Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Project Fi by Google

fi.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 608 posts

Re: Project Fi by Google

#521

Post by clarky07 »

ryanSrich wrote: post #512
jamroom wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just as a point of reference, this is about on par with AT&T family share plans - I pay $145 a month for 3 iphones, unlimited text and talk with 10 gigs shared data. With taxes and fees it comes out to right around $160 (which would be the same here if I used all 10 gigs). The down side is that I'm not refunded for any unused data, so I pay that every month. But we use a good chunk of it every month, so this wouldn't…

I pay $110 per month for 2 iPhones and unlimited talk, text, and data on T-Mobile. I really don't know why anyone wouldn't go with T-Mobile. They don't have contracts, overage fees and have the only unlimited data plan on the market (or at least among the big players). I could see coverage being an issue if you're in the country but that's not going to be an issue for too much longer.

sprint also has an unlimited plan fwiw.

Re: Project Fi by Google

#522

Post by rizwank »

henrikg wrote: post #508
laurencerowe wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google is charging a significant markup over T-Mobile's existing rates ($30/month for 5Gb vs $70/month through Gooogle.) So Fi is really only interesting for people doing significant international roaming.

I've had TMO in the past, and the Google plan is attractive to me for a couple of reasons * T-Mobile customer service is inconsistent in messaging on the phone, via Facebook, stores * As a H1B visa holder I am, according to TMO, not able to get a postpaid plan * Prepaid plan does not work outside of the US * Prepaid plan has issues receiving short codes from Uber/Bank of America and possibly others - I've spent 8+ ho…

TMO prepaid and TMO MVNOs now have full short code access.

-citation: I confounded and run a U.S. MVNO.

Re: Project Fi by Google

#523

Post by rizwank »

URSpider94 wrote: post #485
smacktoward wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I don't get is, what's in this for Sprint and T-Mobile? Currently a user of their network is a customer they "own" -- they deal with that customer directly. Now they have Google sitting between them and the user, which effectively commoditizes their service; Google could switch them out for another network down the road without the user ever knowing or caring. That's great for Google, and probably also great for…

Sprint and T-Mobile already have thriving businesses in reselling their bandwidth through mobile virtual network operators (MVNO's, see http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_virtual_network_operat... ). You've probably heard of some of them, like Boost Mobile and Virgin Mobile. This is because they have excess capacity that they can't sell through their own sales channels.

Boost and Virgin are both owned by sprint, FYI.

Re: Project Fi by Google

#524

Post by rizwank »

mikeash wrote: post #444
maxsilver wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's the whole point of Google Fi. They partnered with Sprint and T-Mobile. When your in Alameda and Sprint sucks, Google puts you on T-Mobile's network, and you get better data + coverage. When you head to the rural Midwest, and T-Mobile has EDGE or no service at all, Google can put you back on Sprint LTE and it's at least better than EDGE on T-Mobile. If this works the way they describe, then you win in both…

If you combine two crappy networks, the result won't be as crappy, but it won't necessarily be good either.

In general yes, but TMO and sprint are often the jack and Jill of coverage.

Re: Project Fi by Google

#525

Post by rizwank »

ricardobeat wrote: post #342
unprepare wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A carrier in germany has to build 26 times less towers than a carrier in the US, because germany is more than 26 times smaller than the US. I would think the increased expenditure of 26 times more towers would increase the cost of plans. Europe also never had the culture of carrier subsidized phones, and so were never accustomed to paying more in monthly fees in exchange for low to no cost upgrades of hardware. Tethe…

> Europe also never had the culture of carrier subsidized phones, and so were never accustomed to paying more in monthly fees in exchange for low to no cost upgrades of hardware. I live in the Netherlands and subsidized phones are the norm here, don't think other countries are that different.

My experience in NL was differentiated pricing based upon the phone you got - ie it was subsidized by financing. In the states it was a massive flat out discount that wasn't explicit financing.

Re: Project Fi by Google

#526

Post by rizwank »

bduerst wrote: post #403
tomhschmidt wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This plan actually makes no sense. Overage charges are the same rate ($10 / GB), so why am I buying a "plan" at all? Why don't they just charge $10 * x gigs / month instead of all this buying / refunding business?

