Up until this point, AT&T has made a strong case in DC securing major support from Members of Congress as well as in the States. There has also not been a lot of noise in public opposition to the deal, and I give AT&T credit for being proactive in this area. However, politics is one thing, and facts are another. When you look at this merger nationally, the facts are hard to spin for AT&T.

I have only been watching this merger from the fringe. I don’t represent any of the parties waging war against each other. However, having been involved in wireless mergers, I’m not surprised by the DOJ making the filing.

In the event of AT&T dropping its bid (and that is the big question), some of the talking heads speculate that Sprint would make a run for T-Mobile. I don’t think that is realistic. The companies utilize two different technologies and Sprint has already gone down that path (with the result being indigestion – Nextel).

In any case, I look forward to watching this play out from the bleachers.

Additional nugget -

Press Release and Full Complaint here…

Bookmark to:

Once again, I’m not going to go on the record (yet) on my opinion on the deal. Instead, I will offer a few thoughts for my friends at at&t and Sprint to chew on…  Enjoy!

Silicon Valley - I love at&t’s proactive outreach to this community. In 2004, the mobile-social revolution was not on the radar and we did not have to court the valley. However, the innovations and services driving the wireless ecosystem is a real success story for the industry. At the moment, there is a ton of money being invested in everything mobile. This group has a huge stake in this deal, and having them on board or just neutralized is huge.

Spectrum – Sprint can play in this sandlot too. Yes, at&t is stating that they need more spectrum, and the merger allows them to acquire it quicker than a future auction. That might be true. However, Sprint should talk about the inconvenience this is going to cause consumers (especially T-Mo’s) as they are going to have to switch out handsets due to how the companies currently utilize their spectrum. T-Mobile has done very well in attracting consumers who have sought the low-priced alternative in the market… You connect the dots.

In addition to that point, Sprint should hammer the fact that without another large bidder in the auction process, the Treasury should not expect huge windfalls from the auction. Spectrum policy (whether good or bad), in most instances, has been driven purely by dollars. Republicans who are predisposed to support the merger, are hoping to raise billions from incentive auctions to cut the deficit. Some might realize that it’s hard to raise a ton of dough when there aren’t many players.

“Crickets” - To date, this merger has failed to capture the general public’s attention. Once again, I give at&t credit by being pro-active and reaching out to important groups (see one example above). Consumers are concerned with gas prices, the economy, and the job market. at&t’s ability to keep the noise on its home field (district of communications) is key to success. They can handle hearings, they can handle the name calling by “consumer groups” (that hasn’t changed since 2004). Sprint has to get them out of their comfort zone (maybe their efforts in the states will help).

Love them or hate them, at&t knows mergers. the onus is on them to make the case for this deal, and they are doing it.

additional note – I wrote this post earlier in the week leading up to today’s House Judiciary Commitee Hearing on the merger.  at&t came out with some additional support (Microsoft, Sierra Club, and some rural Governors) over the last 24 hours.

another note – I worked at AT&T Wireless when we were acquired by Cingular Wireless in 2004.  As always, these are my personal opinions.

Bookmark to:

friendly advice for T-Mo & Sprint – did George Washington play by the same rules as the British in the Revolutionary War? he did not. you cannot play the game the same way as your much larger enemy or you will continue to lose (or eventually become extinct).

The recent news yesterday regarding T-mobile’s acquisition by at&t confirms the above.

Moving beyond competitive strategy in both the marketplace and in Washington, the above combination is going to dominate the telecom policy conversations in DC for the next 12-18 months.  I’m not going to delve into the matter of whether this is good for consumers or not.  I want to focus my thoughts on some issues that my friends at at&t and T-Mo need to consider as they work to get approval. 

Environmental Scan

There is a general tendency to look at the AT&T Wireless acquisition by Cingular to provide a roadmap for getting regulatory approval.  However, each merger presents its own issues and the wireless environment now is quite different than it was in 2004.

With regard to the wireless industry, in 2004, there were 7-8 players in the industry (Verizon, AT&T, Cingular, T-Mobile, Sprint, Nextel, ALLTEL, and Western Wireless).  Today, there are 4 major players but the space between Verizon / at&t and the rest of the market is significant.  Completion of the merger will catapult at&t to the number one spot and grow the gap of the two wireless leaders from the rest of the market.  In addition to the changing composition of the marketplace, T-Mobile is in a very different place than AT&T Wireless seven years ago.  We were bleeding consumers due to service quality issues and it was compounded with LNP (local number portability) rules going into effect.  T-Mobile has a proud and vocal fan base.  They won’t be sitting quietly.

