Blog Post

Carriers Spend Billions on Networks and Millions to Dress Them Up

As consumers increasingly pick up smartphones rather than feature phones, carriers are investing more cash in startups in the hopes of making such devices more useful — and their networks more profitable. The uptick in carrier investments has been particularly pronounced over the last few months, as wireless operators try to boost data revenue and differentiate their services by getting access to new technology first.

Just this week Eventful, a location-based calendar service, announced a $10 million round that included money from Telefonica. In September, two firms announced deals with carrier participation: social calendaring service Zvents, which raised $24 million, some of it from AT&T, and femtocell systems maker Percello, which raised $12 million, including money from T-Mobile.

“In my opinion the operators are becoming a little more aggressive and the equipment folks are less aggressive, with less to spend on R&D,” said Matthew Fix, a principal at Vodafone Ventures, the investment arm of the UK network operator. “Carriers are more aggressive because there’s a lot of uncertainty around their business models.”

Operators spent the last decade focused on growing their business through building out new 3G networks and gaining subscribers, but as markets become saturated the only way to boost revenue is to get people to use the network for data. In some countries the only way to gain market share is to steal customers, rendering the differences among the services being offered by carriers — and exclusive access to those services — more consequential. As Fix observes, operators don’t want to become dumb pipes for data, delivering services that only enrich others. They want to own their destiny. And they want to charge for it.

Driven by flat-rate plans, more widespread 3G coverage and the iPhone, data spending in the U.S. reached $8.2 billion in the second quarter of 2008, or about 21 percent of the total wireless services revenue. This compares to spending of $5.85 billion, or 17 percent of total services for the same period in 2007. The boost in wireless services increased average revenue per user by 5 percent to 50 cents, offsetting a 5-cent decline in voice ARPU, according to data released in August by Chetan Sharma Consulting. So to avoid becoming the dreaded dumb pipes, carriers are funding startups to get exclusive access to services and possibly technology.

But as one venture investor at a large European carrier noted to me, buying exclusivity from established vendors isn’t cheap. Still, the carrier he works for, which doesn’t allow him to talk to the press, has ramped up its investments to about a dozen from just one or two in prior years. His increased investment also puts him in the path of many fund raising companies, meaning he and his employer get a first look at new technology — and interesting startups  — even if they don’t want to fund them. Russ Shaw, global innovation manager for Telefonica said the Spanish telecommunications firm created a venture fund a year ago for similar reasons. The fund had 20 million euros to spend last year, and another 20 million euros authorized for the coming year.

Aside from gaining access to exclusive features or getting in early on the innovation curve, Eric Zimits, a general partner at Granite Venture Capital, predicts that carrier investments in hardware might become more common as carriers seek to exert added control over the component side of their business. He points to investments in femtocells as well as NTT DoCoMo’s recent decision to invest in Quantance, which offers a handset component to increase battery life. Zimits is an investor in Quantance and Percello, the T-Mobile-backed femtocell company.

“It just seems to me that as carriers — especially wireless operators — look for a competitive advantage in the market, they should try to get proprietary access to key technologies instead of waiting for Nokia to take two to three years to figure it out and then sell it to all comers,” Zimits said. “The big change for the startup is they have to sell to the operators from day one. They are hard organizations to navigate but the payoff can be enormous if you get them to specify your technology.”

Back during the telecom bubble in the late 90s, carriers made investments in some of their suppliers, too. But for the most part, that turned out badly as the industry was soon beset by a glut of capacity and too many me-too startups selling gear. This time around, carriers appear to be investing in silicon and software that can differentiate their services in a way they can market to the end user. Maybe it’s access to a cool calendar feature or a longer battery life, but the efforts to fund startups this time around are all about making each carrier unique.

This article also appeared on

11 Responses to “Carriers Spend Billions on Networks and Millions to Dress Them Up”

  1. The article suggests that carriers are making VC investments in startups in exchange for exclusive relationships. That rarely happens — any good entrepreneur (and his VC backers) will not take a strategic investment if it means capping his upside and foregoing scale. There are 700 mobile operators and these startups want to pursue commercial relationships with as many as possible, not just one via an exclusive relationship.

  2. Interesting post. It seems we’ve come full circle in the carrier space with respect to VC investing and corporate strategic investing in general. When I was a VC focused on telecoms around the 2000 bubble, a lot of carriers shut down their activity and in some cases sold their portfolios or became passive investors with no follow-on activity. Equipment OEMs did the same thing in the telecom space with view to scooping up HW and SW plays that looked like they would translate into new sales to carriers. A few stayed and persevered (like Telus Ventures and T Ventures, a few others), but most did not. It is a good strategy to see new technology and selectively invest, but institutionally backed VCs and startups alike should not equate it to a commitment to anything else but a window on technologies or business models. Let’s see, again in the context of a tough capital market environment, how much stomach for these investments the carrier “VC”s will have to be real players.

  3. As more consumers purchase smartphones and new data applications proliferate, wireless network operators will be confronted with the dreaded dumb-pipe phenomenon. As Stacey Higginbotham suggests, in order to drive data adoption and avoid commoditization, operators will need to provide actual value to mobile consumers in the form of a personalized experience. In addition to investing in start-ups which would give them exclusive access to new user features, operators will need to offer consumers a customizable experience for their mobile devices. Location-based services, user-generated content, mobile widgets, and navigation toolbars are examples of customizable applications which further enhance the personalization of the user experience.

  4. >>AirTel and Innovation. Another oxymoron which will come in top 3, other being: 1. Microsoft works and 2. Yahoo can search.<<

    Absolute True. Innovation comes from open minded culture and Airtel name comes last in that. However I view shankar’s comment in different perspective. Airtel is definetly trying to be more than a bit pipe to increase its hold and they are probably looking for more like minded parterners to achieve that and keep everything inside their walled garden.

  5. Anonymous

    Actually the article is good on wireless, but the comment caught my eye.

    AirTel and Innovation. Another oxymoron which will come in top 3, other being: 1. Microsoft works and 2. Yahoo can search.


    fyi – India’s leading wireless carrier announced plans for starting a fund focusing on investing in telco-related tech companies. While wireless carriers do not want to be bit-pipe vendors, not sure if they have the business model to graduate to being more than bit-pipe vendors. They can do it as long as they are willing to invest in their own business infrastructure.