Writer ignores the brand risk to Google by getting involved in a business like this. Consumer facing mobile is a messy business, as is retail. You've always got a ton of pissed off customers mad about something, and it could do a lot of damage to a strong brand like Google.
Why Google should just shut up and buy T-Mobile
11–20 of 30 posts
Re: Why Google should just shut up and buy T-Mobile
#12Everyone seems to want Google to enter the mobile space. However, I don't think Google buying T-Mobile would work out so well. T-Mobile has no low-frequency spectrum. Lower frequency spectrum allows signals to travel further (in real-world conditions) and offers better in-building coverage. AT&T and Verizon have most of the sub-1GHz spectrum in many markets with Sprint trying to re-farm the ~14MHz they acquired via N…
Agree. T-mobile fell behind largely in part because they couldn't get the iPhone. I'm not sure Google could have addressed this issue any better than the current T-mobile management team.
Now that you bring it up, I'm really surprised that Google hasn't tried the MVNO route yet.
Re: Why Google should just shut up and buy T-Mobile
#13Everyone seems to want Google to enter the mobile space. However, I don't think Google buying T-Mobile would work out so well. T-Mobile has no low-frequency spectrum. Lower frequency spectrum allows signals to travel further (in real-world conditions) and offers better in-building coverage. AT&T and Verizon have most of the sub-1GHz spectrum in many markets with Sprint trying to re-farm the ~14MHz they acquired via N…
when i see comments like this, im curious as to what inspired op to write something more in depth and interesting than the original content (higher word count to boot!) are you an industry insider? just passionate about the subject?
Re: Why Google should just shut up and buy T-Mobile
#14Apple used tomtom's map, now what? Please, it's not that naive.
Re: Why Google should just shut up and buy T-Mobile
#15Everyone seems to want Google to enter the mobile space. However, I don't think Google buying T-Mobile would work out so well. T-Mobile has no low-frequency spectrum. Lower frequency spectrum allows signals to travel further (in real-world conditions) and offers better in-building coverage. AT&T and Verizon have most of the sub-1GHz spectrum in many markets with Sprint trying to re-farm the ~14MHz they acquired via N…
when i see comments like this, im curious as to what inspired op to write something more in depth and interesting than the original content (higher word count to boot!) are you an industry insider? just passionate about the subject?
I have trouble being terse.
On a larger level, I think that many issues are multi-facetted and that requires a certain amount of text to explore. Many times we experience the kind of reasoning like, "The car companies just need to make the cars use less gas. . ." The "just" in that statement belies the problem and can lead people to trains of thought like, "they must not care about the environment and might be getting bribes from BigOil to keep fuel economy down". In reality, there are complex engineering issues at play, issues of cost of lighter/more expensive materials (like aluminum), more advanced/expensive parts (like CVTs and DSGs), more advanced techniques (like the grill shutters that enhance highway fuel economy on a few new vehicles), etc. It's hard work to provide a significantly enhanced product while maintaining it as affordable and reliable. Google "just" needs to buy a wireless carrier and we'd have a premier Android product with the wireless service that we dream of. Now, I'm not accusing the article of being simplistic like that, but I think there are more issues at play than what the article raised. In order to create good conclusions, many different data points need to be considered and weighed. Different people may consider them differently, but they should be a part of the consideration.
Ultimately, things like wireless (and other utilities) present an interesting economic problem: how do we (as citizens/consumers) get the best quality product at the lowest price when it may not be practical to have more than a few competitors?
I think Google does many excellent things and hope to see them do more excellent things in the future, but I thought it was important to point out that buying T-Mobile might not give us the outcome that we want (as fans of Google).
Thanks!
Re: Why Google should just shut up and buy T-Mobile
#16While I can't completely rule it out since I have no inside knowledge, this sounds like a terrible move. T-Mobile is in a commodity business and they aren't particularly successful at it. While the author tries to make the argument that Google needs retail help (recency bias, methinks), Google could put together a vastly better retail experience for far cheaper than it would take to buy T-Mobile. Unlike Moto, I don't…
Not disagreeing otherwise, but to your last point, a similar argument could have been made about smartphone manufacturers before they bought Motorola, and yet they did it anyway, and it hasn't stopped other companies from continuing to manufacture Android phones.
Re: Why Google should just shut up and buy T-Mobile
#17I'm not sure Google would be interested in T-Mobile when they already partnered with Dish Network to create a Cellular Network sometime next year http://9to5google.com/2012/11/16/google-dish-wireless-servic...
I'm surprised no one else mentioned this, I was about to before I saw this comment.
Google + T-Mobile + dish spectrum ?= awesome
Re: Why Google should just shut up and buy T-Mobile
#18Everyone seems to want Google to enter the mobile space. However, I don't think Google buying T-Mobile would work out so well. T-Mobile has no low-frequency spectrum. Lower frequency spectrum allows signals to travel further (in real-world conditions) and offers better in-building coverage. AT&T and Verizon have most of the sub-1GHz spectrum in many markets with Sprint trying to re-farm the ~14MHz they acquired via N…
> A Google-owned T-Mobile wouldn't be pushing the envelope on coverage and that's something that the majority of Americans seem to find quite important (even if they don't venture out of their home location much).
Even if they have to put up with contracts and sucky customer service and treatment by carriers.
Someone with a clue should buy a carrier and push the envelope on customer service. My bandwidth is good enough enough of the time. The service and treatment I get has always and still sucks.
Re: Why Google should just shut up and buy T-Mobile
#19I'm not sure Google would be interested in T-Mobile when they already partnered with Dish Network to create a Cellular Network sometime next year http://9to5google.com/2012/11/16/google-dish-wireless-servic...
I'm surprised no one else mentioned this, I was about to before I saw this comment. Google + T-Mobile + dish spectrum ?= awesome
The article mentioned this.
Re: Why Google should just shut up and buy T-Mobile
#20Everyone seems to want Google to enter the mobile space. However, I don't think Google buying T-Mobile would work out so well. T-Mobile has no low-frequency spectrum. Lower frequency spectrum allows signals to travel further (in real-world conditions) and offers better in-building coverage. AT&T and Verizon have most of the sub-1GHz spectrum in many markets with Sprint trying to re-farm the ~14MHz they acquired via N…
> A Google-owned T-Mobile wouldn't be pushing the envelope on coverage and that's something that the majority of Americans seem to find quite important (even if they don't venture out of their home location much). Even if they have to put up with contracts and sucky customer service and treatment by carriers. Someone with a clue should buy a carrier and push the envelope on customer service. My bandwidth is good enou…
That someone isn't Google though. Google is bad enough at customer service that they should aquire t-mobile just for the support department.