You're viewing an article in iPO's historic archive vault. Here, we've preserved the comments and how the site looked along with the article. Use this link to view the article on our current site: Forbes: Will Apple Buy Wireless Spectrum? Not a Chance

News

Forbes: Will Apple Buy Wireless Spectrum? Not a Chance

There's not a chance that Apple will buy some of the wireless spectrum that is going up for auction in 2009, according to an editorial at Forbes. On Monday, reports surfaced that Apple had been investigating what it would take to participate in the auction, but Brian Caulfield reasoned that profit margins in running a wireless network were too small, and that FCC rules requiring networks to be open to competitors means that Apple could just as easily work with whomever does win the auction.

Mr. Caulfield cited analysts to back up his reasoning, including Endpoint Technologies President Roger Kay, who noted, "[You've got] billing issues, activation issues, quality of signal issues, all that kind of messy stuff that's out of your control even if you own it. Why would they want in?"

The article also pointed out that Apple CEO Steve Jobs lacks the kinds of contacts in the telephone market that allowed Apple to more easily enter the music industry.

He concluded with the idea that Apple's path of least resistance is to work with other companies, writing, "If Google made a serious play for the wireless spectrum, the search company could sell ads to subsidize a service that Apple's customers could connect to. Or Apple and Google could partner with an upstart carrier willing to take on a big chunk of debt to grab the spectrum. Either way, Jobs gets a tidy solution to a very messy problem."

4 comments from the community.

You can post your own below.

+ show options

Your current settings, click to change: Sort Oldest First, Show Guest Posts, Hide Community Stats

Bosco said:

member since 03 Jun 2002 with 1002 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Clearly, Apple's strategy is to fake their interest in wireless spectrum so they can buy wired spectrum while nobody is looking.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Okay, let's deconstruct this baby!

1) <i>Brian Caulfield reasoned that profit margins in running a wireless network were too small</i> Last I heard, the iTunes music store profit margins were very small. By US business practices, they were infinitesimal, microscopic, smaller even than Microsoft's innovation capabilities. Yet Apple keeps it up to drive iPod sales, and it's doing a very good job of that.

2) <i>Apple could just as easily work with whomever does win the auction</i> And look how successful other team-ups have worked! Sears, Motorola, Target, just to name a few disasters. Apple delivers on their end, then the other company screws things up big time. So far the only serious complaints about the iPhone isn't the phone itself, it's with AT&T, who seems determined to screw up what should be the easiest success story in cell phone history. The biggest successes for Apple have been the ones where they can control the quality as much as possible, and having their own network would give them major oversight in quality control.

3) <i>"[You've got] billing issues, activation issues, quality of signal issues, all that kind of messy stuff that's out of your control even if you own it. Why would they want in?"</i> The same was said about the iTunes music store, and while it hasn't been perfect, or even smooth at times, it's still #1 and the standard others strive for.

4) <i>The article also pointed out that Apple CEO Steve Jobs lacks the kinds of contacts in the telephone market that allowed Apple to more easily enter the music industry.</i> They seem to think that modern telecommunication industry operates on the same level as high school social cliques. They also seem to have it backwards. Everybody is trying to hang out with Apple and Jobs so they can be one of the cool kids, Jobs doesn't need to hunt down people to sign his yearbook.

5) <i>He concluded with the idea that Apple's path of least resistance is to work with other companies, </i> Apple has never been about taking the path of least resistance. They worked hard just to take a gamble with the iPod, while microsoft took the path of least resistance with the Zune. Apple took the path less traveled and developed OS X, Microsoft took the mall escalator to make Vista (and still got off on the wrong floor). Apple pushes the envelope, others are scared to death of choosing the wrong color. Yet who gets all the headlines?

If anything, Forbes has convinced me that Apple will bid on some frequency. I'm buying more stock right now!

Quote this post ↓

gslusher said:

member since 13 Nov 2002 with 2088 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Guest wrote:
Okay, let's deconstruct this baby!

1) <i>Brian Caulfield reasoned that profit margins in running a wireless network were too small</i>

This forum uses BBCode, not HTML. Put the "i" in square brackets [].

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Guest wrote:
So far the only serious complaints about the iPhone isn't the phone itself, it's with AT&amp;T, who seems determined to screw up what should be the easiest success story in cell phone history.

That's not exactly right. Maybe your only serious complaint is about that, but there are plenty of real issues with the device itself.

Quote this post ↓

Post Your Comments

  Remember Me

Not a member? Register now. You can post comments without logging in, but they'll show up as a "guest" post.


Please enter the word exactly as you see it in the image above. Registered users aren't prompted for this. Having trouble reading the image get a new one.