Media coverage of this merger will be like no other.   In 2004, the interactive space wasn’t thriving.  It is now.  Accordingly, the amount of information that is out there for regulators and staff to chew on is immense.  These folks follow and are influenced by the perspectives of thought leaders online.  In addition to information, opponents to the merger have tools to reach lawmakers as well as journalists who have an appetite for additional angles to cover.  I’d argue that the old inside-baseball DC game that usually succeeded needs a substantial tweak this time around.

Finally, the FCC, Congress, and the Administration had a different composition than 2004.  In 2004, Republicans had the White House and both houses of Congress.  Once again, the wireless market looked a lot different than it does today and it did not garner the attention that this merger will get with the Obama Administration in charge, and with the Democrats holding the Senate.

This isn’t CenturyLink-Qwest.  This is a big wireless acquisition with national players.  An industry that consumers taste everyday.  These diners will have opinions on this marriage that will resonate beyond the beltway.  Dropping news of it on Sunday afternoon wasn’t a good start — that was done in 2004.  A new recipe in DC and beyond will be crucial to getting this deal done on time.

Additional note – I worked at AT&T Wireless when we were acquired by Cingular Wireless in 2004.

Bookmark to:

when everyone is looking for gold in the same river, the best opportunities are somewhere else… Mark Cuban

A recent article in the New York Times got me really excited.  No, it wasn’t an article predicting the Ravens to be Super Bowl Champions.  It was about a journalist who went beyond Facebook and Twitter to bring value to his company.  Not only was he successful in that endeavor but it paid off for him professionally too.

If you didn’t see the article, I highly recommend it.  The story is about Mark Coatney, a former senior editor at Newsweek, who decided to engage with folks in another medium.  Accordingly, Mr. Coatney starting using Tumblr to post unique content.  The effort created a successful following for Newsweek on Tumblr that other media companies are looking to emulate.

Many companies and organizations are starting to pursue a social media strategy now.  Three years ago Facebook and Twitter were great.  However, they are the status quo.  You have to go beyond them now.  There is a tremendous opportunity to be a leader and not a follower by utilizing location based social networks (Foursquare, Gowalla) or going beyond blogging with (Amplify, Posterous).

Congrats to Mr. Coatney for leading and his new gig at Tumblr!

Disclosure – I’m one of the co-creators of Amplify

Bookmark to:

Ms. Kang begins the article stating – “Why pay for a golf trip, dinner, or full-page ad when you can tweet for free”?  It is a good question and is core to the overall conversation.  However, citizen lobbying isn’t on equal footing yet.  Fundraisers that provide the golf and dinner opportunities provide access to policymakers that are not quite analogous to twittering.  If this was true, as highlighted in her Post Tech column, some companies wouldn’t be spending nearly $6 million (last quarter) in lobbying.  Don’t get me wrong, utilizing social media is allowing citizen lobbyists to close the gap on the traditional influence game.  However, we are not quite there yet. 

Ms. Kang rightly draws attention to some folks in the industry who are being paid to create content and are not necessarily making it easy to discern who is sponsoring those efforts.  John Taylor (with Sprint) picked up on this issue and pondered whether this would lead to companies not getting involved with social media because it wasn’t worth the trouble.  The irony that I found with the discussion in the article, is it flies in the face of what social media and taking your message online is all about.

Authenticity and transparency are key to success online.  The fact that some folks aren’t disclosing who funds their organization is only going to work against their online efforts.

The online space is different than it was a few years ago.  In those days, you could engage with folks who truly wanted to debate and cared about the issues.  The web is now starting to get dominated by marketers and individuals whose main interests are political or public relations related.

One is no longer an “alien” when blogging, twittering or utilizing social networks to discuss public policy.  This is a wonderful thing and I’m loving this embrace of digital in the District of Communications.  However, there are some companies that haven’t realized that quid pro quo doesn’t work online.  Those that do it right, who are not looking for the quo, and are authentic and transparent will be able to play with the best that money can buy on K street.

Bookmark to:

Check it out -

Bookmark to:

Ralph de la Vega (CEO, AT&T Mobility) kicked off the start of the show with a snapshot of where the industry is and what will be needed (more spectrum).  Mr. de la Vega highlighted the fact that the United States leads the world in 3G subscribers.  It is estimated that the U.S. has 117 Million 3G subscribers with Japan (101M) and South Korea trailing (40M).  With subscribers in mind, Mr. de la Vega discussed how much the industry is spending and plans to spend on wireless infrastructure.  Specifically, he projected that the industry will spend $22-$23 Billion in 2010.

