Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

European Carriers Claim Apple Should Pay for Network Infrastructure

Wtf

This is the same as Comcast attempting to charge Level 3 since they provide the data streams for Netflix's Instant Services.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/level-3-and-comcast-neutrality-battle-heats-up/?news=123

Something has to be done, this is only the beginning, if this trend continues it will only hurt the consumer in the end by increasing fees.

My favorite analogy mentioned previously in this thread kins this too vehicle manufacturers having to pay for us to drive our cars on the road.
 
nastebu said:
Well, "Evil" is obviously hyperbole. Aside from that, I'll take another crack at defending this.

Apple is making a lot of money selling iPhones. So are the carriers, now. But the question is about the future. As Apple, and all the Android magnafacturers, keep making more and more data hungry cell phones, the carriers are going to have to massively invest in infrastructure. That means we'll be buying phones cheap, but we'll have to pay more for plans.

It also means that the telecos are basically investing huge amounts of money to support Apple et. al's business plan. (if the increased infrastructure doesn't exist, the handsets are useless.)

So it makes some sense that if you're going to sell a data-hungry phone, you should support the investment that is going to make that phone usable.
Click to expand...

This. While I agree with both sides, this particular situation is outside of the norm. Apple has created a product by increasing a need for a niche market (basic business). This surge in data usage due to the "trendy" iPhone has resulted in mobile carriers across the globe struggling to keep up with demand. It's not just about money. Every Tom, Dick and Jane AND their kids left their RAZR's and other basic mobile phones for the "cool" iPhone (I hate to state this but does EVERYONE need a smart phone with an unlimited data plan?). Couple this with how difficult it is for mobile providers to get new towers approved by towns AND built, it's near impossible. As well, comparing the U.S. to E.U. telecoms is a bit of a stretch as mobile carriers in the U.S. have much more territory to cover. In dense urban markets such as NYC there are so many towers from competitors it's even more arduous.

Again, I'm not agreeing or disagreeing as both parties have valid points, I'm merely playing devil's advocate. Apple and AT&T have gained tremendous amounts of capital for Apple's device, both can readily afford to improve mobile usage, and I believe both need to take some responsibility.


dexthageek said:
This is the same as Comcast attempting to charge Level 3 since they provide the data streams for Netflix's Instant Services.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/level-3-and-comcast-neutrality-battle-heats-up/?news=123

Something has to be done, this is only the beginning, if this trend continues it will only hurt the consumer in the end by increasing fees.

My favorite analogy mentioned previously in this thread kins this too vehicle manufacturers having to pay for us to drive our cars on the road.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I'm also incredibly concerned with Net Neutrality. I DO NOT want our government and cable providers dictating what content I have access to online. This is upsetting as it's tantamount to a communistic regime, and yet no one seems to be interested in the fact that certain carriers are working with our appointed political figures to pass such laws. I am much more concerned about Comcast dictating what laws are needed to further THEIR agenda, which is most likely helped by The Supreme Court deciding that corporations can support a politician with unlimited finances. I do not understand why more American's are not infuriated with this, even Pres. Obama lectured the Supreme Court for this horrendous decision during his SOTU address (and received a standing ovation by both parties it seemed).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
sportsfan said:
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=VOD+Income+Statement&annual

Where does all this go? Upper MGMT vacation homes and cars?
Click to expand...

Wow! You have got to be kidding me! Is that what Apple's money is going to, vacation homes and cars?

Is your stomach hurting from all the kool-aid?

This thread is pretty amazing. Apple makes money = good; anybody else makes money = greedy, bad, and "they must be buying vacation homes and cars." Just wow.
 
bedifferent said:
Couple this with how difficult it is for mobile providers to get new towers approved by towns AND built, it's near impossible.
Click to expand...
Yeh, funny you would mention that. It's amazing people in crowded metropolitan areas complain about service but would reject any new towers going up. "Not in my backyard" they say. (Same deal with SUV drivers complaining about gas prices but that's more off-topic).
 
