Newsletter
Google Left Banner
Wireless Competition Flourishing
05 Feb, 2008
The rate of wireless substitution for landlines grew by 51% between 2005 and 2006, according to the latest FCC Annual Report on the State of Wireless Competition, released yesterday. Ninety-nine percent of the U.S. population (61.3% of the geographic territory) had access to two or more wireless providers at the end of 2006. Ninety-five percent of the population had access to three or more competitors, and just over 56% had access to five or more. The FCC reports that 150 companies identify themselves as facilities-based terrestrial wireless operators within the U.S. Subscribership continues to grow, and reached 80% penetration, representing 241.8 million subscribers by year end 2006. The year 2006 saw an additional 28.8 million new subscribers, representing the largest absolute increase in subscribers ever. Approximately 82% of the population was covered by 3G data services, including EV-DO during the same time period.
Usage continues to grow as well, with the average subscriber utilizing 714 minutes of use in 2006, up from 708 in 2005. Text messaging is growing at a torrid pace, with 18.7 billion SMS messages sent/received in December 2006, versus 9.8 billion in 2005. Competitive metrics include 10.3 million subscribers porting their wireless number to a new provider in 2006, down slightly from 10.6 million who did so in 2005. Wireless substitution for landlines continues to grow, with 11.8% of adults having a wireless connection only, up from 7.8% in 2005. But among adults aged 25 – 29, 30% lived in homes with wireless only. The FCC report provides a wealth of information about the wireless industry, even if it’s slightly dated.
About Telecompetitor
Channel
Webinars/Events
Upcoming Webinars
Packet Optical Networks – Enabling Your Future
Dec 16, 2008
Upcoming Events
NTCA Wireless Symposium
Jan 7-9, 2009 - Austin, TX
Featured Article
Should Telephone Service be Free?
12 Oct, 2008
Comcast announced a new promotion last week that offers 12 months of free basic cable service for new customers who also sign up for an additional service. Customers who don’t want an additional service can get Comcast’s basic service of about 20 -30 channels for $10/month. The promotion is tied to the digital TV transition of February 2009 and entices potential customers to avoid the transition “hassle” by getting “free” cable service. “The simple fact is that basic cable is the easiest path through the digital transition and now consumers can get it for free,” said Derek Harrar, General Manager and Senior Vice President, Video Services for Comcast in a company statement. This move is similar to strategies pursued by other video service providers, who are hoping to leverage the digital TV transition for new subscriber additions.
But is this strategy a leading indicator for the future? Should basic core services like basic cable and basic telephone service be offered for free, used as a “carrot” to entice customers to buy “more important” services like broadband? Maybe a very basic phone service, with no LD, access to landline 911, and maybe outgoing service only (to avoid telemarketers) should be a free component of a bundled offering. Such a wireline service may appeal to a customer who previously cut the cord for wireless only, but also needs broadband. There is a growing portion of the population who find the value of traditional wireline phone service elsewhere – either through wireless or broadband/IP services. But, if they could get the security of landline 911, and an extra dial tone in their home as a free value add for subscribing to broadband (or video from a telco’s perspective), maybe a telco’s bundled offering may look more attractive than a comparable cable offering. I realize this idea is not appealing to the hundreds of ILECs who are a part of the current access/settlement system (in fact, it couldn’t work in the context of today’s regulatory structure), but I wonder whether it’s inevitable. In this possible future scenario, the current settlement system adapts to broadband as the underlying service, as opposed to voice.
This scenario cuts both ways. From a cable company’s perspective, a growing portion of the population is turning to the Internet as a source for their video content, and no longer see value in paying for a broad package of video as a part of a traditional subscription pay-TV service. But, if they could receive basic TV (which includes local broadcast affiliates) as a free value add for buying broadband, maybe the cable bundle is more attractive. In a true IP/broadband world, very basic phone and video service is relatively easy to deliver, and has little impact on bandwidth and network performance. Maybe the digital transition is opening the door to a future where free basic services are a regular component of a bundled offering. Thoughts?

digg this story
google
