Big Bell Dogma: November 2009
As we work to build mobility into every product, service, and process, our greatest inhibitor is the mindset represented by those who defend the tethering of products and processes to specific places. This mindset is fueled by the investments that have been made that establish power in the companies, departments, and individuals that stand in the way of mobilizing our lives and our businesses. These investments are not always in hard assets, but often are investments of time and experience to establish intellectual and relational assets. We should expect our assault on these ways to be defended to the death. Here are recent examples:
December 3rd, 2009 at 3:34 pm
Russ,
You asked last week if Sprint should engage in the battle between AT&T and VZ or remain on the sidelines. I believe Sprint should actively engage. Primarily because they are beginning to define the terms of battle in a way that strongly benefits Sprint: around data networks.
Imagine an ad comparing Sprint’s voice network footprint and performance to AT&T and VZ, Sprint’s 3G footprint and performance to theirs, and concluding with a view of 4G markets served and apps supported. Sprint clearly positions itself as leading the mobility revolution, starting with the path to 4G. The theoretical ad described here could end with the following question: “Blazing-fast 4G and the apps it enables. Verizon and AT&T, do you have a map for THAT?”
The more I think about it, the more surprised I am that Sprint isn’t already shoving that message down their throats. Sprint has placed the biggest bets of any company on the future of mobile network technology. It’s high time Sprint reminded the world (including competitors) that’s the case.