My Photo

Ordering Information

Tomi on Twitter is @tomiahonen

  • Follow Tomi on Twitter as @tomiahonen
    Follow Tomi's Twitterfloods on all matters mobile, tech and media. Tomi has over 8,000 followers and was rated by Forbes as the most influential writer on mobile related topics

Book Tomi T Ahonen to Speak at Your Event

  • Contact Tomi T Ahonen for Speaking and Consulting Events
    Please write email to tomi (at) tomiahonen (dot) com and indicate "Speaking Event" or "Consulting Work" or "Expert Witness" or whatever type of work you would like to offer. Tomi works regularly on all continents

Tomi on Video including his TED Talk

  • Tomi on Video including his TED Talk
    See Tomi on video from several recent keynote presentations and interviews, including his TED Talk in Hong Kong about Augmented Reality as the 8th Mass Media


Blog powered by Typepad

« Musings From the Sidelines Observing the Bloodbath in Smartphones Nearing Q2 Final Results | Main | Pondering The Blackberry Puzzle: what IS going on here? »

August 03, 2011




Very interesting! I've never heard about this Godwin's law. But perhaps it is not very smart to judge that someone's opinion has no value just because this person mentioned Hitler. Or do you believe that? Was also Godwin saying you should not read the person that mentioned Hitler? I don't think so... haha



Maybe you should think again about what you said. The mobile OS race is not just for profit. The gold is on how you can extract information and influence the user's behavior by controlling the mobile OS.

If this where not true then why would Google develop Android for free for handset makers? We can know how much money exactly one iPhone makes to Apple when is bought but we will never know much money google makes influencing Android users to use gmail, gdocs, google search, google maps, Google+ and bla bla bla. Using Android Google knows much more about who you are, your behavior, who you talk with, what you buy and what you don't buy. Take a look on your google account and you will see google has the history of ALL GOOGLE SEARCHES you EVER MADE!

We don't know how much this information values but I guess is a LOT and maybe in the future it will worth even more!

Imagine the president candidate asking Google to look over Android users how many of them intends to vote on him, how old are day, what do they like to listen, which time do they sleep, where do they go, if they use drugs or not... Everything! That kind of information must worth BILLIONS FOR SURE!


@rodrigottr [& then by reference @kdt]: Exactly, rodrigottr, very good point, also a point made by several others over the past few months on Tomi's blog site here. There is political, social and material power to be had in this industry. Profits are important to keep from going out of business or to keep from being taken over. And of course to have free money to invest in the future and to help reward your loyal stockholders. But behind the big money of this world is power and power seeks always more power. Imagine the president asking google to look over past google searches of potential political adversary from day #1 of this poor slob's life to see a window into his or her psyche for blackmail or exploitation purposes. Imagine Coke asking google to help direct its advertising for new diet drink product productively and efficiently. Imagine Mr. and Mrs. ET visitors from outer space running binaries in the background of google systems compiling a meta report on human society's adoption of the ET new paradigm. Imagine google's internal evaluation of the value and profit to mother google inc. per each new android user broken down by regions of the world. Imagine all the world's people living life as one... Always hated that song! and that artist, but not enough to be happy to see him shot down on TV.


@eurofan @Piot

As you and @Piot detected on me some Apple Hate, just for fun I'll share if you something that just by itself makes Apple disgusting:

This is Apple on 1984

This is Apple today

So, Apple, what was you saying about making the world free from the Big Brother? Or is it that the Big Brother is also called by the Steve Job's name?

On there is also a beautiful text from some iPhone users about how Apple betrayed it's own philosophy and ended up controlling it's users with an iron fist even Yosef Stalin would be afraid of. hahaha

That is one of the reasons why I love so much Nokia. Nokia is much more close to be a community-dominated-brand then Apple is. We are seeing this everyday as everyday thousands of fans like us go online and try to join this debate hoping for the best of Nokia.



@rodrigottr: Neat choices to make your points, which I agree with, although I am kind of tired now and my political muscles go to sleep first so I'm not yet sure that we are in agreement politically. In other words I'm not sure that ability to be bad means necessarily that a person or an entity is bad, intrinsically. If that were true, all or most humans should just get lobotomies now. For example, we have here in the USA a folk expression, "You can't fight City Hall [meaning central office of the local government]." Every local police chief can know as much or as little about every person in his or her area of responsibility. Yet we don't see as many rich and corrupted police chiefs as a completely materialistic view of the world would encourage us to believe must then necessarily exist.

