<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Voice, is still the king</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/2005/03/05/voice-is-still-the-king/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/2005/03/05/voice-is-still-the-king/</link>
	<description>Trusted Insights and Conversations on the Next Wave of Technology</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 06:47:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: DG Lewis</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2005/03/05/voice-is-still-the-king/#comment-8557</link>
		<dc:creator>DG Lewis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2005 05:22:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/03/05/voice-is-still-the-king/#comment-8557</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;If prices go down by half, but volume quadruples, revenue doubles.  But if margins are less than 50%, and costs per minute stay flat when prices go down by half, margin goes negative.  So you lose money on each minute, but make it up on volume.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Now, most costs of carrying minutes on a network (wireless or wireline) are not straight marginal costs -- instead, there are generally large fixed costs and significant step-function costs at specific capacity breakpoints.  (The exception is intercarrier compensation, which is pretty much completely marginal cost per minute.  But that&#039;s a topic for another discussion.)  So the magic is in pricing to capture incremental revenue from additional usage of existing capacity that drives no incremental cost.  Hence unlimited off-peak usage (which is nothing more than an evolution of &quot;evening rates&quot; for long distance, for anyone old enough to remember when the cost of long distance calls mattered...).&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Now here&#039;s a scary thought: Name another industry with high fixed costs, effectively zero incremental cost per additional unit carried up to a capacity threshold, resulting in sophisticated pricing models to maximize incremental revenue within the capacity threshold.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Air travel.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;And how many profitable airlines are there?&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If prices go down by half, but volume quadruples, revenue doubles.  But if margins are less than 50%, and costs per minute stay flat when prices go down by half, margin goes negative.  So you lose money on each minute, but make it up on volume.</p>

<p>Now, most costs of carrying minutes on a network (wireless or wireline) are not straight marginal costs &#8212; instead, there are generally large fixed costs and significant step-function costs at specific capacity breakpoints.  (The exception is intercarrier compensation, which is pretty much completely marginal cost per minute.  But that&#8217;s a topic for another discussion.)  So the magic is in pricing to capture incremental revenue from additional usage of existing capacity that drives no incremental cost.  Hence unlimited off-peak usage (which is nothing more than an evolution of &#8220;evening rates&#8221; for long distance, for anyone old enough to remember when the cost of long distance calls mattered&#8230;).</p>

<p>Now here&#8217;s a scary thought: Name another industry with high fixed costs, effectively zero incremental cost per additional unit carried up to a capacity threshold, resulting in sophisticated pricing models to maximize incremental revenue within the capacity threshold.</p>

<p>Air travel.</p>

<p>And how many profitable airlines are there?</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Om Malik</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2005/03/05/voice-is-still-the-king/#comment-8553</link>
		<dc:creator>Om Malik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2005 03:06:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/03/05/voice-is-still-the-king/#comment-8553</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;i think there are some data apps which will benefit from the bandwidth, but mostly good quality voice should be the key area of focus for all 3G providers&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i think there are some data apps which will benefit from the bandwidth, but mostly good quality voice should be the key area of focus for all 3G providers</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sunil Chhaya</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2005/03/05/voice-is-still-the-king/#comment-8552</link>
		<dc:creator>Sunil Chhaya</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Mar 2005 20:58:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/03/05/voice-is-still-the-king/#comment-8552</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I&#039;ve always thought that VoIP over 3G will be the way to go!! There&#039;s way too much bandwidth to be used productively for data apps.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve always thought that VoIP over 3G will be the way to go!! There&#8217;s way too much bandwidth to be used productively for data apps.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
