metaViper

Lately there’s been buzz on the inter-web about a new phone service option, Ooma. Their idea is to provide phone calls utilizing a peer to peer (P2P) network. That means everyone on the Ooma platform will end up sharing some bandwidth to facilitate calls.

The business model is different in that new customers will pay about $400 up front for the device and thereafter will be able to make calls for life within the United States without any additional charge. International rates are promised to be pennies per minute.

I have a couple of thoughts on this approach. First, I wonder what happens when the company distributes enough of its hardware and sales begin to slow. They’ll be making some money from international calls but will it be enough to sustain continued growth and innovation? Anytime there’s a steep up-front fee I’m a little hesitant, especially after my experience as a refugee from VoIP provider Sunrocket’s bankruptcy.

The difference here may be that the hardware will be independent and won’t require maintenance on Ooma’s part, which is the concept behind most modern P2P applications.

Another concern is with the competitive landscape. A product like this challenges the fundamental business model of traditional telephone companies and I would expect a strong response first with some sort of patent lawsuit, and later with innovation.

If you’d like a first hand account of what setting up and using the service is like check out Stephen Shankland’s post, My so-so Ooma setup experience on CNET.

Apparently the Manitoba First Nations tribe in Canada is asking for monetary compensation for any airwaves passing through their territory, according to BroadBandReports. This adds a whole new dimension to airspace as it demands measurement of metaphysical objects. Maybe what they should consider next is a tax for any foreigner breathing on their land. After all, oxygen isn’t cheap these days.

This is a close parallel to another debate happening right now between content and pipeline providers. Companies like AT&T who deliver physical access to the inter-web want companies like Google to “share” a portion of their revenues. After all content can’t be delivered without the pipeline right? But of course the retort is that pipelines are worthless without great content.

Talking about paying taxes on airwaves and forcing content providers to share revenue exposes a common red line question. What is the value proposition?

Pipeline providers claim they’ll provide priority bandwidth to those who pay, but I suspect with their current infrastructure that would be difficult to measure. Manitoba First Nations possesses some wonderful land with lots of fresh air, and maybe with those two qualities airwaves would travel with less interference? That’s stretching it.

My point is that in order for these proposals to sound halfway reasonable they need backing by solid value.

But, no one likes to lose a cash cow.