After providing this snapshot of the industry , he addressed the critical question of whether or not the industry can handle the growing appetite for mobile broadband.  Accordingly, he offered up a blue print for taking on this issue.

(1)  “increasing available spectrum” – This point has been hammered everywhere.  On that note, the FCC recently called for 500 MHz to be available for wireless broadband over the decade and that 300 MHz be available within the next 5 years.

(2) “accelerating network efficiency” – In this instance, Mr. de la Vega discussed LTE and the network efficiencies that can be derived from that technology – it is about 2.5X more efficient that HSPA.

(3) “capitalizing on Wi-Fi and Femto” – I don’t have too much to add on this point.  Offloading traffic is an important part of the solution.  I’ve always been a big fan of Wi-Fi.

(4)  “ensuring application efficiency” – This is a point that is starting to be repeated more often and it is a good thing.  Developers need to be cognizant of the amount of bandwidth a particular application is going to have on the network.

Spectrum is the lifeblood of this industry and we need more capacity to keep the momentum going in this space.  The FCC’s efforts in the National Broadband Plan is a great start.  However, there needs to be more talk about spectral efficiency as we get ready for the long battle ahead to free up more capacity.

Bookmark to:

In any case, Congress is going to review the plan next week.  With regard to the Senate, they will hold a Full Committee Hearing on Tuesday, March 23.  The House will hold a Subcommittee Hearing on Thursday, March 25.

Enjoy!

Bookmark to:

Blogs have influence — I subscribe to an email based clipping service pertaining to the wireless industry.  I’ve noticed this before but it is becoming more and more the norm – the highlighted clips are from tech bloggers.  I know many folks in the diner are not shocked by this news.  However, there are still tons of people in the District of Communications that haven’t figured it out.  Not only are many journalists getting their stories from bloggers but the impact some of these stories have had on public policy decisions are significant.

EVOLVE — According to GigaOm, a much tweeted quote from author Clay Shirky’s speech at SXSW was: “Institutions will try to preserve the problem to which they are the solution.”  What a fantastic quote!  I can think of so many examples but this may whet my appetite for a future post in the diner.

Location, Location, Location — The battle of the “check-ins” is quite fierce and the NY Times did a nice little story this morning.  Although sharing my location information is not my thing, there is huge potential in this space.  Small businesses really have a nice opportunity to connect at a more intimate level with consumers and consumers can reap the benefits of being “a regular.”  I look forward to seeing more marketing efforts around location based social networking.

Bookmark to:

On a related note, I often connect with many of you in some other social spaces online (Twitter, Facebook, Amplify).  Please feel free to follow or connect with me there.  As I have mentioned previously, time becomes an issue when running a small company and being involved with a growing internet start-up company.  I still like to discuss the issues but I’m doing it in other places that allow me to quickly engage on a more regular basis than the diner.

Thus, I’ll be here when conferences are coming up or to give deeper insights on an issue (if time allows for it).  Otherwise, please catch me on Twitter, Facebook, or Amplify.

Bookmark to:

The report, authored by ITIF Senior Analyst Stephen Ezell, explores the global state of mobile payment systems and identifies Japan, South Korea, and Singapore as the world’s leaders.  In these countries, mobile phones are used in conjunction with near field communications (NFC) technology to pay for public transit, to check in at airline gates, to make purchases from retails, and, in some cases, to supplement banking and financial institutions.  As a result, the mobile phone has evolved into an “electronic wallet,” which the report defines as “a multi-functional device possessing cash, information storage and transaction, identification and authentication, and communication functions.”

After presenting the report, Ezell participated in a panel discussion alongside David Jeppsen, Vice President, NTT DOCOMO USA, and Mark MacCarthy, Adjunct Professor, Georgetown University and Former Senior Vice President for Global Public Policy at Visa Inc. The discussion was moderated by ITIF President Robert Atkinson.

The panelists argued that using cell phones as an electronic wallets will result in increased economic productivity and personal convenience.  However, as the reports notes, “widespread deployment and adoption of mobile payments systems requires action from a complex ecosystem of organizations.” This ecosystem include mobile carriers, banks, credit card companies, and others.  Because of the complexities involved, only a few nations have succeeded in coordinating the ecosystem required to develop a widely used mobile payments system. For America to realize the convenience and cost savings opportunities provided my mobile payments, Ezell stated, it “needs to develop and adopt a national strategy with government participation.”