Apple and Google are handing the carriers a cash cow. Customers want to use their networks more than ever and they are complaining that Apple and Google should build infrastructure for them to make money on as well??? Don't they see that the day Apple or Google builds a network is the day that all the carriers will go out of business? Carriers... you are a pipe, nothing more, you aren't offering customers any reason to stay with you over the other guy. How about loyalty rewards?? How about working with content providers to cache the most popular content and speed up downloads for your users while decreasing load on your network? I would pay more for data but I want ONE plan for ALL my devices. Not $15 here and $20 there.

Maybe Wal-Mart should whine to the toy companies the next time a new tickle-me-elmo comes out and overworks their cashiers.... boo hoo
 
nastebu said:
Well, "Evil" is obviously hyperbole. Aside from that, I'll take another crack at defending this.

Apple is making a lot of money selling iPhones. So are the carriers, now. But the question is about the future. As Apple, and all the Android magnafacturers, keep making more and more data hungry cell phones, the carriers are going to have to massively invest in infrastructure. That means we'll be buying phones cheap, but we'll have to pay more for plans.

It also means that the telecos are basically investing huge amounts of money to support Apple et. al's business plan. (if the increased infrastructure doesn't exist, the handsets are useless.)

So it makes some sense that if you're going to sell a data-hungry phone, you should support the investment that is going to make that phone usable.
Click to expand...

The bolded bit is a strange way of looking at it - these companies sell bandwidth. They are investing the money to meet the massive demand for their services; not to support Apple. If they can't make a profit with such staggering demand, they should close down now.

I do agree there should be cooperation between the handset makers and the networks. You'd think there would be more mergers/joint-ventures already.. Apple invested in Flash memory for the long-term good of its mobile products; perhaps they should look to do likewise in providing bandwidth? But moaning to the media seems to be a strange way to go about it.
 
DiamondMac said:
Yet another reason people can expect unlimited to be gone when the next iPad/iPhone get released

Every company is inching closer to continuing to screw customers with smaller and smaller caps
Click to expand...
you're 6 months behind the times. UK unlimited data tariffs were abolished in May! since then, new contracts get just 500mb data, 600mins & Unlimited txt for $63.22 - where'as previously you got Unlimited data for the same money! but even that was capped by a fair usage policy that effectively meant you were kicked off the 3G data network if you got anywhere near 3GB mark per month.

There are now zero unlimited tariffs available in the UK on any network! A Data Package "bolt-on" can usually be purchased for an extra $15.80 per month tho - meaning there's no shortage of bandwidth availability ...just a desire to make as much money from customers (and now Apple\Google) as possible.

The EU Telco's paid what is said to be £billions over the odds for 3G licences (greedy suckers) - they want their investment back as quickly as possible.

on another note: someone posted the we (Europe) had the best data service in the World! not quite... that honour goes to South East Asia. ;)
 
Last edited:
Hahahaha. Really, providers?

"Waaah I can't keep up with technology to host these phones that I get big money for every month from my customers, so I'm going to make the phone manufacturers pay for my inadequacies!"

Oh, providers.
 
Hey European Carrier crybabies, just tell Apple and the other iPhone wannabes what they need to pay. They in turn will increase their subsidized requests from you, the carrier that wishes to have the iPhone customer and then the carrier will increase their price for plans of minutes and data capped and in the end, is where we the consumers will get it... in the end! :eek:

Get it?! ...in the end! :D
 
they want apple and google to pay for it but their phones are giving them the most business?? sigh at carriers.
 
Rot'nApple said:
Hey European Carrier crybabies, just tell Apple and the other iPhone wannabes what they need to pay. They in turn will increase their subsidized requests from you, the carrier that wishes to have the iPhone customer and then the carrier will increase their price for plans of minutes and data capped and in the end, is where we the consumers will get it... in the end! :eek:

Get it?! ...in the end! :D
Click to expand...

Don't get on your high horse, AT&T requested the same. At least in Europe and other locations, your given the option of which carrier you want to use your iPhone on.


--

The outcome doesn't matter, either way, the customer will be screwed.
 
bedifferent said:
Agreed. I'm also incredibly concerned with Net Neutrality. I DO NOT want our government and cable providers dictating what content I have access to online. This is upsetting as it's tantamount to a communistic regime...
Click to expand...

There's no tenet to communism that calls for denying citizens access to information. It's an economic system.

But what do you care, throwing around words like "communism" and "socialism" without having any understanding of their meaning?

:rolleyes:
 
Greed

Do you smell that?

I love the smell of corporate greed in the morning.

Nothing else in the world smells like that.
 
huh?

Wait, so should Audi pay for potholes in city streets?

Television manufacturers pay the utility companies extra?

Would love to see what their strategic plans look like.

:eek:
 
dexthageek said:
This is the same as Comcast attempting to charge Level 3 since they provide the data streams for Netflix's Instant Services.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/level-3-and-comcast-neutrality-battle-heats-up/?news=123
Click to expand...

This is not the same at all. L3 is using NN as a scare tactic, but it's not NN. L3 and Comcast have/had a peer agreement to allow each others traffic to cross through each others networks at no cost presumable b/c they had similar amounts of traffic. By underbidding all other providers L3 got the NF contract and now their bandwidth usage has gone up A LOT (5x more by the article you posted). Comcast is calling foul b/c the amount of L3 traffic is going way up so they want L3 to pay like other CDNs, Akamai for example.

When L3 got NF by underbidding everyone else, people in the know all wondered how they could bid so low. Turns out they were hoping that their free peering deals would stay in place.
 
Bs

Dear Carriers,
You get paid by the users for data throughput. The device being used to access/consume this bandwidth is irrelevant.

User paid for device the device you sold them to use on your network and the user paid for data plan to use your infrastructure, so why would you say that Apple (or Google, or another device manufacturer) owes you anything?

If I were a device manufacturer I'd get with the other manufacturers of similar devices (Apple, Google, RIM, HTC, etc.) and start investing in building an IP based infrastructure built for data devices from the ground up (and underground too)
 
I think the article got the new wrong

MacRumors said:
Bloomberg reports[/url] that European carriers are looking to band together in an effort to demand that companies such as Apple and Google offering data-intensive smartphones make specific contributions to network infrastructure according to their usage. The move comes as carriers struggle to handle the rapidly-growing demands on their networks as customers increasingly turn to smartphones and consume increasing amounts of data for purposes such as video streaming.

Quote:
"As mobile and Web companies add videos, music and games, operators including France Telecom SA, Telecom Italia SpA and Vodafone Group Plc want a new deal that would require content providers like Apple and Google to pay fees linked to usage."
Click to expand...

The carriers are not demanding the money from Apple because it sells iPhone, they want the money from Apple (and others) as a content provider. Some one has to pay for distribution of data from Apple to end customer. It could be either Apple or us (or both in some ratio). I think it makes perfect sense.
 
lilo777 said:
The carriers are not demanding the money from Apple because it sells iPhone, they want the money from Apple (and others) as a content provider. Some one has to pay for distribution of data from Apple to end customer. It could be either Apple or us (or both in some ratio). I think it makes perfect sense.
Click to expand...

It makes no sense.
 
mdriftmeyer said:
Cry me a river. Perhaps they should develop their own OS/Smartphone and compete.

Perhaps they need to redesign their plans?
Click to expand...

Wow, your insight is amazing.

But again the same could be said for Apple, maybe they should develop their own cell networks and compete. :D
 
alent1234 said:
that's impossible, everyone knows europe has the most advanced cell network along with internet pipes in the world and the US is the stone age of the internet.

european carriers should have no trouble keeping up with traffic since they can sell unlimited bandwidth for half the price of AT&T
Click to expand...

That might have something to do with the fact that the UK has a population of around 61 million people and the US has a population around 307 million people. There is only so much bandwidth available when you are serving a population that is nearly 5 times the size. The US would have a lightning fast network if they had five times less population to serve.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back