However your concluding remarks I don't need to be wide awake to completely agree with and say hear, hear!:

"That is one of the reasons why I love so much Nokia. Nokia is much more close to be a community-dominated-brand then Apple is. We are seeing this everyday as everyday thousands of fans like us go online and try to join this debate hoping for the best of Nokia.


Here, here! Nokia, hurah!

Mikko Martikainen


One of the constants of tech world is that whatever Apple comes up with, there is always a collective cry of "that's so lame, where're the innovation?" And, quite funnily, a lot of that cry comes from people using Apple products. It's almost like "how dare Apple make that kind of product? I have no use for it!"

Anyway, it is my opinion that we're witnessing a market disruption on multiple levels:
- on the phone hardware level, where the iPhone is less capable as a phone than for example Nokia phones
- on the distribution / carrier level, where Apple has a strong distribution network outside of carriers, and where the product is so desirable that carriers are making concessions to be able to sell it
- on the software level, where Apple is totally transforming the traditional software sales / publishing model

Disruptions don't necessarily happen fast, and for example the software sales disruption was not started by Apple, but Apple really accelerated it. When you combine there ongoing disruptions with other changes going on in the world (for example the EU legislation regarding roaming charges etc.) you maybe start to see a picture where the carriers inevitably lose power. In Finland, for example, carriers are basically nothing but "dumb pipes." Against this background, it is really easy to see why carriers love Android: it gives them more power. However, I don't think they can stop the disruption but they can slow it down.

This is one side of the current situation that is often overlooked. It is in the best interest of the users, us, to be free of the carrier stranglehold, and anything that furthers that disruption is good progress. At the end of that road, we will have the carriers providing data services and competing on the quality of their network, price and customer service. On top of that we will have competing, independent software + hardware ecosystems, so the end result is that the users will have more choice. At least that's what I hope will happen, and I can see signs of it.

buy essay online

Amazing post! Thanks for it!


I agree with the thrust of Mikko' s comments here but I want to be clear on one of the reason's why I have contempt for Apple's accomplishment so far in the hand held space as a human being and great respect for that accomplishment as a cold hearted business observer: Apple's biggest and still singular accomplishment in the cell phone space was to bundle the purchase of its original and now current iPhone offering with a minimum two year AT&T subscription to not only voice but a minimal ($20 at least) data plan, plus messaging if the customer wanted that too. Most plans came to $100 a month after the new subscriber checked off on higher data and messaging with a higher voice minutes component. You couldn't for example just get a data plan or just a voice plan with a new iPhone: you had to get both and the minimum plans you could get for both came to $70 or so and that's a plan with no messaging, which everyone really wanted most of all anyway, so we're realistically looking at 80$ plus for a minimally useful plan with a $200 iPhone (subsidized from $600 or whatever); AT&T therefor got a commitment from each customer to pay $100 per month for 24 months, $2,400 then total over two years with each subsidized iPhone it sold. Remember, AT&T's sunk costs providing switchgear and cell towers and sunk costs in purchase of radio frequency spectrum from the US governement are all just sunk costs. Actual overhead costs are just financing, maintenance, advertising, and sales [the usual costs in our great new economy]. AT&T was so happy for its exclusive with the original iPhone, which bumped all its renewing and new customers from typically $40-60 voice/messaging plans to new voice/messaging/data plans costing an average of $100 that its stock took off just like Apples and the executives partied hard and hatched plans to acquire competitors in the telcom space.

Job's real genius and the most sophisticated aspect of all iPhones from one to four is the fine tweeking of this subsidized offer from AT&T, down to the pennies and the restrictions and the minimal requirements: for example not requiring a messaging plan because they knew that everyone wanted messages more than voice or data and would sign up for that on their own and by not requiring it this "lowered" the price of the iPhone commitment. The iPHone increased economic rents on americans in a way noone noticed because they were getting that greatest american invention of all time, WC Field's something for nothing, an iPhone for the price of a cheap Nokia. %20 percent of american families could afford to take AT&T up on this new offer of a flashy thing in your hand that meant you had a need to push a button and see active stock tickers or the weather at your summer house.

