Your thoughts on MVNO... (aka carriers without a network)

Remove all ads!

Up in Canada, the flavour of the month is to launch your own cellphone service without having a network. 7-Eleven are set to launch their own in november on Fido's network, Loblaws have just launched their own PC Mobile (read: a rebundled Bell Mobility), hell even Canadian Tire and PJC want to hop in the train! And let's not forget Disney (!) and ESPN. A flavour of the month, started by Virgin Mobile...

Thus, this brings me to ask: What do you think of that new trend?
Personally, I think of it as a double-edged sword. On one side, it is good for the *real* network operator, as it generates a substantial source of revenues, but on the other... network saturation is definitively a long-term threat.

The debate is on...

 

This seems similar to the trend of having non-financial institutions issuing credit cards. I guess it is a good thing if it works out to provide a better deal for customers. Time will tell.

 

....OH! You mean resellers - companies that provide service to end-users and license the service itself (phone #s, network equipment, etc) from a full-fledged carrier.

Actually these entities (essentially 'brokers' of cellular service, or maybe retailers in a manner of speaking) have been around about as long as cell phones in general. In my tenure as a 'phone monkey' for one of the 'Big 4' carriers (Virgin is reselling Bell's network, BTW) I've had calls both from end-clients of a reseller and the resellers themselves - has a few extra quirks, but essentially a normal call.

I can see the attraction to the big carriers: this guy leases n CTNs (Cellular Telephone Number) from the carrier at a prefrential rate, but then takes on all the responsibilities of finding customers for these CTNs - marketing, sales, bulk of cust. svc. issues, etc.

The proliferation of resellers recently (I'd not heard of half the ones you mentioned, tNO ) seems to be an indication of diversification (and essentially outsourcing) of service; by the principles of free enterprise this should be good for all involved - likely a portion will fail, but the healthy survivors will give a customer more choice (and a valuable tool when dealing with those Sales folk - playing them off each other "well, 7-eleven is offering me this" )

In short, I think it's good - with only four (three really, with Rogers in the process of gobbling up Fido^1) carriers, there ISN'T that much competition between them, and a common complaint I'd hear from customers is how 'unfair' their contracts were - an extra raft of *known* names offering svc WILL foster competition.

But now that I no longer work in the industry (yay) and have an aversion to owning one of those THINGS (omg - people will ALWAYS get hold of me ), I don't care much.

Footnote: 1 - I notice Yves Tremblet(sp?)(pres of fido) is no longer in the ads...

 

I almost purchased a Virgin Mobile, but changed my mind as soon as I knew they were using Bell Mobility's network... I strongly dislike Bell Mobility. Seems that every MVNO that crops up wants to settle on Bell's network... PC Mobile did, Canadian Tire mobile and PJC Mobile are pondering the possibility... That's a lot of people on one network. But on the other hand... the incomes that MVNO generate can be invested in expanding, or upgrading the network... it's not like Bell Mobility are in big trouble, anyways.

Personally, I use and prefer Telus Mobility, and it's likely to stay this way until my betrayal of Canada to the US. Then, hello Verizon for kick-ass CDMA service, or Cingular for UMTS (aka WCDMA)

[ October 03, 2005, 01:27: Message edited by: The New Order ]