficult would it be to disrupt the cell phone market? Well, to start you'd have to do is build a couple of hundred thousand cellphone towers, at a couple of hundred thousand dollars apiece.
- pyre 14y ago
  You're leaving out the part where you purchase a swatch of spectrum for billions of dollars from the US government.
  - toomuchtodo 14y ago
    So, what you're saying is that mobile voice and data in the US would best be served by a non-for-profit that owned the spectrum, the towers, and the gear, and leased access so that anyone could be an MVNO. Because, to me, this whole Verizon/ATT/etc. fucking the consumer because of spectrum costs as well as barrier to entry seems to be one giant circlejerk we're wasting our time on.
- majorlazer 14y ago
  Well I understand that but I guess my main question can be condensed into the following: Do the big cellphone companies appear to be scummy because the industry is difficult to turn a profit in, or are they just 'poorly' run companies?
  - wmf 14y ago
    I don't think a non-evil carrier could compete against Verizon and AT&T. Human psychology is so susceptible to "pay less now but more later" and "shiny widgets that don't work" that companies cannot afford to do the right thing. Just look at how T-Mobile is considered too weak to survive by many analysts.
untog 14y ago
Is it possible for a company, let's say Google, to provide an unlimited data/calling plan for a reasonable cost without all of the hidden fees and charges? It's possible in the sense that Google could become an MVNO (virtual network operator) and piggy-back off an existing network. Except that network would have to allow them. And charge them a large price for it. So in effect, no, it isn't possible.
- lucian1900 14y ago
  It certainly works for some. Giffgaff in the UK use O2's network, but have lower (and more predictable) prices.
  - ropiku 14y ago
    There are a lot of MVNOs in US too. Also GiffGaff is owned by Telefonica (O2).
- 27182818284 14y ago
  This didn't seem to stop them with Google Fiber, though.
  - koalaman 14y ago
    As far as I know they Google is using it's own network for Google Fiber.
  - nstf 14y ago
    It's always possible to lay new fiber. Wireless requires spectrum, which is finite and heavily regulated.
    - 27182818284 14y ago
      I have no idea why you'd think that would stop them given how they've been involved with it off and on since at least 2008. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_2008_wireless_spectrum_auction#Google_involvement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_2008_wireless_spe...
axusgrad 14y ago
It's the network effect, AT&T and Verizon have the biggest networks, therefore the most valuable. Apparently there are lots of pre-paid plans that do what you want using the big networks, not to mention T-mobile and Sprint with their smaller networks.
- MichaelGG 14y ago
  That's not a network effect. A network effect is a growth pattern related to having other users on the network adding value to you. In this case, it wouldn't matter if I was the only AT&T customer, they'd be more valuable simply because of coverage area.
baddox 14y ago
I suspect that competing with cell service providers in the USA is very difficult, but slightly easier than competing with the Post Office for providing first-class mail service, competing with the US Mint by minting your own currency, or competing with the US military for providing national defense.

pavel_lishin 14y ago

> How difficult would it be to disrupt the cell phone market? Well, to start you'd have to do is build a couple of hundred thousand cellphone towers, at a couple of hundred thousand dollars apiece.

pyre 14y ago
You're leaving out the part where you purchase a swatch of spectrum for billions of dollars from the US government.
- toomuchtodo 14y ago
  So, what you're saying is that mobile voice and data in the US would best be served by a non-for-profit that owned the spectrum, the towers, and the gear, and leased access so that anyone could be an MVNO. Because, to me, this whole Verizon/ATT/etc. fucking the consumer because of spectrum costs as well as barrier to entry seems to be one giant circlejerk we're wasting our time on.
majorlazer 14y ago
Well I understand that but I guess my main question can be condensed into the following: Do the big cellphone companies appear to be scummy because the industry is difficult to turn a profit in, or are they just 'poorly' run companies?
- wmf 14y ago
  I don't think a non-evil carrier could compete against Verizon and AT&T. Human psychology is so susceptible to "pay less now but more later" and "shiny widgets that don't work" that companies cannot afford to do the right thing. Just look at how T-Mobile is considered too weak to survive by many analysts.

untog 14y ago

Is it possible for a company, let's say Google, to provide an unlimited data/calling plan for a reasonable cost without all of the hidden fees and charges? It's possible in the sense that Google could become an MVNO (virtual network operator) and piggy-back off an existing network. Except that network would have to allow them. And charge them a large price for it. So in effect, no, it isn't possible.

lucian1900 14y ago
It certainly works for some. Giffgaff in the UK use O2's network, but have lower (and more predictable) prices.
- ropiku 14y ago
  There are a lot of MVNOs in US too. Also GiffGaff is owned by Telefonica (O2).
27182818284 14y ago
This didn't seem to stop them with Google Fiber, though.
- koalaman 14y ago
  As far as I know they Google is using it's own network for Google Fiber.
- nstf 14y ago
  It's always possible to lay new fiber. Wireless requires spectrum, which is finite and heavily regulated.
  - 27182818284 14y ago
    I have no idea why you'd think that would stop them given how they've been involved with it off and on since at least 2008. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_2008_wireless_spectrum_auction#Google_involvement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_2008_wireless_spe...

axusgrad 14y ago

It's the network effect, AT&T and Verizon have the biggest networks, therefore the most valuable. Apparently there are lots of pre-paid plans that do what you want using the big networks, not to mention T-mobile and Sprint with their smaller networks.

MichaelGG 14y ago
That's not a network effect. A network effect is a growth pattern related to having other users on the network adding value to you. In this case, it wouldn't matter if I was the only AT&T customer, they'd be more valuable simply because of coverage area.

baddox 14y ago

I suspect that competing with cell service providers in the USA is very difficult, but slightly easier than competing with the Post Office for providing first-class mail service, competing with the US Mint by minting your own currency, or competing with the US military for providing national defense.