Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dtagames 379 days ago
No device manufacturer would ever be permitted to own a national carrier like that, nor vice-versa. It gives too many opportunities for monopolizing the customer -- like there aren't enough of those already!
1 comments

What if Apple just operated a MVNO like Google Fi does?
MVNOs are like second or third-tier citizens on mobile carriers, why would Apple hand a lever like that to, say, AT&T?
That depends on their negotiations, no? Fi has been fantastic for me in the years I've had it, far better than first party AT&T or Verizon for my use cases.

Presumably that's because Google was able to negotiate favorable terms from T-Mobile. I assume Apple would be even better at that.

Google Fi isn't deprioritized. There are a few MVNOs that have the same priority as first party carriers.
Apple could definitely strongarm the carrier to make them highest priority.
???

Why would they want to halve* their market cap?

Lol.

(*: ok 2T vs. 3T)

What do you mean? Why would operating a MVNO lower their market cap?
Apple has a 3 trillion market cap with a 1/100th of the products that Google makes.

Why would they want to follow a strategy that is evidently worse? Lol.

Are you saying if Apple does one thing Google does it becomes Google and then has identical financials?
Huh? Just offering a cell phone plan doesn't mean that Apple becomes Google overnight?

I would love to see a first party Apple cell plan. It'd be better if they owned the whole network, but a MVNO would be better than nothing.

That doesn't mean Apple has to copy Google in any other ways.