3 ms·

> Apple could theoretically attempt (or at least threaten) a hostile takeover of any of them. If I were any of the carriers, I wouldn't worry about this in th

> Apple could theoretically attempt (or at least threaten) a hostile takeover of any of them. If I were any of the carriers, I wouldn't worry about this in the slightest. Apple attempting to gain ownership of a mobile carrier in order to impose it's will on the market would be met with incredibly harsh regulatory scrutiny. Beyond that, there's a strategic reason Apple hasn't launched their own mobile offering. The minute Apple owns a particular mobile carrier, they would be pretty well cut off from the other mobile carriers, or they would have to negotiate deals that would probably be argued to be collusive trade practices. The real solution is that the United States needs real data security and privacy laws that prevent network operators from reselling your usage history, location tracking, and other personal details. It's a national security issue at this point.

kingcharles 5y ago
I was thinking the same, then I remembered that Google has its own phones, it owns Android, and it managed to start its own cellular network without a whisper. So, no reason why Apple can't do the same.
- nickphx 5y ago
  google's wireless offering is an MVNO, they're paying to ride on other networks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Fi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Fi
- jessaustin 5y ago
  Google is in slightly more of a "home-grown" situation, but more importantly Lina Khan was not in her current chair back when all that stuff happened. In marked contrast to previous officeholders, she won't be deferring to the "monopoly is good" FCC.
- numbsafari 5y ago
  Launching an MVNO that pays out to network providers isn’t the same thing as a hostile takeover of a single carrier, for either case. Also, as a carrier, I’m not worried about Google’s MVNO for one simple reason: Google hates humans. For all that the carriers are bad to their customers, they at least have a footprint in meatspace. Google’s DNA finds physical footprint and real human interaction anathema. I would gladly take Google in a customer foot race any day.
  - mariojv 5y ago
    They contract it out, but Google Fiber had door to door sales people attempting to get people to switch to Google Fiber a few months ago. Several of my neighbors switched from these people reaching out. There's a difference between temporary sales presence contracted out and a permanent retail presence, though, you're right.
    - chrisjc 5y ago
      I always felt like Fiber was a warning shot to all of the ISPs trying to constrain what/how/where customers could do while extracting as much money as possible. In other words, if they keep this behavior up, Google will begin to compete as well as advocate (fight for the regulation, laws, etc) for other, smaller, new ISPs to enter the market. Or fight harder on the net-neutrality front. Or potentially worst of all for the incumbent/monopolistic ISPs, fight to make them dumb-pipes. Then again, maybe it's just another google product/service destined from conception for the graveyard...

kingcharles 5y ago

I was thinking the same, then I remembered that Google has its own phones, it owns Android, and it managed to start its own cellular network without a whisper. So, no reason why Apple can't do the same.

nickphx 5y ago
google's wireless offering is an MVNO, they're paying to ride on other networks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Fi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Fi
jessaustin 5y ago
Google is in slightly more of a "home-grown" situation, but more importantly Lina Khan was not in her current chair back when all that stuff happened. In marked contrast to previous officeholders, she won't be deferring to the "monopoly is good" FCC.
numbsafari 5y ago
Launching an MVNO that pays out to network providers isn’t the same thing as a hostile takeover of a single carrier, for either case. Also, as a carrier, I’m not worried about Google’s MVNO for one simple reason: Google hates humans. For all that the carriers are bad to their customers, they at least have a footprint in meatspace. Google’s DNA finds physical footprint and real human interaction anathema. I would gladly take Google in a customer foot race any day.
- mariojv 5y ago
  They contract it out, but Google Fiber had door to door sales people attempting to get people to switch to Google Fiber a few months ago. Several of my neighbors switched from these people reaching out. There's a difference between temporary sales presence contracted out and a permanent retail presence, though, you're right.
  - chrisjc 5y ago
    I always felt like Fiber was a warning shot to all of the ISPs trying to constrain what/how/where customers could do while extracting as much money as possible. In other words, if they keep this behavior up, Google will begin to compete as well as advocate (fight for the regulation, laws, etc) for other, smaller, new ISPs to enter the market. Or fight harder on the net-neutrality front. Or potentially worst of all for the incumbent/monopolistic ISPs, fight to make them dumb-pipes. Then again, maybe it's just another google product/service destined from conception for the graveyard...