Does Google need its own MVNO? To support the N4

[deano131]

First I own a Nexus 4 and think it is the best Android phone I have owned and I owned a few. For the last 2 months I have been on ST Tmo, Tmo $30 plan and now will try Net 10 AT&T. I have had my sons SGll on Net10 for a month which looks like where my N4 will end up. ST AT&T was my 1st choice but due to Sim issues that has not happened.

Let's face the facts, there are only 2 GSM Tower services in the U.S. a MVNO provider can use. AT&T or T-Mobile. The problem is Tmo seems to be the only company that wants to play ball and support BYOP. AT&T on the other hand seems to be doing all they can to slow down the use of their towers via a MVNO. If you are lucky enough to live in an area where Tmo coverage is acceptable great. If AT&T is your only option due to poor Tmo coverage things get a lot tougher. Those MVNO's that are still offering AT&T service are throttling data, limiting data, MMS issues and in general have poor customers service. It would seem to me if Google wants there non contract Nexus phones to succeed they are going to need to find a way to pressure AT&T to play ball. Maybe this means they need to take some of their billions of dollars and start there own MVNO service to support their phone and all other BYOP customers. If their N4 has limited MVNO service or frustrating cell service in the U.S. success will be steep hill to climb. Most average cell users are not like those of us on the forums willing it to deal with the hassles.

 

[CoMoNexus]

I'd be surprised if Google were willing to take on that expense. AT&T says it's going to spend $8 billion this year just to expand its network. That's on top of operating expenses (e.g., backhaul leases, contact centers, marketing). To scratch-build a network with the level of coverage you want, Google would have to spend at least $10 billion the first year. It might have been cheaper to buy TMO, but Google still would have had to pump in billions annually to upgrade to LTE, expand coverage, etc.

I think Google is more interested in having someone else run the network. Google Fiber seems to be an experiment rather than an effort to build a network that covers at least the 50 largest markets. Plus, who knows how long Google Fiber will be around? Google has a long record of going big in new areas (e.g., smart meters) and then abandoning them.

 

[deano131]

Technically I was not suggesting Google start their own Network but their own MVNO. I agree with you it would cost way to much to start from scratch and take way to long to catch up. But having their own MVNO they might be able to offer AT&T's network with better service and more reliable data support through the Play Store.

 

[Biggnaa20]

Plus, who knows how long Google Fiber will be around? Google has a long record of going big in new areas (e.g., smart meters) and then abandoning them.

Agreed. After the dissolution of Google Reader, I'm leery about using any service that I might come to rely on with Google that doesn't have immediate monetized feedback for Big G.

 

[ConTejas]

There was a rumor that Google would be partnering with DISH network to build a terrestrial network under DISH owned spectrum. Now the rumor is that DISH is trying to buy Sprint. So maybe there's something more with Google in the works. One can hope

Google and Dish Network are in talks to launch a wireless service, says WSJ | The Verge

Google Wireless: Could a Dish Network Alliance Make It Happen? | TIME.com

Dish Network Offering to Buy Sprint in $25.5B Deal | TIME.com

 

[Tall Mike 2145]

deano131, I don't really understand your logic here. Let me see if I get this straight:

1. There's only two meaningful actual cell service providers in the U.S., T-Mobile and AT&T;
2. T-Mobile is very MVNO- and BYOP friendly;
3. T-Mobile's coverage, comparatively, sucks;
4. AT&T's coverage, comparatively, is pretty good;
5. AT&T is relatively MVNO- and BYOP unfriendly;
6. Therefore, Google should start up their own MVNO (with AT&T, presumably)

Did I miss anything?

What I wish is that we could have state-by-state- or Federally-financed dedicated fiber networks spanning this country to feed cell towers. These cell towers should be extremely numerous, and big enough to support multiple different carriers on every single tower. This then provides a commons and we won't be stuck in this stupid situation any longer.

 

[gone down south]

deano131, I don't really understand your logic here. Let me see if I get this straight:

1. There's only two meaningful actual cell service providers in the U.S., T-Mobile and AT&T;
2. T-Mobile is very MVNO- and BYOP friendly;
3. T-Mobile's coverage, comparatively, sucks;
4. AT&T's coverage, comparatively, is pretty good;
5. AT&T is relatively MVNO- and BYOP unfriendly;
6. Therefore, Google should start up their own MVNO (with AT&T, presumably)

Did I miss anything?

