When I think of Earthlink I think of the Internet not a phone call to relative or friend. I could possibly buy into the idea of Earthlink selling an EvDO Internet data card but not a cellular handset.

Successful MVNOs need to bring something extra to the table. MVNOs that simple sell dial tone won’t be successful. Dial tone is a comodity, represented by the incredibly high mobile subscriber churn rate. MVNOs that Go Beyond the Dial Tone and create something unique for their customers will have a fighting chance.

Unless Earthlink comes up with some killer service it can use to redefine itself as a company I don’t see how becoming an MVNO makes sense.

COMMENT: AUTHOR: Mike

Where are you getting Sprint from? It’s not mentioned at all in that linked article.

COMMENT: AUTHOR: Om Malik

Yeah, well fortunately i have it saved in my mail. not sure what happeend but looks like they made some kind of mistake

COMMENT: AUTHOR: Om Malik

Via ZDNet

EarthLink, SK to announce mobile deal

Reuters January 26, 2005, 4:34 AM PT

EarthLink, the No. 4 U.S. Internet service provider, plans to announce a $400 million joint venture with South Korea’s SK Telecom to offer mobile services in the United States, The New York Times reported Wednesday.

EarthLink will sell phone services using the networks of Sprint and Verizon Wireless, while SK Telecom will be a technical partner in the venture, the paper said, quoting an executive close to the deal.

EarthLink and SK Telecom, South Korea’s top mobile operator, will each contribute $200 million to the deal, the report said.

SK, which reported a quarterly profit fall earlier Wednesday, declined to confirm the report. It said the issue will be discussed at a conference call with analysts at 1100 GMT.

The company has sought overseas expansion opportunities, as growth in Asia’s third-largest mobile market has slowed, with three out of every four people having a mobile phone.

Shares of SK closed down 2.4 percent at 185,500 won ($179), hit by an unexpectedly large 20 percent fall in quarterly profits.

Story Copyright © 2005 Reuters Limited.

All rights reserved.

COMMENT: AUTHOR: Charlie Sierra

yep, it’s been confirmed by both Sprint and Verizon

COMMENT: AUTHOR: Jesse Kopelman

Charlie Sierra: why not both? I think it is enlightened to admit one doesn’t have a flipping clue on how to market something. The truth is the business of making and maintaining a network has nothing to do with the business of selling use of a network and there is no inherent efficiency for one company to try and do both. It makes about as much sense as for UPS to manufacture its own trucks.

Earthlink and SK Telecom (South Korea) have entered into a partnership to bring integrated 3G and Wi-Fi service to US…

COMMENT: AUTHOR: Charlie Sierra

Jesse,

Your followup is completely inane, and usually I’d just ignore it, but additional irony of your choice of UPS trucks is too rich to pass up.

In fact UPS trucks are one of a kind and they own all the related industrial engineering IP in their design. So basically they do indeed control/own this compenent of their business, and for good reason.

The larger, and I thought more obvious, problem with your followup was that you attempt to equate the outsourcing of a non-core operating element, with the outsourcing of the marketing function.

I don’t know of many business’ where marketing is considered ‘non-core’, which was my original point.

Furthermore, carriers hardly even operate their own networks, that responsibility has already been outsourced to equipment mfgs, etc., and lets not forget outsourced CC/BO.

So if they already outsource what you consider their ‘core’, and then they choose to outsource marketing, what the hell is left to do?

PS. If you wanted to make a relevant analogy, something closer to the mark would be if, FedEx or UPS, allowed virtual delivery firms to leverage/resell their large fixed cost backend distribution network. That would be a start.

COMMENT: AUTHOR: Jesse Kopelman

Charlie I think you misunderstand me, as I feel your points support my argument. UPS — designing something is diferent than building and maintaining it. Carriers outsourcing Network Operations — my own experience in the industry is that Network Design is more heavily outsourced than Operations while the opposite would make better sense. Anyway, you and I agree on an important point — marketing is always a business core. What you are missing however, is that there is a diference between marketing a network and marketing a service. An MVNO markets a service. If a company has a really good network, but does not seem to be doing all that well selling services, perhaps it should stop and just market its network to those willing to sell services on it. While I wouldn’t stoop to call you inane, I think you lack mental flexibility.