Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

relative profitability of SMS service?

Last response: in Technologies
Share
Anonymous
December 4, 2004 11:46:34 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.tech,sci.econ (More info?)

if one could start a SMS-only network, would the return-on-investment
be better than voice service?

In existing American cellular networks, is there appreciable amounts
of unused SMS capacity. Could that capacity (as against voice
capacity) be increased by "tuning"?

has any American carrier ever honestly attempted to aggresively market
SMS services, to bring consumer useage up to world levels?
Anonymous
December 7, 2004 3:24:37 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.tech, sci.econ (More info?)

Do you mean like a news SMS service, in which customers pay per txt
sent to them?
Anonymous
December 7, 2004 10:02:01 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.tech,sci.econ (More info?)

On 4 Dec 2004 08:46:34 -0800, alanh_27@yahoo.com (Alan Horowitz) said
in alt.cellular.tech:

>if one could start a SMS-only network, would the return-on-investment
>be better than voice service?

If one starts a new cellphone network, one would have to invest
billions. ROI would be nil for at least the first few years.

>In existing American cellular networks, is there appreciable amounts
>of unused SMS capacity. Could that capacity (as against voice
>capacity) be increased by "tuning"?

No, "SMS capacity" is the same as "voice capacity". They're all just
data packets.
---
CellPhonesEtc at optonline dot net
Anonymous
December 8, 2004 4:33:32 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.tech,sci.econ (More info?)

"Al Klein" <CellPhones@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:t0hcr0dar1pnheiske9o5pcg6j1vkgkrkt@4ax.com...
> On 4 Dec 2004 08:46:34 -0800, alanh_27@yahoo.com (Alan Horowitz) said
> in alt.cellular.tech:
>
> >if one could start a SMS-only network, would the return-on-investment
> >be better than voice service?
>
> If one starts a new cellphone network, one would have to invest
> billions. ROI would be nil for at least the first few years.
>

Not that it is profitable but a 2-way pager is close to a SMS only device in
use.
I've used one all over the US and parts of Canada.
Coverage is good and 1-way coverage is better than 2-way.
The Blackberry device is very popular with some people, but I think Research
In Motion not the service provider is making most of the money.


> >In existing American cellular networks, is there appreciable amounts
> >of unused SMS capacity. Could that capacity (as against voice
> >capacity) be increased by "tuning"?
>
> No, "SMS capacity" is the same as "voice capacity". They're all just
> data packets.
> ---
> CellPhonesEtc at optonline dot net

Capacity is not an issue as unlike voice a message can be delayed till
capacity is there.
Also one message would use only a few seconds of air time.

The problem as I see it is the extra effort to compose a message vs a phone
call, if your device has a limited keypad then the difference is greater.
The ability to send the same message to a group of people would be one
advantage of messaging.
Sending messages where phone calls are expensive such as other countries is
another advantage.
It is also nice to send a message vs a phone call when the other party is
sleeping.

Overall I would not expect an SMS only network to be profitable. It is not a
surething that cell phone companies will be profitable.
!