Comments on: Coping With The Changing Handset Market http://mobhappy.com/blog1/2006/01/26/coping-with-the-changing-handset-market/ Russell Buckley and Carlo Longino on mobile technology. Tue, 20 Jul 2010 10:16:33 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: C. Enrique Ortiz http://mobhappy.com/blog1/2006/01/26/coping-with-the-changing-handset-market/comment-page-1/#comment-1560 C. Enrique Ortiz Fri, 27 Jan 2006 17:02:22 +0000 http://mobhappy.com/blog1/2006/01/26/coping-with-the-changing-handset-market/#comment-1560 Hey Carlo. Interesting post -- this post can be interpreted in different ways. For example: "users donǃÙt see much reason to spend a lot of money on a phone. It makes calls, it sends text messages, itǃÙs got a camera, it can download ringtones and maybe games, so they donǃÙt see why they should spend more money to get a more powerful device. That signals a marketing breakdown on the part of the vendors and carriers" The above is a very good example of something I have being saying and expecting for a long time, but it is just a slow process -- that people will actually use high-end phones. You see, the phone you described above is high-end when compared to phones a couple of years ago... and today people are buying and using those. And people will buy high-end phones per today's standards, if you put them on their hands without having to spend $300 . So I don't think it is a breakdown for vendors and carriers -- they just need to figure out how to put those high-end handsets on the hands of people very cheaply (yes, by subsidizing), and make money in other ways. Yes, you are right on the "what's there for me", and that carriers may be thinking Mobile TV was the way to make money, and it is not (I don't think it is), but it really is about the whole mobile experience -- from personal, to entertainment, and of course, voice. All the above will be a moot point in the future, as soon (well, couple of years) high-end phones will be cost-effective to produce at large volumes, and those high-end phones, with all have all the features, all the bells and whistles, will be standard, and will be easily put on the hands of subscribers -- and what features the subscriber will use will be "field serviceable", a matter of activating/disabling those on the field -- or do you think this is wishful thinking? ceo Hey Carlo. Interesting post — this post can be interpreted in different ways. For example:

“users donǃÙt see much reason to spend a lot of money on a phone. It makes calls, it sends text messages, itǃÙs got a camera, it can download ringtones and maybe games, so they donǃÙt see why they should spend more money to get a more powerful device. That signals a marketing breakdown on the part of the vendors and carriers”

The above is a very good example of something I have being saying and expecting for a long time, but it is just a slow process — that people will actually use high-end phones. You see, the phone you described above is high-end when compared to phones a couple of years ago… and today people are buying and using those. And people will buy high-end phones per today’s standards, if you put them on their hands without having to spend $300 . So I don’t think it is a breakdown for vendors and carriers — they just need to figure out how to put those high-end handsets on the hands of people very cheaply (yes, by subsidizing), and make money in other ways. Yes, you are right on the “what’s there for me”, and that carriers may be thinking Mobile TV was the way to make money, and it is not (I don’t think it is), but it really is about the whole mobile experience — from personal, to entertainment, and of course, voice.

All the above will be a moot point in the future, as soon (well, couple of years) high-end phones will be cost-effective to produce at large volumes, and those high-end phones, with all have all the features, all the bells and whistles, will be standard, and will be easily put on the hands of subscribers — and what features the subscriber will use will be “field serviceable”, a matter of activating/disabling those on the field — or do you think this is wishful thinking?

ceo

]]>