This then is the genesis of the fabulous installed base of iPhones and the fabulous credulous base of iPhone app users who are always trying to justify the utility of their expensive shiny objects by purchasing apps for the price of Starbucks coffee to show their friends. In the privacy of their bathroom stalls at the office I'm sure each of them realize they are wasting money on monthly bills by not having a Blackberry to keep up on email, that's all they need. But their bosses are among the most converted to using iPhones, so they continue to roll with the fraud.

My Nokia n80I has everything the iPhone 4 has now except screen size, clock speed and virtual keypad. The screen resolution is just barely under iPhone 4's retina display level, the blacks are very amoled black, the speaker is awesome, the front facing and rear facing zeice cameras work as advertised, the wifi feature is dazzlingly straightforward and as is the cellular data connection capacity. As a prepaid voice/messaging phone it is cheap to use today. I pretty much use it only if I'm in a wifi hotspot such as a hospital or coffee shop or office or at home with wifi in the bathroom when I'm in the tub or on the throne. It's small and kind of has a KGB look -- I think if Telly Sevalis were still alive he could use one as a cop issued cop phone on a modern NYC cop show. Its got removable data storage and a great camera and voice recorder so he could kind of use it as a data collector as well as to compare finger prints on the little amoled screne compared to his perps, etc. I feel a romantic attachment to my nokia because it works great, takes a licking and saves me money.

Out of fans a community of users is born. Out of communities trends can be shaped. Marketing can do a lot of things but it can't long sell shit. Maybe for a short time, not for a long time.

The main and again I think only distinguishing thing about Finns that separates them from the rest of us is they as a culture and as individuals tend to always be thinking of the long term.

For whatever it was worth... I'm not going to reread this and edit it down. Yes Lee I skipped your piece; I saw a few words I didn't like as I scrolled through it and then noticed your name at the bottom and so decided to skip the annoyance of reading your post. Your are welcome to do the same to me.



I forgot to add to my list of n80I features that web pages load from wifi in quite a jiffy compared to even my current apple laptop. There is no "delay" due to symbian s60 that I can see, only the need to be somewhat familiar with how the thing works and to be able to say yes or no often where the iphone or laptop just gets her done. Again, I spend $10 a month to keep my phone connected to the AT&T network -- as it should be. Anything more is just rent.


@rodrigottr: I laughed because you show absolutely no understanding of Apple's values, priorities, strategy, and yet you feel compelled to comment. It’s clear you’ve not read or understood anything I’ve written here before. I don't know as much about Nokia, so I refrain from saying more on Tomi's Nokia posts other than to point out differences and factual errors. So I laugh.

As for addressing all your points, to some, I say “so what?” So Apple has to lower profit margins. They just did that with iPad. They do it all the time when they think they need to for strategic purposes. And yet their margins still remain much higher than any other company selling consumer electronics/computing devices. (Apple’s overall margins have gone up over the last 10 years, even as its products have gotten cheaper.)

So a cheaper iPhone maybe will cannibalize. The iPhone 3GS coexisted with iPhone 4, and both sold well. But even if it does cannibalize, don't you know iPod nano ended the life of iPod mini (which was the most successful, highest margin iPod ever at that point), and MacBook Air is cannibalizing the MacBook Pro today. Jobs himself said it’s better to cannibalize your own products than to have a competitor do it for you. So again, so what?

As for “hurting Apple’s brand”, have the Mac mini, white MacBook, or iPod shuffle hurt Apple’s brand? No, because Apple’s lower cost products are still found by consumers to be easy-to-use, high quality products.

As for Foxconn, you do know Apple does use and could go to other manufacturers, like Quanta. Apple is growing production capacity at a very deliberate speed (just about doubling yoy). Apple is in no rush because it is confident it can win over enough consumers with its carefully innovated, planned and executed products whenever it wants to. It just did that with iPhone to Symbian and Blackberry, and many surveys have shown many Android owners are likely to buying iPhone for their next phone. So as I wrote here before, Apple will grow its base in a defensible manner, meaning it will take its time to sell products whereby its customers will be so satisfied, over 90% will come back for the next version or the one after that. Tomi calls this fanaticism; it’s simply what happens your customers are satisfied after being dissatisfied for so long with other products. There’s little use in having a large market share if you can’t get repeat customers and this is clearly on display for the world to see today --- Nokia’s 1.3B phone owners aren’t buying many discounted Nokia phones in 2011.

