Apple to crush carriers, become direct service provider

[trotsky]

It's very hard to imagine Apple as a traditional MVNO where their brand would take all the hits for network quality and yet have little to no ability to impact things on the engineering side. There is a reason that there aren't premium MVNO's.

[maratd]

Bingo. And the probability of Apple building their own wireless network is pretty close to zero.

[ianterrell]

Filed under, "I'll believe it when I see it."

[aaronsw]

And where are they supposed to get all the towers? That's a multi-year construction project and, if they try it, they'll alienate their existing carrier partners.

Now maybe Apple thinks they can afford to do that, but it seems risky.

[flyt]

The carriers don't operate their own cell towers, they're run by an outside company that just leases space to ATT/VZW. Apple could work with this company to add their new network to the towers.

This would prevent the MVNO situation where you're still dependent on one of the large carriers for the connection, and ultimately at their whims.

http://www.quora.com/Does-each-wireless-carrier-own-their-ow...

[danilocampos]

> And where are they supposed to get all the towers?

They aren't.

> Bluestein said while speaking at the Informa MVNO Industry Summit in Barcelona.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_virtual_network_operator

[myko]

If this were to happen I might consider getting an iPhone again. I'd miss my Nexus but the service providers available now in the US are terrible.

But yeah this doesn't seem very likely.

[itg]

Why didn't you include the "expert says" part when submitting the article? Especially one that has no proven track record. That changes the entire tone of this link-bait headline.

[ChuckMcM]

"Apple has the distribution channels, digital content portfolio and customer base to make the move, Bluestein says, and it also has more than 250 million credit cards on file for iTunes users who could be billed directly for wireless service."

Ok, and the big missing piece, oh yeah the network. You know the thing that costs 4 - 10 billion to buy the spectrum for and another 50 - 100 billion to build out the actual network stations for. Now sure, Apple to commit its entire cash pile to becoming another AT&T or Verizon but that certainly isn't going to happen.

And the other challenge I see is that the carriers all co-operate with pairing agreements and roaming agreements because they are all in the same pool. Bring in an 800 lb gorilla which is trying to 'crush' them? Do they co-operate now? Probably not.

[peterknego]

It's more likely that this rumors are a move to extract even more cash from telcos.

[cturner]

Markets that require detailed interaction with customers are a minefield.

I can't see Apple wanting to be there.

Consumer telecoms is a brutal, low-margin business. The service providers are doing them a favour by being there, because they shield Apple branding from the nastiness of the domain.

[Edit: I removed some references to Google while I was mulling on it. Can't quite remember what it said, but I expect notatoad's feedback was in-spirit]

[notatoad]

this article is about apple, not google. apple already has channels to directly interact with their customers. Apple stores are hugely successful, have a great reputation, and are everywhere.

and consumer telecom is hardly a low-margin business. it might not be as high margin as apple is used to, but consumer telecom companies seem to manage to pull in plenty of profit.

[tdr]

Actual quote: [..] says Apple will soon begin to offer wireless service directly to iPhone and iPad users.

In the last years Apple focused on innovation. Moving against the carriers (voice service) doesn't look too good (going against partners, very mature business == little potential & high costs)

Going in the wireless data service (internet) would however bring value: less latency, more speed, better Siri service.

[ralfd]

Oh, come on hacker news! Don't upvote crazy Apple rumors. Leave that stuff on Macrumors.

[phil]

...according to random pundit trying to get attention at industry conference.

[pooriaazimi]

This piece (by Jean-Louis Gassée, August 2011) is relevant:

Steve, Please Buy Us A Carrier!

http://www.mondaynote.com/2011/08/14/steve-please-buy-us-a-c...

[brudgers]

The premise is entirely US centric - strategies aimed at ATT, Verizon, and carrier subsidies don't scale globally.

And of course, begs the question of how this would help Apple sell the hardware from which it derives the bulk of it's profits.

[haydenevans]

I'll believe it when I see it, seems very unlikely though. BGR is on a role, this has to be the second or third horrible article I've read from them this week.

[moystard]

It seems to be a risky move and I don't know if Apple wants to go down this path. There are huge costs tied to network operators' functions..

[speg]

Please come to Canada.

[nextparadigms]

They would probably charge even more than the carriers.

[snowwrestler]

How would this crush the carriers when, as an MVNO, Apple would be writing the carriers a giant check every month to use their towers?

The CLEC wars proved that you can't use a network owner's wires to compete against them.

[squozzer]

I'm not sure Apple should play that game unless they are ready to handle the extra regulatory and infrastructure management loads.