Maybe it's a purchasing nuance with the data supply chain? As in, it's more expensive to meter everyone's data and charge per 100 MB, and cheaper to charge in 10 GB blocks and then refund retroactively. They are piggybacking off of other networks, which may not accept 100 MB purchases. I can see them doing a purchasing scheme with the suppliers and then transferring the savings to the customer.

It's a CC charge issue.

You get incremental costs per CC charge. Better, in Googles mind, to overcharge and refund rather than a new charge every 100mb.

Re: Project Fi by Google

#527

Post by ismail »

This is very interesting, I have over 10 years experience working in the mobile telecoms industry. Here are my theories on how this could change the market/analysis:

1. This reduces the friction in switching networks, no 'SIM Card' Lock in. It's a pain to keep having to switch sim cards. Some people carry 2 phones here in Africa so they can take advantage of different deals by different carriers.

2. Due to Point 1, This will face push back from carriers

3. Unless there is some incentive for them to get this carriers want to make switching costs as high as possible. To avoid churn.

If it succeeds:

4. This changes the game in voice calling. Currently you sim is linked to a specific carrier, you only logon to their network all traffic (Local, International Voice, SMS, Data) is carried by them. What if you could route International calls traffic via X, and then local calls via Y?

5. WhatsAPP is most likely the company that will get the largest payoff from this. They are a few years ahead of everyone else, and have just launched voice calling.

6. Super-normal profits are over for operators

7. Actual Network quality (vs marketing about network quality) will become more important.

8. This will create an opportunity for players that are focused purely on network quality, and not marketing.

9. Carriers spend tons on marketing, failed product launches etc. At times this outstrips their engineering spend. Some even believe this is not a core competency and outsource IT/Engineering. Any carrier that does the opposite, could disrupt the incumbents

10. The base-stations (BSS/BSC) becomes more valuable, companies that own these have high value assets. They could then lease it out to other players. A few years back operators in Africa were selling off their base stations to American Towers [0] to fund their marketing budgets. At the time, i thought this was not a very good decision. Now i am convinced it was a terrible decision. The network of base stations is probably one of the most valuable assets a carrier has.

If i think of anything else, will post back here.

[0] http://www.americantower.com/corporateus/global-country-sele...

Re: Project Fi by Google

#528

Post by ismail »

ismail wrote: post #527

This is very interesting, I have over 10 years experience working in the mobile telecoms industry. Here are my theories on how this could change the market/analysis: 1. This reduces the friction in switching networks, no 'SIM Card' Lock in. It's a pain to keep having to switch sim cards. Some people carry 2 phones here in Africa so they can take advantage of different deals by different carriers. 2. Due to Point 1, T…

11. There is a massive industry from manufacturing [1] to distributing sim cards and getting them into the hands of customers. I do not see a bright future for them.

http://www.gemalto.com/techno/sim

Re: Project Fi by Google

#529

Post by spullara »

xanderstrike wrote: post #302
Someone1234 wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything you said is correct, I just want to make two tiny clarifications: - It is unlimited talk (domestic) and unlimited text (domestic and international). International talk costs extra. What was said in your post was accurate, but the way it was worded could confuse people into believing that it is unlimited international talk. The pricing is a little more nuanced than you said. - It is $20 (talk/text) and then…

The "refund" language is confusing for the purposes of advertising, and I wouldn't bother repeating it. It's by-the-gig pricing, full stop. They just charge you for data you use, at a quite competitive price.

$10/G is the same price as AT&T. Is there another one that is more expensive?

Re: Project Fi by Google

#530

Post by spullara »

smacktoward wrote: post #171
wiremine wrote: post #92

For those who don't want to read the FAQ or find the video incredibly unhelpful [1]: a. It only supports the Nexus 6 out of the gate. b. It automatically switches you to the "fastest" network available. Partners out of the gate are Sprint and T-mobile. Sounds like it prefers Wifi, then 4G LTE, and then degrades down to 3G or 2G. c. Pricing is $20 for unlimited talk (domestic) and text (domestic and international) and…

What I don't get is, what's in this for Sprint and T-Mobile? Currently a user of their network is a customer they "own" -- they deal with that customer directly. Now they have Google sitting between them and the user, which effectively commoditizes their service; Google could switch them out for another network down the road without the user ever knowing or caring. That's great for Google, and probably also great for…

Relevance? Verizon and AT&T are killing them.
Post reply on HN