Hello! And welcome to our Friday column, Worst of the Week. There’s a lot of nutty stuff that goes on in this industry, so this column is a chance for us at RCRWireless.com to rant and rave about whatever rubs us the wrong way. We hope you enjoy it!
And without further ado:
Not to state the obvious, but it must be good to be Google. First, you have a name that has become a verb, which I would argue is the sign that you have truly “made it.” But more importantly, you have all the money and clout in the world to do basically whatever you want.
With this sort of power, one could see Google’s leadership taking on a sort-of Tony Stark role of attempting to make the world a safer place, as well as provide content for awesome comics and movies. That hasn’t happened just yet for Google, but let’s give it some time.
(Really? This movie happened?)
How else can you explain why a search engine company is playing around with autonomous vehicles? Because it can. Hubris? Perhaps. But, when you have a lot of money and a lot of smart people, you can do some crazy stuff.
That is why Google’s recent announcement about getting into the cellular service space has me a bit perplexed.
Now, why on earth would a company that has everything, including the seeming love of all people, want to get tied up in an industry that for some reason can’t capitalize on the PR goodwill of providing people with access to anyone in the world and all the information in the world from anywhere in the world? People have an ingrained hatred for cellphone carriers, that while a bit overboard, has been fostered some by what seems to be cellphone carriers having ingrained hatred for their customers.
Why get involved in this nonsense? There are already dozens of perfectly good (bad) wireless carriers out there doing all the hard work of being hated by everyone. Best of all, they don’t seem to care and we have all come to accept this. It’s like there is a perfect balance of hatred here that seems to be at a level that allows it to sustain itself in perfect harmony.
And now Google has the bright idea to enter this space in an attempt to do what? Provide superior service?
Sure, there is definitely room for improvement in terms of how cellular operators treat their customers. But, I would say that the current model is not so bad considering the hundreds of millions of people in the U.S. using cellular services and also knowing how boneheaded many of these people are. I know I would get a bit snippy having to deal with some of the asinine antics of the average U.S. consumer.
Heck, Apple for years had been rumored to be looking at entering the services side of the business, but one can only assume has avoided doing so because it wouldn’t want to sully its name. There is a reason Apple has its Genius Bars at the back of its retail stores: it’s so that the masses get stuck playing with all the devices up front, thus saving the “geniuses” from having to deal with these boneheads.
Plus there is that whole hatred balance I mentioned earlier. Let’s just say that Google can somehow improve on the current state of customer service. All that will do is tip that delicate balance, causing anarchy in the streets. Streets that will now be clogged with people doing their anarchy thing and making it more difficult for Google’s autonomous vehicles to get anywhere.
More confusing is that Google wants to enter the space as a mobile virtual network operator, reportedly using Sprint or T-Mobile US – or both – networks. This move will obviously not make it possible for Google to offer any sort of superior network service quality as it really can’t do any better than what is already out there.
Word is Google will tap into the growing Wi-Fi hysteria when it comes to cellular services, but my own experience has shown that the world of unlicensed spectrum only leads to service frustration. And we know there is already plenty of frustration in the cellular world.
The one area in which Google may have a leg up in this matter is pricing, though history has so far shown playing the pricing game is a tough outing. Google could garner some pretty sweet pricing deals from Sprint and T-Mobile US, which if combined with more efficient back office platforms and the ability to “bury” loses in one division inside of another division could allow Google to undercut current pricing models.
But, again history has shown that established operators get a bit crazy when they see any new threats to market share. Haven’t we already seen that this model only works for companies targeting niche demographics? And if anything, I don’t see Google as “niche” anything.
Google does have a bit of history in tampering with the services side of the mobile telecom business. The company was at the head of affairs in getting the Federal Communications Commission to enact “open access” provisions to the largest chunk of 700 MHz spectrum put up for bid in 2008. Google also “attempted” to acquire that spectrum itself by bidding up that license to the minimum that would then enact that open access provision, only to then quickly shut it down and let a “real” wireless operator purchase the license.
Another strike against this venture’s potential for success is that of device selection. I will assume that Google will rely heavily on devices running Google’s Android operating system as well as devices sporting the natty Google logo. That market today is somewhat limited to the Nexus lineup, which while sporty in its own right, leaves out a couple of attention grabbers consumers seem to gravitate toward: iPhone and to a lesser extent Galaxy.
I guess Google could garner more traction for its Nexus lineup if those devices were the center point of what I would assume would be a multibillion-dollar advertising campaign. And with Google’s deep pockets, I guess that is possible. But, as was shown with its Motorola purchase, tampering with the delicate balance of the Android ecosystem could have wide-ranging effects on the health of that ecosystem.
Look, I want Google to enter the wireless services space for no other reason than it will provide for some great stories. This sort of chaos only happens on a weekly basis in the mobile space, so to increase that to a daily basis is a win-win for me.
But, all great companies have a moment where one decision leads to them not being considered great anymore. For Google, this may be that time. As they say in the workplace: Google carefully.
OK, enough of that.
Thanks for checking out this week’s Worst of the Week column. And now for some extras:
I love vending machines, both for the nutritional sustenance they provide, the helpful way they display their sustenance and in how they let me use my “Battle Ship” experience to select my sustenance of choice.
However, a recent report from Berg Insights found that the simple times of vending machines is coming to an end. The firm noted that by 2019, 15.3% of vending machines will become “connected.”
These connected vending machines are said to be ushering in the age of “cashless payments,” which taken at face value would seem to mean the contents of these vending machines is free, but in reality means that they still cost money. More money, in fact, if you are not so good at keeping track of what you have in your checking account, thus running the risk of overdraft fees.
The best part of the report was this embedded quote: “The availability of machine data in real-time coupled with state-of-the-art software platforms make it possible for vending operators to reach entirely new levels of operational efficiency.”
If there is a point in which too much efficiency is a bad thing, I would argue it’s connected to vending machines. I enjoy the inefficiency of standing for hours in front of a vending machine going over my purchasing options. More importantly, these connected vending machines will take away yet another depository for all this change that keeps clogging my pockets.
I welcome your comments. Please send me an e-mail at [email protected].
Bored? Why not follow me on Twitter