Now back to your last response: First, by your mention of Chinese MPX, it seems by cheap you mean the throwaway no-margin commodity market. Apple will never enter that market. Neither would any of the major players. So we’re not even talking about that. Does anybody care about the $99 "tablets" being hawked at Amazon or eBay when discussing tablets? Tomi is talking about reaching the next layer of consumers, which is the mid-to-high end of the prepaid market.

Haven't you heard that competitors can't make cheaper but profitable tablets than iPad? Haven't you heard that competitors won't be able to make cheaper but profitable ultrabooks than MacBook Air? Apple has very much learned about how to squeeze the profit margins of its desiring-to-underprice-Apple competitors by mercilessly working and dominating key parts (Flash RAM, displays) of the supply chain.

Next point: I absolutely didn't deny that some blogs found disappointment. In case you didn’t understand, THAT WAS EXACTLY MY POINT. Not just some, but MOST blogs find disappointment with EVERY major Apple product going all the way back to iMac. So what else is new? Apple really doesn't care about geek blogs; Apple is selling to the mainstream consumer, and the consumers have been talking with their money.

Next point: Um, what's a brilliant moment? Apple's stock price (pardon me Tomi) is the highest it's ever been. Apple's market capitalization is the highest it's ever been. Apple's revenues and profits are the highest it's ever been. Again, what's a brilliant moment?

Next: Steve Jobs health is causing iPhone 5 delay? So who's delusional? Apple has been showing the market that it is smoothly transitioning to an Apple primarily led by Tim Cook. No one is even asking/talking about Jobs' health anymore.

And I've said many times here that iPhone 5 was planned by Apple in Jan 2011 or earlier for a Sept release. (I could've said Apple decided to do that on Feb 12th but that would set off blaming Elop. ;) The reasons for the change: Verizon iPhone, white iPhone, iOS 5 waiting for Lion, iCloud, Christmas/China sales, and maybe lack of Nokia competiton ;)

I could write more but this is long enough as is. I invite you to read Horace Dediu at for a perspective on how to disrupt and how to hold markets.


Exciting news for fans of silliness: It looks like now that American Football is back on the schedule after the player's strike The Dude has resumed posting his weekly Dude's Mail Review on the Bronco's website ITSALLOVERFATMAN. I live to read the absurdities of this mock mail review, half of the comments to which I attribute to the Dude himself. I invite anyone who thinks team rivalries and professional athletes don't provide grist for comedy to check out todays effort by the Dude:


"Maybe you should think again about what you said. The mobile OS race is not just for profit."

Business is always about making money.

"If this where not true then why would Google develop Android for free for handset makers?"

It was a defensive move against Apple and Microsoft controlling the mobile web.

"We can know how much money exactly one iPhone makes to Apple when is bought but we will never know much money google makes influencing Android users to use gmail, gdocs, google search, google maps, Google+ and bla bla bla. Using Android Google knows much more about who you are, your behavior, who you talk with, what you buy and what you don't buy. Take a look on your google account and you will see google has the history of ALL GOOGLE SEARCHES you EVER MADE!"

We know that Apple makes a little over $300 for each iPhone sold, it's been estimated that they make an additional $150 from accessories/iTunes, etc. and they make $100 million a year from Google being the default search engine. In your wildest estimates you can't believe that Google can possibly make over $450 a year per user of Android.


@Mikko Martikainen

You have a nice point of view but I'm not sure if carriers are really going to be disrupted. I believe carriers were are incredibly important on selling smartphones. There is something I don't see many people talking about here is how smartphones are a expensive gadget with possibly the smallest life cycle of gadgets.

Smartphones are exposed to 24x7 use, plus risk of shocks, robbery, natural damaging by the use, battery issues, oxidation of its internal components due to sweat and many other risks.

I believe if every person had to pay from its own pocket the entire price of 600$ for a product that possibly wont stay with you more then one year people would think twice before buying it.

