Tuesday, 17 January 2012

M2M: comparing CSP footprints

As you might have seen, Machina Research is publishing its M2M CSP Benchmarking Report this week. More details on that here.

One of the graphics that I pulled together for that report was of the likely addressable cellular M2M subscriber base for each major CSP in 2020. This is based on data from our Connected Intelligence Forecast Database. How I built it was to look at the current geographical footprint of each of the major global CSPs and compare that with the number of cellular M2M connections that will be contained within that footprint in 2020. I have also included a calculation (the red bar) of the 2020 footprint taking account of the current alliances and partner arrangements, e.g. DT's arrangemenent with Orange or Vodafone's Partner Programme.



DTAG has the biggest footprint with 800 million addressable connections, thanks largely to its retention of T-Mobile USA. Behind DTAG on around 500 million are AT&T, Sprint, Telefonica, Verizon and Vodafone.

When we take account of partnerships and alliances the picture changes somewhat. Vodafone/Verizon are streets ahead with 1.8 addressable connections, courtesy largely of access to each others markets. Behind them are DTAG, Everything Everywhere, Orange and TeliaSonera, which are benefiting from a cross-partnerships. Telefonica and China Unicom, which recently inked a deal for strategic co-operation, are the only other CSPs with a footprint of more than 600 million when partnerships/alliances are taken into consideration.

Of course there are a few caveats to attach to this analysis. It pre-supposes that each company will maintain the same footprint and won't be involved in any M&A for the next 9 years which is, let's face it, pretty unlikely. It would also be wrong to assume that CSPs can only address M2M opportunities within their footprint. Of course that's not the case, although they will probably have an advantage in terms of network transparency and roaming rates. Finally, it should not be assumed that M2M is all about footprint. It's not. It would be possible for a company with a huge footprint to make a complete pig's ear of M2M if it gets its partnership, platform or process decisions wrong. Which is why in the report M2M Communication Service Provider Benchmarking Report, 2012 we look at all of those elements, and more. I'll be blogging on the results of the report, but thought you'd all be interested in seeing the table.

Drop me a line if you'd like more details about the report and how to get access.

2 comments:

Horst Kuchling said...

Matt, another valuable illustration by Machina Research.I'm missing KT in your list.
Cheers,
Horst

Matt Hatton said...

Thanks Horst. It's not an exhaustive list and there are a few other players that will have to wait until next time.