July 6, 2009 4:06 PM
- Text
Feds Upsetting Apple Cart?
(MoneyWatch)
The Department of Justice has begun investigating certain practices in the wireless telecom industry, including exclusive deals between carriers and handset makers that limit competition, and violations of network neutrality rules, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal. The DoJ will certainly have the support of customers who'd like their iPhones on the Verizon network, but observers also point out that unsubsidized, dual-mode handsets would be prohibitively expensive.
AT&T, for instance, subsidizes the price of the iPhone, as well as a good deal of the marketing cost that Apple would have to otherwise spend on its own. Moreover, the cost of handsets to consumers would be a good deal higher if vendors had to ensure they worked on any U.S. network.
However, the focus on the DoJ's investigation might not be about the impact on consumers, but rather the effect of these arrangements on smaller regional and mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs). Avi Greengart, who follows the wireless market at Current Analysis, told me that while the likes of AT&T, Verizon and Sprint can order handsets in large enough quantities to command special feature sets and the exclusivity that goes with that, smaller carriers like Cincinnati Bell or Metro PCS "are limited to a degree to the types of handset they can get." They certainly can't benefit from the next hot phone.
By the same token, Greengart said, the market is currently providing a wide variety of feature phones at affordable prices; many of the most egregious abuses by carriers towards consumers -- like early termination fees that aren't pro rated -- have been put to an end. Moreover, exclusive arrangements aren't unique to the telecom industry -- you have to buy a Ford if you want Microsoft Sync in your car. Greengart also argued that subsidies make it easier for customers to afford feature phones, thereby stimulating innovation. Greengart believes the DoJ may upset a delicate balance by intervening in the market. "It's hard to know what the consequences of reining in some features of the market would be," he said.
The Department of Justice has begun investigating certain practices in the wireless telecom industry, including exclusive deals between carriers and handset makers that limit competition, and violations of network neutrality rules, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal. The DoJ will certainly have the support of customers who'd like their iPhones on the Verizon network, but observers also point out that unsubsidized, dual-mode handsets would be prohibitively expensive.AT&T, for instance, subsidizes the price of the iPhone, as well as a good deal of the marketing cost that Apple would have to otherwise spend on its own. Moreover, the cost of handsets to consumers would be a good deal higher if vendors had to ensure they worked on any U.S. network.
However, the focus on the DoJ's investigation might not be about the impact on consumers, but rather the effect of these arrangements on smaller regional and mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs). Avi Greengart, who follows the wireless market at Current Analysis, told me that while the likes of AT&T, Verizon and Sprint can order handsets in large enough quantities to command special feature sets and the exclusivity that goes with that, smaller carriers like Cincinnati Bell or Metro PCS "are limited to a degree to the types of handset they can get." They certainly can't benefit from the next hot phone.
By the same token, Greengart said, the market is currently providing a wide variety of feature phones at affordable prices; many of the most egregious abuses by carriers towards consumers -- like early termination fees that aren't pro rated -- have been put to an end. Moreover, exclusive arrangements aren't unique to the telecom industry -- you have to buy a Ford if you want Microsoft Sync in your car. Greengart also argued that subsidies make it easier for customers to afford feature phones, thereby stimulating innovation. Greengart believes the DoJ may upset a delicate balance by intervening in the market. "It's hard to know what the consequences of reining in some features of the market would be," he said.
Latest Now in MoneyWatch
- Big banks, gov't officials strike $25B deal
- LinkedIn swings back to profit
- LinkedIn doubles revenue, beats growth estimates
- Kodak to stop making digital cameras, frames
- Market cap, schmarket cap, Apple still gets no respect
- Philip Morris Int'l income up nearly 8 percent
- Survey: Small biz plans big hires in 2012
- Freddie Mac: Mortgages inch higher but stay low
- Will the European debt crisis sink Obama's re-election?
- Banks in $25B deal to settle foreclosure abuses
- Joe Coffee: Scaling up without selling your soul
- Greek agreement accomplishes nothing
- 401K plans: New rules make costs clearer
- Are women leaders selling themselves short?
- Ask the Experts: New 401(k) rules
- Mortgage lenders strike a deal
- $25B foreclosure-abuse settlement reached
Latest CBS News Headlines
on Facebook
on CBS News
- NY Fashion Week: Wearable, sellable style for fall
- On the Call: LinkedIn CFO Steve Sordello
- Guilty plea anticipated in NY baby kidnap case
- Romney "glitter bomb" suspect loses his job
on Facebook
- Adele opens up about vocal cord surgery
- Tenn. father charged with murdering couple who"unfriended" daughter on Facebook
- Mo. teen gets life in prison for murder of 9-year-old girl
on CBS News