Most people I know wouldn't/couldn't do that.

There is another thing: in some moment of the next decade smartphones will probably outsell dumbphones meaning we will have billions of smartphones on peoples pockets. Also, people will stay more time connected and a big part of computers data traffic will migrate to carriers. We will use carriers services maybe 3 or 4 times more then we use now, but, will number of carriers be multiplied 3 or 4 times? I don't think so. Then carriers having more power is inevitable.

In some point I agree with you: I'm seeing that there are two major behaviors from carriers here in Brazil. Two carriers are focused on richer markets and offering every time better smartphones with better prices. The other two are advertising that there is no "free cellphone" and you always pay for your expensive smartphone using services you maybe don't even need. I believe the second behavior will be the most successful on emerging markets but don't see this being successful on developed markets.

In the end I believe the major trend on any markets is that services are becoming more important then products and carriers are a nice example of that: when you buy a smatphone you buy a telecom service plus a financial service.


@Rodrigottr: Thank you for the info from Brazil on how telcoms are marketing themselves with the two strategies. I wish we had some big players trying strategy two up here in the States but we don't. If I wanted to re-up with AT&T on my old n80i my minimal plan would be almost $50 a month just for voice. Voice/messaging would be almost $60/month. Adding Data too gets the total monthly bill for "post paid" back to the $80/month starting level [its never actually postpaid, you're locked into prepaid whether the plan is called prepaid or not, just a difference whether the bill is automatically generated or not]. I mentioned above that I use an AT&T so called prepaid plan, GoPhone, to get limited voice plan of less than $10/month with my old n80i. Thing pays for itself every damn day.

The telcoms up here charge you 80$/month every month for minimal voice/data/messaging whether you are getting a subsidized phone from them or not, the only difference is with a subsidized phone, you have to agree to a two year commitment to this regime and with no commitment you are free to a month to month deal in which you can quit any time though until you quit, the charges are automatically generated each month. This is how they disguise the free phone tax/rent: you're going to pay the same whether you get a subsidized phone or whether you don't so you might has well sign up for the two year commitment and get the subsidized phone.

I don't like it but there it is and it has been an enormously profitable model for both the telcoms and for the biggest winner in the subsidized phone space, APPle. An interesting statistic would be APPle's share of the non-subsidized space. Anyway, I hope the f&&&king Nokia Board of Directors remembers your other golden nuggets, the top four reasons android phones are returned to US telcom operators after subsidized phone sales. Nokia could focus down on the E7 and N8 and an advertising campaign selling these phones around the world as more practical to use than androids; it won't work in the US market, however, since Nokia is on telcom reseller boycot or something and seems to have no relationship with telcoms to get its phones under display glass at telcom phone sales store fronts, which is where most Americans buy their phones. APPle's stores were for three years essentially ATT&T reseller store fronts when it came to the phones, now they're AT&T/Sprint store fronts in that respect: you buy the phone in an Apple store they ask if you want to hook it up right now to a two year commitment with ATT or Sprint and get a subsidy and you say hell yeah, do I look stupid?

Nokia has problems in the US market. This has been going on for several years. So does that mean all Nokia's phones and all Nokia's plans and all Nokia's business models suck, that Nokia had been arrogant before ELOPEwiththePATENTPORtfolio arrived on the scene? Hell no! It means Nokia missed out on APPle level profits, ok, so did everybody else. But Nokia was profitable and had a plan to leapfrog iOS as it were and its plan should have done well in the rest of the world that as Rodrigottr's above note indicates either has legally mandated or economically mandated market structure in which telcoms operate as dumb pipes and the user finances his or her own cellphone. The LADA was enormously successful company in Soviet history making cars for closed, subsidized markets. Does that mean Ford and Mercedes sucked in those years because there cars were only owned by foreign diplomats in Soviet countries? I feel my indigestion acting up again and am going to reheat some lasagna and crush extra garlic on top. I just hate INEQUITY and the north american cell phone market has been one of the greatest inequitable transfers of wealth from consumers to telcom operators. I remember back in the good old days AT&T was a monopoly and you could only have one phone per household unless you wanted to pay extra. Local calls were included in the monthly plan, long distance was billed separately and by use. Phone operators were human beings who said "AT&T operator, can I help you?" and half the physics and chemistry nobel prizes were were won every year by scientists at "Bell Labs", AT&T's central research facility in upstate New York. Oh, and monthly plans were 10$/year with no commitment. The phone was a free rental from AT&T.

