Nokia and Alcatel-Lucent: Who Should Buy Who?

Seeking Alpha reported that Nokia confirmed it is in talks to acquire all or part of Alcatel-Lucent and it is no surprise the companes are quibbling over valuation. Alcatel-Lucent has gone through some tough times and appears to be executing well on its Shift plan. Arguably, they are undervalued but investors are waiting for more tangible results, which will indicate that the plan is working. Current shareholders and employees can sense this positive momentum and are remiss to “sell-out” before the results of their hard work and commitment are fully realized. 

Consolidation in the equipment market is not unexpected. Communication service providers are consolidating too and are getting bigger. When this occurs large equipment providers tend to consolidate as well as they have fewer large customers and need economies of scale to be successful. This is truly a zero-sum game. Either you get 70 percent of the business, 30 percent as a second, keep the first one honest, source or you get zero percent. With the inherent complexities of SDN, NFV and virtualization, particularly in multi-vendor integration, it may be years before the “second’ source is even added.

Driving this buyout could be Huawei. The company is disrupting the entire global telecommunication equipment market. The industry has been aware of the company’s “grey area” business practices such as outright appropriating technology and intellectual property to giving eNodeBs away for free, with customers just paying the yearly maintenance fees (with a bonus of dozens of undocumented back doors). Although this is disturbing to the industry what really is of concern is Huawei’s huge product portfolio, their ability to throw “armies” at initiatives and their ability to take a long-term view to market (and global) domination.

The big issue for either Nokia or Alcatel-Lucent is who is going to compete with Huawei? Communication networks are a fundamental asset to nation states. They drive economic development, entertainment, education, national security, etc. Perhaps it’s time all governments treat them as national assets.

Network PVR a Win for SPs and Consumers

Moving the "storage" function out of the Set-top box and in to the network is a win for both the service provider and for the consumer.  This article, written in ADD solving terseness,  will give the read an overview of the salient points of the benefits of deploying a network-based DVR or N-PVR.  Comments/corrections/suggestions are always welcomed.

What is N PVR?

1.       Network Personal Video Recorder (a.k.a. Network DVR)

2.       A DVR in the Cloud

3.       A user’s programming or content is stored on a server located within a service providers facility instead of stored on a hard disk drive embedded in a set-top box.

Benefits for Service Provider and Consumer

1. Enables SPs to remove costly storage in every STB.
1. One less device to fail.
2. Reduces cost per STB,  less stranded capital
3.  Reduces power consumption of STBs
1.   Helps achieve goals set in voluntary agreement (see: http://greywale.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/greywale-communique-STB-010614.pdf)
2. Makes whole home DVR simpler
1.  All traffic originates from the network to any device (TV, PC, Tablet, Smart phone et al.)
2. Transparent to user
3.  Simplifies home networking, re-use existing networks such as WiFi,  No need for a new technology.
3. Enables TV-Everywhere or video everywhere and advanced video services
1. A single seamless video experience across all devices/screens.
2. Pause on one screen; resume on another screen is simplified.
3. Watch “save” programming on any device at any location.
   
4. Enables location-based targeted advertising
1.  Ads can be “re-inserted” to location user is actually watching stored content.
2. No need to play Boston Ads if user is watching Red Sox game in San  Francisco.
3. Enhances advertising packages to ad buyers.
4. Enhances viewing experience of consumer since ads are more relevant.
5. Increases ad revenues
5. Reduces usage and congestion of upstream bandwidth
1.  Eliminates the need for Sling Box
1. Sling box clogs limited upstream last mile channels
2. N-PVR eliminates Sling Box zero revenue traffic
6. Enables SPs to take advantage of innovations in Content Delivery Systems and advanced caching technologies.
1. May already be implemented for Video on Demand.
7. Enables smart phone to become DVR controller
1.  Guide on smart phone delivered from network
2.   “record” in network
8. Leverages investments in cloud infrastructure
1.  ROI of data centers investment will be enhanced with the addition of N-PVR application. 
9. CAVEAT
1.  As N-PVR rolls out, cache’s and servers may find themselves in facilities that aren’t as friendly as purpose built data centers.  These may include regional and local facilities such as central offices and head ends.
2.  Energy issues (e.g., heat) should be addressed.
10. LEGAL Issue
1. The Cablevision litigation in the U.S. has been resolved in Cablevision’s favor.
2. Content providers argued it violated copyright laws.
3. Cablevision argued it’s the same as a DVR just a different location.
4. After a number of rulings and subsequent appeals the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case ending the litigation.
5. Recommendation to SPs…Deploy! 
11.  Technical Issues
1.  SP’s will need to have the stored programming in numerous formats applicable to specific devices.  i.e., different resolution and data rates for an HDTV verse a smart phone via 4G/LTE.
2. Do you translate and transcode on demand or ahead of time? 

   To discuss these issues please contact me at gwhelan@greywale.com

   For a list of previous articles please see   http://greywale.com/articles

IoT? Internet of Things....What is a Thing?

Internet of Things, or IoT, is a topical conversation these days.  Companies with vested interest, such as Cisco, have announced this market to be $Billions and $Billions in the not so distant future.  

The word “thing” is a good one here.  You can add “no” and “every” to the front of it and get other proper words.  So IoT can mean “nothing” and “everything”.   That exactly what it means today! 

A market of nothing and everything is not a real market.  It’s either a ZERO billion dollar market (nothing) or an infinite billion dollar market (Everything).   Zero dollar markets don’t sell market research reports and space at trade shows.  So the industry tends to favor the infinite dollar market.  So we see reports of IoT being a $19 TRILLION market (Cisco), $14 to $33 Trillion (Mckinsey) and a mere $2 Trillion market (Gartner). 