The report’s key recommendations suggest that government should:

1. Create an inter-government mobile payments working group and private-sector advisory council that would collaborate to introduce, by min-2010, a strategy for spurring the deployment of an open, interoperable mobile wallet;
2. Assume a leadership role in promoting and adopting mobile payments (i.e require that mass transit systems receiving federal funding deploy mobile payment systems, and provide funding for pilot programs); and
3. Establish clear consumer protections and address consumer privacy concerns.

Though the report states that electronic wallets are “now ready for full-scale implementation and use,” Mark MacCarthy noted that first, “we need incentives for merchants to upgrade and for carriers to embrace their role as payment intermediaries.”

No clear timetable was offered on when Americans can expect a mobile payment system. Stephen Ezell predicted, “two or three years,” while David Jeppsen said, “this technology is being developed for my twelve-year-old…who will be using it when he gets to college.”

Bookmark to:

Free Press is a leader in the interactive universe.  They cultivate and organically grow their communities.  By utilizing digital tools early and often, the Free Press team has built a machine that can deliver results.  Last year, they took on Comcast, leading an effort to urge the FCC to rebuke Comcast for its network management practices.  They won.

Early this year, Free Press began beating the drum for the FCC to stay the course and open a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on open internet regulations in the wireline and wireless spaces.  This effort mobilized thousands of letters, blogs and tweets on the topic.  Once again, they won.

Free Press has become a juggernaut in the District of Communications.  Although, I don’t always agree with all of their public policy positions – I love the strategies they use to raise public awareness and influence policymaking.

Sprint and Verizon are also leaders.  By actively engaging consumers online, Sprint’s John Taylor gains valuable feedback on everything from policy to gadgets to network launches while consistently promoting the Sprint brand.  He also does a masterful job of interacting with reporters and directing traffic to links and articles he wants the media to see.

Verizon does a great job on the communications front.  The company has developed a “sixth sense” for public opinion and carefully crafts their positions to balance both consumer and corporate interests (think LNP, opposing a wireless directory, or supporting the open conditions on the 700 MHz C block auction).  On the digital side, Verizon’s John “CZ” Czwartacki is omni-present.  He covers a lot of the same ground that John Taylor covers, however, he really takes it to Verizon’s competitors – especially AT&T.  It is no secret that Verizon has a great network and he lets it be known.

In any case, both of these guys have been engaging for years.  They didn’t just start blasting their press releases, creating Facebook Fan Pages, or tweeting links to content that supports their points of view.  On the contrary, they’ve mixed outreach tools and, ultimately, are their for consumers.

The posers online are as obvious as the leaders.  They beg for followers on Twitter.  Their blogs are essentially press releases or just dead.  They rarely offer fresh content or engage their Facebook Fan Pages.  They are always asking instead of listening.  And their companies continue to spend gobs of money doing the same thing over and over again (lobbying) in Washington and getting the same results.  Eventually, they’ll learn the hard way that public perception and consumers are their best advocates.

Dish Disclosure – I spoke at the National Conference for Media Reform, which was sponsored by Free Press, in 2008.

Bookmark to:

What are Twitter lists?  Briefly, Twitter now has the functionality to allow its users the ability to segment people they follow on Twitter.  For instance, I follow around 400 people and, with the addition of twitter lists, I can now group people according to “policy”, “mobile”, “digital”; you name it, there is a Twitter list for it.  You can also see other Twitter users’ lists (if they’re public) by looking at their profiles and you can get a sense of how you are seen in the Twitterverse.

This is either another stroke of genius by Ev, Jack, and Biz or just another thing for the social media elite to point to as a way to measure “influence.”  Thus far, it seems to be the latter and I don’t think that’s good for Twitter in the long haul.

We’ve already seen reports that Twitter’s growth is slowing.  The strategy to get to 100 million users seems to be promoting the celebs and hoping all of us will just want to sign up so we can see what Alyssa Milano and Ashton Kutcher are doing.  Contrary to being an awesome two-way communication tool – it becomes a fire-hose of noise.

I’m working on my list now (it is private) to see if it adds additional value.  I enjoy Twitter and the community I have engaged with there for over 2 years.  However, I’m not optimistic about this move and believe it is a step in the wrong direction…

Bookmark to:

The letters were handiwork of a DC-based consulting firm, Bonner & Associates, which specializes in “innovative grassroots campaigns.” In case you’ve missed the string of players involved: the letters were manufactured by Bonner & Associates as part of their work for the Hawthorne Group.  It turns out the Hawthorne Group was working for American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE), an opponent of the climate legislation.

