& cplSiteName &
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View        ADD A COMMENT
kq4ym
50%
50%
kq4ym,
User Rank: Light Sabre
11/25/2015 | 5:38:58 PM
Re: Brilliant!
Yes, it would surely seem that companies wlll always seek that extra buck even at the cost of infuriating customers sometimes. I always guessed that Google really put a crimp in the plans of those companies that wanted their own walled garden putting out apps and specialized home pages. But, "people weren't interested in having ISPs curate the web for them" when it's much easier to find things through a search engine or go directly to the content.
mendyk
50%
50%
mendyk,
User Rank: Light Sabre
11/11/2015 | 1:57:07 PM
Re: Brilliant!
Very few busineses set out to purposefully screw their customers. But Goal 1 for almost all businesses is to come up with ways to extract more revenue and increase profit margins.The screwing is a byproduct of pursuing those goals.
TomNolle
50%
50%
TomNolle,
User Rank: Light Sabre
11/11/2015 | 1:37:15 PM
The Cost Transfer is More Complicated than it Seems
It might sound crazy for T-Mobile to subsidize video, and it does mean that in the long run they have to make up their loss.  That doesn't necessarily mean charging consumers more, though.  Capex is only about 20 cents on every revenue dollar.  The cost of customer acquisition and retention makes up about 12 cents of every revenue dollar.  The capacity cost T-Mobile is giving away might reduce their acquisiton and retention cost enough to be justified without changing service prices at all.  Nobody breaks their costs or plans down like this, though, so we'll have to wait and see what happens.
Smoochy18
50%
50%
Smoochy18,
User Rank: Lightning
11/11/2015 | 1:06:21 PM
Brilliant!
Very well said. At the end of the day, if your revenue stream is based on screwing the consumer, your business model will be short-lived.
Marcos El Malo
50%
50%
Marcos El Malo,
User Rank: Light Beer
11/11/2015 | 12:31:49 PM
The new app model vs channels, etc
Thanks for this article. The point about portals is especially pertinent (and is causing me to re-examine my model for weaknesses at this moment). I also agree that "curation apps" are a dead end, although curation itself is important. The thing about the app model replacing the channel model is this: it's not a direct one for one replacement that is the new model (although channel operators are welcome to try). The app model deconstructs the channel model. In the current broadcast/cable model, the broadcasters and cable operators are the gatekeepers and the middlemen between content producers and the audience. The new app model allows the content producers to find their audience directly and the audience to find their desired content. This will also open up a lot of nontraditional avenues for monetization.
mendyk
50%
50%
mendyk,
User Rank: Light Sabre
11/11/2015 | 11:26:57 AM
Sentenced to fragments
The apparent answer to coping with audience fragmentation is ... more fragmentation. Supported by intrusive ads that nobody wants to look at. It's a brilliant solution in the Bizarro world.


Featured Video
Flash Poll
Upcoming Live Events
September 17-19, 2019, Dallas, Texas
October 1, 2019, New Orleans, Louisiana
October 2-22, 2019, Los Angeles, CA
October 10, 2019, New York, New York
November 5, 2019, London, England
November 7, 2019, London, UK
December 3-5, 2019, Vienna, Austria
December 3, 2019, New York, New York
All Upcoming Live Events
Partner Perspectives - content from our sponsors
Transform Beyond Borders to Lead the Innovation
By Ben Zhou, CEO, Whale Cloud
Reject Limits. Build the Future.
By David Wang, Huawei
China Telecom & Huawei Jointly Complete the World's First End-to-End 5G SA Voice & Video Call
By Jay Liu, Senior Marketing Manager, Cloud Core Product Line, Huawei Technologies
All Partner Perspectives