VoIP

Nortel’s Ethernet auction: What of the NSN speculation?

It’s almost time to play “Who’s Got the Nortel Ethernet” assets, with the auction coming in little more than a week. The big question is whether NSN, Cisco or another player might jump on Ciena’s stalking-horse opening bid.

Most financial industry speculation is aimed at NSN, whose numbers seemed to show more product sales erosion than others in the market. At NSN’s analyst event, there was a sense that professional services were the name of the game, though of course they could never sustain a business of that size. Furthermore, nobody knows how much of the professional services business NSN could get without a strong equipment base. In short, NSN needs to sell gear.

The Nortel stuff would bring them a much better North American presence, one of the problems NSN is contending with. It may collide with the Juniper/NSN joint venture, however, enough to reduce its overall value. We don’t think NSN could up the Ciena bid more than about $250 million without paying so much the Street would trash its stock. We also wonder whether more low-OSI-layer assets will really help.

Our feeling: leave Nortel alone.

Juniper/NSN joint venture and the LTE connection

Cries that Juniper must now match Cisco and Tellabs and buy a mobile-core player are ignoring a critical reality — and it’s not that Juniper’s new superchip can make its universal edge portfolio into an Enhanced Packet Core box (though it can).

The real issue with wireless, guys, is that you need a radio network. Through its close relationship with NSN (including metro, which after all is the “core” of Enhanced Packet Core, through its joint venture), Juniper has direct linkage with the radio network. NSN and Juniper actually make a pretty credible total mobile solution provider, stronger than either Tellabs or Cisco, providing that they can make the joint venture work effectively in that light.

NSN also adds professional services, which virtually all LTE deals are likely to mandate. All of this, to us, means that the real question is whether the Juniper/NSN joint venture will work effectively. While both companies blow kisses at the joint venture in their public comments, we’re still waiting to see substantive cooperation emerge.

NSN professional services a plus for carrier procurement zone strategy

The head of NSN’s North America operation said the company would be an LTE leader in North America, and said it rather emphatically, to be sure. The comments came at NSN’s analyst event this week, which was a parade of optimism on NSN’s prospects in the market, not only in North America but elsewhere.

NSN’s greatest strength is its professional services business, and second on the list comes its credibility with operators in multi-vendor integration. The company also has a strong service-layer story, though that story is built on tools used by its consulting and professional services staff to create one-off solutions for operators and not productized (at least for now).

The value of professionals services in the U.S. today is based on the procurement zone trend, already formally in place at AT&T, and in process (we’re told) at both Verizon and Qwest, and being considered even by Sprint. This program creates what’s effectively a mandatory systems integration position in each zone, which in turn means that those with strong capabilities in that area can expect to get a prime vendor position.

Verizon quarterly financials tell classic telco story

Verizon delivered a classic US-telco story in the third quareter: Wireless was doing very well, telco TV was doing better, enterprise services were under price pressure, and wireline losses continued.

For Verizon, the net was better than Street expectations. Most encouraging were revenue gains of more than 10%, though about half of that was from the Alltel acquisition. Customer churn was up slightly in wireless, and DSL broadband subscribers continued to decline, but the latter was more than offset by broadband FiOS growth, suggesting that Verizon FiOS is attracting broadband users beyond its own DSL base.

The company promised investors that LTE would not generate a big capex surge, a relief given that the large up-front FiOS load is finally tapering down. In all, the story was good but not great. You can see that Verizon, like AT&T, is spending a ton of money on wireless and making a big bet it will be able to capitalize on that investment. We think that in the near term, that is almost certain. But the long-term viability of wireless depends on the ability of the operators to create value beyond voice and Internet.

Verizon’s smartphone direction still chasing AT&T?

Verizon is apparently planning a total smartphone blitzfor the holidays, including the already-discussed Droid from Motorola, but also according to rumor, a new HTC Android smartphone and perhaps a third model as well.

The Verizon moves are, we think, are calculated to make things complicated for AT&T and Apple with the iPhone for the holidays. A multiplicity of models at various sizes and price points makes sense at this stage in the market, but there is no question Apple still has the cachet that other smartphones have so far been unable to match.

We think all of these smartphone wars are a signal that whatever the FCC might do with wireless net neutrality, operators are committed to the mobile web.

FCC includes pivotal issue in Net Neutrality NPRM

The FCC isn’t “considering” net neutrality rules as a formal order; they’re “proposing” specific actions. That’s the meaning of what happened yesterday at the public meeting. The FCC approved its net neutrality Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) by unanimous vote, but Republicans dissented in part, just enough to keep alive the partisan bickering that’s characterized Washington and to reflect their concern with some of the points.

If you look at the document closely, you find it really consists of four parts. One codifies the original principles of net neutrality that were published in 2005. The second requires that providers treat lawful traffic in a non-discriminatory way and publish any traffic management policies. Both these sections (which are subdivided further in the NPRM) are largely accepted by all. The third element asserts the FCC’s position that these principles be applied across access types, meaning wireline telco, cable, and wireless. This raises some ire in the industry, and also with some Republicans.