At the end of this era Nokia helped invent the cell phone and AT&T lost its appeal to the Supreme Court of a lower court ruling that it was an illegal monopoly and was finally broken up and split into the baby bells. The baby bells became the new Verizons and the new At&T's and championed new cell phone technologies as national brands in order to get out of their regional land line ghettoization, since there was little money to be made as regulated regional dumb pipes. Again, why should Nokia pay the price for all this peculiarity in American History. Why can't one of the better designers and makers of cell phones find a way to survive in this GLOBAL industry? Whyyyyyyyy, god?


@Tomi, @Mikko:

iCloud makes it clear that a cheaper phone is coming (but maybe not yet), because it will enable iPhone owners to have their documents, music, movies, books and other stuff with them all the time but with just 8GB in the phone. Though Apple pays the lowest cost for Flash RAM, it is still one of the costliest items in the phone. So iCloud allows Apple to further reduce its per-phone costs and thus, its price.

But iCloud points out an issue that still needs to be resolved: the carrier's price for cellular service, including contractual strangleholds as Mikko was writing about. The prioe is still higher than what people want to pay or are able to afford. So Apple is still working methodically, product by product, to bring pressure, whether market, consumer, regulatory, or other, to force a change such as lower prices, or dropping of mandatory voice plans. Some possible first steps that we've heard about but haven't yet occurred include a change in the SIM card to allow carrier selection; iPod touch with no-contract 3G data service (like iPad); and much broader wifi penetration (not just buildings but also vehicles). I don't know if any of these will happen, but I'm certain that Apple is still working to disrupt the carrier business model, even as it partners with them.


@Kevin: I too have wondered why people don't just pay for a data plan for a mobile hotspot in their car and then buy a nice high end phones for the family and go with wifi mobile telephony only, just to fight back against the telcoms. Of course the mobile wifi hot spot is supplied by the telcoms but it's just data, which after all is what in reality all telephony is nowadays anyway or could be in a rational world. Who really needs to be in constant two way communication with the world besides a very limited set of professions? Seems to me getting by with coverage from wifi hotspot to wifi hotspot, like home to car, bus, train, office, cafe, store, etc... its good enough. We'll look back at this time and see the public got suckered into spending for mobile telcom service like we were all real estate agents, radiologists and directors of disaster preparedness. Seems silly to pay $100 a month when you could meet 90% of your needs for much less if you knew better how to configure your damn phone to be a wifi first cellular service second (or never) device. I guess with the iPod Touch many kids are already doing that cheerfully and without fanfare. Power too them.



Ok, let's keep focused here. Maybe it is not clear what am I really saying about Apple. It will sound a bit repeating what Tomi just said but I think is necessary to make things clear.

Today Apple has 20% of the smartphone marketshare. But has only around 5% of cellphones market. 5% of the richest consumers.

I believe on this decade or even on the next 5 years a number very close to 90 or 100% of phones will be smartphones. But the question is: how much of this will Apple be able to have?

Assuming economies wont change that much, 95% wont be able to pay more then 400$ for a phone. So the market share for phones priced above 400$ (as Apple's are) will still be 5%.

But phones in the future will all be computers, no more just phones. And as computers are an environment for business, not just for making calls, being influent over this environment is much more interesting then how much is this going to cost. (that's exactly how Microsoft saw PC market 30 years ago, and very correctly)

So maybe, for being influent over the computer environment of the future controlling the 5% richest share won't be enough. Apple would need to go many layers under their pricing. Layers where Android has already made their presence and also layers where no smartphone has ever been before. And that is not only a problem for their pricing, but also for their entire design, hardware, services, quality standards, branding, security and unity philosophy.