What I wish is that we could have state-by-state- or Federally-financed dedicated fiber networks spanning this country to feed cell towers. These cell towers should be extremely numerous, and big enough to support multiple different carriers on every single tower. This then provides a commons and we won't be stuck in this stupid situation any longer.

The logic is that current GSM carriers are doing a lousy job, Google should throw it's weight into the ring to bring customers the service Google wants them to have : ubiquitous, unlimited, fast data.



Sent from my Nexus 4 using Android Central Forums

 

[deano131]

deano131, I don't really understand your logic here. Let me see if I get this straight:

1. There's only two meaningful actual cell service providers in the U.S., T-Mobile and AT&T;
As fare as GSM is concerned in the U.S. am I not correct? And is not the only supported N4 network GSM?
2. T-Mobile is very MVNO- and BYOP friendly;
At this time that appears to be the case
3. T-Mobile's coverage, comparatively, sucks;
In my neck of the woods YES
4. AT&T's coverage, comparatively, is pretty good;
In my neck of the woods YES
5. AT&T is relatively MVNO- and BYOP unfriendly;
It seems that way
6. Therefore, Google should start up their own MVNO (with AT&T, presumably)
and Tmo. Who else are they going to work with? Since it is obvious starting there own network would be cost prohibitive and time consuming.

My point is, from a business stand point, if Google wants to make a non contracted phone a viable option in the U.S. they are going to have to find a way to give the common cell phone user a user friendly and easy to implement product. Otherwise Google is going to find its N4 and future Nexus phones in a niche market relaying on Tmo's network which at this point is usable but not reliable for parts of the U.S. or deal with what appears to be AT&T's push to get MVNO's thus non contracted phones off their network or at-least stifle the trend. This is why I posed the question if Google should offer their own MVNO product. One would hope with there financial clout it might give them some leverage with Network providers like AT&T to play a little nicer plus they would have a stake in the hardware's ability to work reliably on the network. What I mean by working reliably is fix the MMS issues, Data and APN issues. Call forwarding issues making Googles own GV crippled on some Tmo MVNO's. Just to name a few issues.

Did I miss anything? NO

What I wish is that we could have state-by-state- or Federally-financed dedicated fiber networks spanning this country to feed cell towers. These cell towers should be extremely numerous, and big enough to support multiple different carriers on every single tower. This then provides a commons and we won't be stuck in this stupid situation any longer.Not sure if this is intended with a bit of sarcasm or your are serious. As nice as it sounds I don't believe it would ever happen.

 

[deano131]

GDS Thank you! I couldn't of said it better.

 

[return_0]

Google + T-Mobile = G-Mobile.

G-Mobile + Google Fiber = Awesome.

 

[gnr_2]

What is MVNO?

I think Google should partner with Virgin Mobile, which interestingly, uses the Sprint network. I know the N4 can't work on Sprint right now, but in time, this could change.

Sent from my totally awesome Sprint Galaxy Nexus, even if I don't know all its secrets yet.

 

[deano131]

Mobile Virtual Network Operator. Wikipedia gives the full low down.

 

[josegb2011]

T-mobile seems to me as the best partnership for google especially with the metro pcs merger approved now coverage and LTE roll out should improve. they can possibly be the first carrier to release 5g AKA LTE ADVANCED dare i say.(150mbs of data that would be f**** awesome)

 

[jdbii]

T-mobile seems to me as the best partnership for google especially with the metro pcs merger approved now coverage and LTE roll out should improve. they can possibly be the first carrier to release 5g AKA LTE ADVANCED dare i say.(150mbs of data that would be f**** awesome)

LTE ADVANCED 150mbs would be awesome -- but even so everybody outside of Tmobile's network is still sol unless you are willing to pay full contract price on one of the majors when you already own your phone. This is one area where I would like to see Congress step in and pass legislation that mandates that cell phone contracts are more transparent so that there is clear separation between the cost of the service from the cost of financing the phone.