We’ve seen this movie before.  In the 1990’s the market for “Multimedia” was predicted to be many billions and more recently we hear the market for “Cleantech” will be multiple billions.  Yet, like the term IoT, these words meant nothing and everything. 

When asked what multimedia applications were the answers were always video editing, video conferencing, training and kiosk.   Not sure about “kiosk” but the other three are not multimedia applications they are specific identifiable markets.

Similarly, what are cleantech applications?  Energy efficiency, renewable energy and smart grid are often the answer.  Here again, these are not cleantech applications, they are specific identifiable markets. 

So let’s drop the hype around IoT and start talking about real markets that combine sensors, IP networks and analytics.  I almost said “Big data”, but that’s another “nothing” and “everything” market.

For further discussion please contact me at gwhelan@greywale.com

Click here for an INDEX of Articles and Post

A Telco Energy Strategy Should Demand ZERO Impact on Service

 As energy strategies reach the boardroom, service provider management should insist on “zero-impact” on services.  The stakes are too high in the competitive zero-sum game they participate in.  Customer satisfaction, reduced churn and a strong brand are paramount in this environment.  By treating energy as a strategic initiative they will achieve the benefits of lower OPEX, enhance brand and more efficient end-to-end operations.  Tactical energy initiatives will not get funded if they have a perceivable adverse effect on consumer and business services.  These adverse effects could be short lived, as during installation, or long term, if, for example, latency is introduced.   Thus, their energy strategy should demand zero impact on services.

Note the emphasis on “services” instead of “network”.    It would be unreasonable to demand zero impact on the network if you are deploying a new architecture or energy aware protocol.  Yet, with IP (Internet Protocol) the impact on the network should not cause the perceivable impact on services. 

Is zero-impact unreasonable and wouldn’t “minimal impact” be a better goal?  The challenge here would be to define what “minimal” means?  Would it mean X amount of video anomalies per 30 minutes?  Why not X+1?  Would it mean Y dropped calls/tower/minute?  Why not Y+1?  Also, who defines X and Y? Would the CEO, CTO, or CMO define them?  Would international standards organizations set them? 

 Setting the goal of “Zero Impact” sends a clear message throughout the organization of what is expected.  Terms such as “sustainability” and “green” will have clearer meaning.  Green projects that make people feel good but have no financial justification will fail fast so the real winners can progress.  Therefore, telcos and service providers should demand Zero Impact on services.

Contact: Greg Whelan at gwhelan@greywale.com to discuss.

Click here for an INDEX of Articles and Post

Service Provider Energy Efficiency (SPEE) is Inevitable!

Network traffic is increasing exponentially and energy efficiency is increasing linearly.  Yet, network engineers are focused on, and measured on, scalability and availability.  They don’t see their energy expenses.   However, given the simple math of exponential verse linear growth it is inevitable that energy efficiency and energy management will be a primary driver in the near future. 

Energy Management: Focus of Nokia Siemens Networks

Nokia Siemens Networks (NSN) announced their Technology Vision 2020 recently.  Energy management was one of six major pillars.   The six pillars are:

1. Support up to 1000 times the capacity
2.  Reduce latency to milliseconds
3. Teach networks to be self-aware
4.  Flatten total energy consumption
5. Reinvent telcos for the cloud
6. Personalize network experience.

The key point regarding energy is illustrated in the following chart.

  

As shown, electricity alone accounts for 15% of total OPEX.  In developing markets this can be as high as 50% with a high percentage of off-grid sites.  If energy management is ignored the cost of power will continue to rise with the expected exponential growth in traffic.  The next chart illustrates that while traffic grows exponentially, energy efficiency grows linearly.  Thus, the amount and cost of energy will rapidly increase. 

Other key facts that NSN articulated are that the RAN (Radio Access Network) accounts for 80% of energy consumption and that current installed base-stations are 50% less efficient than new ones. 

As with any energy management and energy efficiency program there is no silver bullet or one solution to solve this.  However, there are numerous solutions when taken together add up to real savings in energy and money.  This area is too large for this short post.  For now, consider four main areas to investigate

1. Devices: Components, Moore's Law
2. Network Architectures
3. Network Management and Operations
4. Marketing and Services

By focusing on energy management and energy efficiency the end results will be meaningful OPEX savings, reduced carbon footprint and an enhance brand for sustainability conscious consumers.

Please contact me if you'd like to discuss this post.  +978 992 2203  gwhelan@greywale.com

Introduction

The focus of Greywhale Research is Energy Management in IP Networks, both the service provider and the large enterprise.  We focus on the technologies, markets and business issues in this emerging area.

Energy Management in IP networks is a nascent marketplace.  Why focus on this area?  First, the Internet is expected to consume 4% of the world’s electricity up from 2%.  Reductions in this area can have tremendous economic and environmental benefits.  Currently IP Traffic growth is exponentially outpacing energy efficiency in both fixed and mobile networks.  A small percentage of energy savings translates into $Billions in energy cost.  Savings here, as in any OPEX, results in cash delivered to the bottom line. 

Second, sustainability for service providers and large companies is moving beyond saving money to becoming a strategic competitive advantage.  Consumers demand “green” and sustainability enhances the brand.  With a “bit” being a “bit” and a “packet” being a “packet” the brand image is critical to capture and retain customers.  Additionally, the global financial markets now link sustainability to management sophistication.

Given these reasons, the time is right to examine energy management and efficiency in large IP networks.  Please join us in the new journey.