Cheaper designs would be necessary but also designs that would offer more options for consumers. Keeping only one OS would be harder if not impossible for different designs of such different price ranges. Services like App Store or iTunes would have to adapt do some conditions from emerging markets. Paying 5,99$ for an App is affordable in Brazil because this days US dollar is cheaper. With 5,99 in Brazil you can buy a McDonalds hamburger. But I don't get how it works in countries like India where with 5,99$ you can maybe buy food for several days. Also the iTunes business model wouldn't succeed in economies where 12,99$ for one album is food for the entire week. For providing some kind of device in this places Apple would have to ease some rules like downloading or data transferring between devices.

So, I believe I don't need to give more examples about how many problems will Apple have to face if they wish to be a important Mobile company 5 years from now. Most of this problems I even can't imagine.

Maybe you could give me again your myopic answer of "who cares about the 99$ phones market" but then I tell you: If Apple doesn't care. Well. I'm sure Google will care A LOT about this market. Google would know how to make money from the information and traffic from those phones.

And for Apple, to penetrate this markets would almost mean to UNDO EVERYTHING they have being doing since EVER!

So, my friend, again I say you. Even if Apple succeed on gaining some market share on the next layer (which I have doubts they will because they never did it and they are not in a good moment) to become a relevant ecosystem on the mobile future 5% of share is nothing and for growing bigger Apple will need to unbuilt the walls they build by themselves. That is why this war is owned by Google.



You would love brazilian operators! I believe brazilian TIM was the first carrier to compete with NEXTEL from GSM. They began charging only 0,25BRL (0,16US$) per call to any other TIM phone in the country for pre paid users!

I had a girlfriend on another city and gave up skype for calling her for HOURS for 0,16US$ at any moment and any time!

Also, they started data plans and SMS plans where you pay only 0,50 BRL (0,32US$) per day of use! NO USE, NO PAY! And NO LIMITS! The operator then started focusing their attention on providing telecom services, not selling smartphones with contracts. And stoped selling locked phones and began doing this advertising "there is no free phone".

As an answer for this other operators started offering the same and also a different kind where you charge 10 BRL pre paid credits and win every day for the entire month 20 BRL for calls inside the operator web. That is the best one for clients that use very low voice calls and only inside their operator web.

I believe this innovation began here and will make some difference in developing countries.



I know it is a bit unappropriated for the debate but you really should follow @fakeselop on twitter. The guy makes me LMFAO!


I feel a lot of synergy between building the Third Ecosystem and suddenly falling to third place in smartphone sales."


Thanks for the link. Finally, a good use for Twitter.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Available for Consulting and Speakerships

  • Available for Consulting & Speaking
    Tomi Ahonen is a bestselling author whose twelve books on mobile have already been referenced in over 100 books by his peers. Rated the most influential expert in mobile by Forbes in December 2011, Tomi speaks regularly at conferences doing about 20 public speakerships annually. With over 250 public speaking engagements, Tomi been seen by a cumulative audience of over 100,000 people on all six inhabited continents. The former Nokia executive has run a consulting practise on digital convergence, interactive media, engagement marketing, high tech and next generation mobile. Tomi is currently based out of Helsinki but supports Fortune 500 sized companies across the globe. His reference client list includes Axiata, Bank of America, BBC, BNP Paribas, China Mobile, Emap, Ericsson, Google, Hewlett-Packard, HSBC, IBM, Intel, LG, MTS, Nokia, NTT DoCoMo, Ogilvy, Orange, RIM, Sanomamedia, Telenor, TeliaSonera, Three, Tigo, Vodafone, etc. To see his full bio and his books, visit Tomi Ahonen lectures at Oxford University's short courses on next generation mobile and digital convergence. Follow him on Twitter as @tomiahonen. Tomi also has a Facebook and Linked In page under his own name. He is available for consulting, speaking engagements and as expert witness, please write to tomi (at) tomiahonen (dot) com

Tomi's eBooks on Mobile Pearls

  • Pearls Vol 1: Mobile Advertising
    Tomi's first eBook is 171 pages with 50 case studies of real cases of mobile advertising and marketing in 19 countries on four continents. See this link for the only place where you can order the eBook for download

Tomi Ahonen Almanac 2009

  • Tomi Ahonen Almanac 2009
    A comprehensive statistical review of the total mobile industry, in 171 pages, has 70 tables and charts, and fits on your smartphone to carry in your pocket every day.

Alan's Third Book: No Straight Lines

Tomi's Fave Twitterati