The final point, in our view this is the most controversial, asks for comment on the specialized services that are IP-delivered and share the broadband pipe with the Internet. The FCC wants to know how to define these and what rules (including the six defined in the first and second parts we’ve outlined) should apply to these special services.

This last issue is pivotal because should the FCC decide these services are also to be regulated in some way, they could impose access-sharing requirements on telco IPTV offerings. We think it will be months before any order comes out of this process, but just the fact that the FCC is thinking about the third and fourth issues here could force operators to consider what would happen to their mobile and wireline walled-garden services if access connections had to be wholesaled to competitors at a fair price.

Regulatory issues are never covered well in the media, and the public interest in this one will likely make it worse. Make no mistake; the key to the future is in the single issue of those managed or special services!

Cisco and Oracle look to change data center landscape

Oracle and Cisco may change the landscape in the data center if the companies continue to pursue their current tracks, according to most pundits, and we agree.

Oracle is already the giant of middleware, broader there even than IBM and more focused on making software the premier offering. The Oracle approach to IT is to create a brand around software and middleware, adding hardware to reap the maximum benefit from the sale, but focusing on software (especially middleware) for differentiation.

Cisco wants to ride virtualization and connectivity in the data center, and collaborative applications that link employees, into a dominant position. Cisco’s theory is that owning collaboration could give the company a foot into every application door because collaboration is the broadest of all horizontal applications.

Both companies face competition from incumbent giants IBM and HP, and the big question for 2010 is whether the competition among this group of four will create enough market buzz to build buyer literacy and interest levels enough to create a new technology buying cycle. We’re doubtful that competition alone can do it because competition typically focuses on differentiation rather than project justification. But we’ll have a better idea next month when we complete our enterprise fall planning survey.

Cisco’s Starent acquisition could be LTE procurement zone play

Cisco wrote another big check, this time to acquire Starent, a major player in the mobile/LTE space. And with the move, it may have leapfrogged a number of competitors. Starent and Cisco were somewhat competing previously, and Wall Street reports that it expected Juniper to announce a partnership with Starent that would have played in the AT&T procurement zone for mobile IP. Motorola was also a Starent partner, and to the extent that either of these deals was meaningful, they now have to be re-evaluated.

What may be most significant here is the procurement zone angle, in fact. Since we’re hearing that network operators worldwide are moving to a zone strategy, the acquisition of critical product mass in key zones is now vital for vendors. Cisco’s move signals an M&A wave to pluck up key components, since it’s now clear that major players will acquire vendors and thus kill simple partnership agreements.

The move will solidify a truth that’s been pretty visible for the last six months: LTE is where most investment focus will be in 2010 through 2012, so having a strong position there will be critical. LTE will accelerate disintermediation of operators, however, unless it’s coupled with a rational service-layer strategy.

Policy clues surface as FCC hits its stride

The FCC is hitting its stride in regulatory policy terms, primarily relating to the issues of next-gen voice. In one matter, the FCC has already asked Google for specific details on Google Voice, in response to AT&T filing a complaint that the service was really a regulated voice service and was discriminating against open call routing to exchanges with high reciprocal compensation rules.

Now the FCC’s chairman is making it clear that his FCC thinks mobile services are the really hot regulatory issue. Genachowski applauded the AT&T decision to open its mobile network to VoIP services and the Verizon Wireless partnership with Google. He still feels that mobile services aren’t necessarily as competitive as the FCC would like. The knotty issues for mobile are the application of net neutrality and the question of open handsets and handset subsidies.

Google Wave preview needs clear explanation of platform’s versatility

Google launched its wider Wave initiative, and it seems clear from early reaction that a lot of people are still trying to get a handle on just what Wave is. The classic question is, “Why can’t I do the same thing with XYX?” where the variable is anything from email or IM to telepresence.

As we see it, this isn’t the right question for a bunch of reasons. First, you can hammer a nail with a crescent wrench (we, like many others, have done that a couple times ourselves), but it’s not the right tool. The first step toward a relevant question to generate an appropriate appreciation of Wave would be to ask whether any of the alternatives could be an optimal tool. Second, we believe that even this optimality story falls short of the mark. Wave is a platform that could support a model of collaboration that we do not envision today because we have no reasonable mechanism to support it.

Wave is a flexible tool that we could build practices around. Many of the things we do with computers today (like writing blogs) are natural extensions of the typewriter process, and so a computer word processor can be conceptualized by applying it to typing tasks. But spread sheets? Some say they’re extensions of accounting sheets, but anyone who’s ever taken accounting knows how thin that analogy is. Other tools like GPS are further off the wall.

But many articles are grasping one truth — Google needs to make the value of Wave clear. A use case alone won’t do that because it doesn’t show the versatility. A host of use cases might, and a hierarchy would be best of all. Can Google produce this, or will it open the door to a new collaboration model only to have someone else walk through it? That’s the question we’d like to see answered, and we think Google would also like that.