Bonner & Associates’ President Jack Bonner has blamed the forged letters on a recently-fired “bad employee” and proclaimed outrage.

He’s not the only one.

More than a dozen “senders,” organizational leaders whose identities were used without their knowledge or consent, are pretty upset, too.  So is Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), co-author of the legislation at the center of the storm.  Markey has launched an investigation into the forged letters. (Though thirteen fraudulent letters have been identified, dozens more await verification.)

However, the most audacious expression of outrage came from a small band of environmental activists known as the “Action Factory.”

These brazen demonstrators stood, nearly naked, outside the Bonner & Associates office building on a recent afternoon. Wearing little more than handmade signs of protest, they took to the street to draw attention to a despicable PR tactic known as “astroturfing.”

What is astroturfing?

It’s a PR tool most commonly employed by the lazy, unskilled, and unconnected. It’s also an underhanded and unethical practice.

According to Wikipedia: “In American politics and advertising, the term astroturfing describes formal public relations projects which deliberately seek to engineer the impression of spontaneous, grassroots behavior. The goal is the appearance of independent public reaction to a politician, political group, product, service, event, or similar entities by centrally orchestrating the behavior of many diverse and geographically distributed individuals.”

The basic idea is to manufacture the appearance that a grassroots movement is taking shape. Some resort to paying troops to generate propaganda. Even more disgraceful, some simply invent these troops or enlist them without asking permission.

Bonner & Associates is not the firm to resort to astroturfing, just the latest to learn the key lesson of this tacit: In an effort to gain ground, astroturfing can result in considerable and devastating loss. In this case, some have lost jobs (the “bad” employee), others have lost their cools (the many “outraged” participants), and a bold few have lost their shirts (the Action Factory team).

Most concerning of all, however, is the loss of credibility that astroturfing inflicts on the entire PR industry — especially when most communications professionals conduct their outreach, grassroots organizing, and coalition building activities with integrity.

As the count of forged letters grows and news about this astroturfing incident continues, Bonner & Associates is not the only firm affected. Ethical communications shops and legitimate grassroots advocacy organizations also suffer.

Winning public relations fight is no easy task, but adhering to the rules of battle is a critical professional responsibility. Astroturfing undermines both the valuable work of the public relations industry and the most vital tenants of our democracy — open and honest pubic debate.

In launching his investigation, Chairman Markey stated,  “Democratic debate has been deceptively debased by fake facts and harsh rhetoric. We must return to an honest discussion of the issues, and ensure that this sort of campaign does not further poison the well of trustworthy debate.”

Let’s hope his words –  not the threat of his investigations — can inspire an end to astroturfing.

This post has been edited.

Bookmark to:

The answer is no. And the reason is clear: Twitter doesn’t need a lobbyist!

Twitter continues to be the hottest thing on the social web.  However, let’s not forget that the company is not making any money.  The resources necessary for representation would be better served elsewhere.  For instance, hiring more developers to strengthen the quality of service (think FAIL WHALE) or growing the treasury for more acquisitions (think Summize) to make Twitter more valuable as a service are better investments for the company.

Twitter also has something that many companies (many of which have huge arsenals of lobbyists) are trying to build now — an active community!  Twitter founders Evan Williams (1,129,147 followers), Biz Stone (964,023 followers), and Jack Dorsey (927,253 followers) could easily start a movement in response to a misguided attempt by a lawmaker to cripple the popular social networking website.  On a related note, @Ev, @biz, @Jack already have relationships with lawmakers on twitter.  They already engage in direct conversations with key policymakers without spending a dime at a fundraiser.  Not to mention the attention Ashton “Mr. Twitter” Kutcher (2,858,856 followers) would draw to the legislation.  He is already using his Twitter fame to mobilize around causes.  Let us not forget his talent for publicity – his achievement of 1,000,000 followers before Larry King did and his appearance on Oprah was all over the news!

Companies such as Twitter are changing the world, and the Internet is changing the way business is done in Washington.  Twitter allows us to connect directly with Congress and to build connections with people around the world among common interests.  This is good for our democracy.

Twitter will need to play the traditional Washington game at some point in the future.  It is a fact of life.  However, they can play it differently.  Once again, they have millions of users who can carry (tweet) their messages to Congress.  Ashton will lead their battle and not the lobbyists.

Follow me on Twitter – @mobilediner

Bookmark to: