A hype revival of vintage mobile video communication in MWC 2011

Let's get back to 2004, the hype in Mobile World Congress for the first time in Barcelona is about video communication. Thanks to 3G and embedded cameras in the mobile phones, people can proceed to a mobile video call from their device. It's huge. Telecom operators imagine gateways to enable subscribers to proceed with video call between a mobile and a PC to compensate the low numbers of nascent 3G phones. Two years after, this turns to be a failure. Damned, consumers are not using it.

Several reasons have been given at that time : cameras not powerful enough, screen definition too low, requirement of "high quality real time bandwidth", low willingness to use due to high intrusiveness and, finally, too difficult to take a continuous movie of its own image in good condition for the other party (sun, image stability, etc...).

2011, Mobile World Congress, perhaps one of the last time in Barcelona. The hype is back on ... mobile video communication. What can explain the revival ?

Some progress have been done on the technology side, especially on the devices now much more powerful in terms of CPU, screen and camera. Moreover, Skype, which has largely contributed to popular usage PC-2-PC of video, is everyday increasing its penetration on mobile phones.

However, the major factor could be the support of the magician Steve Jobs through Facetime, the video communication service from Apple. US investors suddenly start to poor money in these technologies. Of course, these "dollar cow-boys" did not necessarily participated to the hype 8 years ago since US was still at that time an underdeveloped country in terms of mobile usage, fighting to make CDMA EVDO operational.

Despite device technology evolutions and financial support, some challenge remain on the way to a large penetration of this service on mobile phone. Video communication still is intrusive and image stability did not significantly improve when you have your mobile in your hand.
Another main hurdle - requirement for a high quality network - will still exist for several years. Watching Youtube, users can benefit from buffering in the device, which is not possible with real time communication. This thus requires a continuous quality and bandwidth, which is challenging for a good quality. Just have a look on your device how many times you switch from GPRS (G) to Edge (E) to 3G (3G) to HSDPA (H) and you will see the stability of the data network, especially when you move one meter in your office or when your neighbor starts watching Youtube (because you share the cell data capacity with your neighbors, you like it or not ;-).
Moreover, in terms usage, some analysts state that consumers would use the service to show what is around. Capability to record a video and send it by MMS or email (on smartphones) exists for years. MMS video traffic is very low due to high price for upload of large volume. Imagine the price range when telecom operators want to guarantee a higher quality all along the call.
Finally, since telecom operators face problems with huge data traffic generated by smartphones and USB dongles, they will normally price the video call higher than voice call. Who is willing to pay more for a good quality video call ? It's true that Skype video calls are used on fixed Internet but using video or not is always the same zero price. Willingness to pay is probably the final killer of mobile video communication.
And if some operators would offer video call service at the price of voice calls in order to maintain price of a voice/video call revenues, they would significantly increase their cost without increasing the revenues. Better use this bandwidth to offer more low consumption services.

I had the chance to live the complete previous cycle of mobile video communication. We thought at the beginning that we were very successful since we signed a lot of contracts with major telecom operators but consumers brought us back on earth a bit later.
So, if you are in this business, have fun but do not expect your venture to be funded for a long time. Dollar cow-boys will probably stop soon pooring money in bottomless pit when they will discover the lack of fruits and remaining hurdles of previous experiences.
There are probably much better ideas for new telecom services, focused on low bandwidth for higher profitability of the whole value chain.

Future will say.

Benoit Quirynen

Telecom - automated tariff optimization as the next improvement in customer relationship

Yesterday, I received two messages from my telecom provider.

The first message was an SMS notification that I reached 50% of volume granted by my data plan. I like this kind of positive message when it's not pushed to often.

The second message was a bill. It's usually not a pleasure to receive a bill but this one was a bit special. In the header, the provider announces that tariff optimization process has been run based on my consumption and the tariff plan that I have selected is still the best one for me.

It is also mentioned that they will automatically run this tariff optimization process every 6 months. The optimization facility was already available before but it was up to the subscriber to run it and to switch tariff. Now, at least the simulation is executed automatically.

Telecom operator considers that it's better to keep an existing subscriber than artificially increase the Average Revenue Per User (ARPU) based on poor customer relationship. Customer loyalty improvement could make a sound difference for the value of the share at the end. I consider it as a good anti-churn tool and a very good move of telecom industry inline with respect of the subscriber. A win-win deal obviously.

What is still missing is a simulation of tariff with offers from competitors. It would have been very nice to add a sentence : "and if you would have selected provider B, you would have paid x € more every month" ... if it's true.

Is "automated cross-provider tariff comparison" the next step in customer relationship improvement ?

To be continued ...

Benoit Quirynen

Digital dialog - definitely engaging

This week, I once again had to invoke my preferred customer care - the one of my telecom service provider - in order to activate a data roaming pack.

After a few hours, I received an SMS asking if I wanted to freely participate to a survey about the quality of the interaction with customer care agent. I positively answered and received 2 questions with possibility to reply by sending an SMS including 1 for yes or 2 for no. The last question was asking for open comment. My last personal comment was a proposal for service activation through SMS or web self-care, which would be much more efficient for me than dialing my well-known call center.
Funny to personally experience a format I tried to convince this industry to adopt a few months ago for different usage.

As a subscriber, I honestly found the format more interesting than audio survey usually proposed at the end of the call. It gave me some time to digest if I was happy or not and I felt it much less intrusive.

Answers were explicitly mentioned to be free. Since I answered the survey while in roaming, I'm curious to see if these messages will be charged or not on my next bill. A next test about the consistency about customer communication.

The previous test about communication consistency failed. When in roaming, I received as usual 3 messages indicating rules and caveat about usage abroad. A 4 digits phone number is mentioned in the message. I tried it and ... the answer is that I am invited to dial another 9 digits number. I actually wonder why a telecom operator can not automatically ensure the re-routing of the call to the right support center.

So, still a long way to run for full customer communication consistency but, at least, some telecom operators start to use compelling formats to communicate with their subscribers.

To be continued ...

Benoit Quirynen