There is a reason why I refer to Jeff Pulver as “The Senator.” Consummate diplomat, he is the iron fist in velvet glove, the exact opposite of my nature. He has a nice take on SBC’s subtle takeover of the IP world. His is more in-depth take, and worth reading, and thinking about.
Interesting observations all.
I’ve really tried to cut down on my comments because we are getting ever more closer to some really mind-blowing deals over the next 2 years, and I don’t want to give up too much information.
That being said, re:SBC, the thing to really watch is how masterfully they’ve managed to co-opt Yahoo (ditto PCS’s MVNO with ATT), and pull them into the fold.
As you recall SBC has enhanced and expanded its relationship with Yahoo on the heels of these new VoIP, TV, etc announcements.
Yahoo is a very big deal because its a software talent, and software is crucial for any bigtime player because software is the manifestation of users habits. Thus you can’t truly own your customers unless you own the software they use. That my friends is the lesson of Mr Softie.
Plus the FCC doesn’t control software. yet?
So far the relationships are this:
SBC-Yahoo, strong and tight
VZ-MSN, at arms length
Google???
Potential teleco dance partners for Google?
MSO’s
Wireless: Nextel, TM, PCS
Notice how SBC co-opted BellSouth via the Cingular partnership. Very capital efficient, no PMI. Hmmm.
This is a high stakes game of musical chairs and the music has yet to stop, but when it does somebody is going home with nothing.
So even telecom comes down to a RED state (SBC) vs. Blue state (VZ) drama.
charlie, can you email me? just wondering if i could ask you something about another topic
The word always was that SBC was the smartest of the Bells. Living in MA, I see more SBC commercials than Verizon commercials, which would seem to coroberate CS’ claims of more to come. That said, I’ve never heard of telecom player that SBC wasn’t rumored to be interested in acquiring, yet the actual deals haven’t been particularly hot and heavy.