Thirsty Rock

Back in 2004, NTT DoCoMo introduced the first mobile wallet. DoCoMo is a spin-off of Nippon Telephone and Telegraph (NTT), the largest telecommunications carrier in Japan. Named Osaifu-Keitai which literally means 'Wallet Mobile', the wallet is based on the FeliCa integrated circuit developed by Sony. FeliCa is a smart card and is the de facto card standard in Japan. NTT DoCoMo fully integrates the chip into phone handsets thereby extending mobile device functionality to include payments. The chip communicates with contact-less readers such as POS equipment, parking meters and train ticketing kiosk to effect payment. While Osaifu-Keitai is a product of bringing together an array of players, other wallets are sponsored by either a bank, operator or a combination of both. Mobile operators typically favour SIM-based wallets. All the functionality is embedded onto the Subscriber Identity Module. The application is pre-loaded or provisioned over the air and the database is main...

A cursory look at mobile banking systems launched in the last five years provides interesting insights. The products on offer range from bank led initiatives such as Wizzit (South Africa), through 50/50 bank-operator JVs of which MobileMoney (Standard Bank, MTN - South Africa) is a good example to operator centric solutions led by SMART Money (Smart Communications - Philippines) and M-Pesa (Safaricom - Kenya). Although information around subscriber numbers, revenue per user and transaction volumes is generally unavailable there are rough estimates in the public domain. How do the numbers stack up? The top performers in terms of subscription are M-Pesa (7 mil), SMART (7 mil) and G-Cash at 1.5 million. All three services are bank agnostic. At the bottom of the table are the bank-led and JV solutions: Wizzit (200k est.) and MobileMoney (150k, 2007 estimate). Why is there such a staggering difference in subscriber numbers between bank-led solutions and those underpinned by MNOs? One...

Initiating a remote payment from a mobile phone is trivial. The most basic of handsets can utilise SMS or USSD access channels to initiate the payment process. In other words roughly 4 billion people around the world can potentially initiate a mobile payment. The question is: how does the recipient convert electronic money into physical bills? Traditional cash withdrawal channels such as ATMs and bank branch networks (which, globally, number around 1.5 and 0.5 million respectively) cannot cope with cash withdrawals triggered by mobile payment instructions. An alternative money dispenser should step in to cover for the increased demand. An unlikely contender to the ATM throne may be the humble cash till with the help of Point-of-Sales terminals. Cheap, lightweight and occupying limited real estate on the shop counter, the POS device is a perfect complement to the traditional till, eliminating the need for expensive automated cash dispensers. When merchants cash out through POS term...

There is growing interest within the financial and mobile communications communities in what some see as the next big application: Mobile Payments and Money Transfer (MMT). In the developing world mobile phones present a low cost opportunity for financial service providers; the devices are ubiquitous, inexpensive and free of costly maintenance. Compared to competing delivery channels such as EMV cards and ATMs, the mobile phone exacts the least cost on service providers. However, while the mobile phone is in everyone's pocket (well, almost), the most important commodity in any payment system which targets the under-banked is cash. As noted by Telco 2.0, cash is the crucial application in these cashless payment systems. Unlike mobile devices, cash redemption points are not ubiquitous. It is all very well to transfer funds from one mobile phone to another but the recipient must reserve the right to expunge real money from the system. To tackle this wicked problem network operato...

Less than four months after the launch of two social networking phones, Microsoft has withdrawn the mobile devices. Dismal device sales are the main reason for dropping the Kin I and Kin II. The European launch, slated for third quarter 2010, has also been cancelled. This is the second failed attempt by the Redmond firm to prise open the mobile phone market. In 2008 Microsoft acquired Danger Inc ., the company behind Kin, to get a foot onto the lower rungs of the mobile device manufacturing ladder. Like the Zune phone , Kin did not impress. Ironically, Andy Rubin a co-founder of Danger Inc. moved on to develop and sell the Android operating system to Microsoft's key competitor - Google. Android phones have outsold Kin by a long shot and are on track to challenge the iPhone's dominant position.

Most mobile phone manufacturers offer emulators to help developers with software tests. Java and C++ programming environments usually provide plug-in facilities for emulators . Products such as Pulsar go a step further to integrate and maintain the entire development space. Although emulators catch a fair amount of design and runtime errors, software behaviour on real phones is unpredictable. For most developers it is not financially feasible to test the behaviour of their mobile applications on all target platforms. To get around this obstacle some companies offer on-line services that allow for application testing on real devices. These services are often expensive. In software provided by phone manufacturers multiple instances of the emulator are invoked to simulate the behaviour of federated handsets. One solution is to run an instance of the application on a PC and set up a local communication channel with a real phone. A neat, inexpensive and elegant solution is availab...

Mobile Network Operators (MNO) seldom roll out GSM services in rural or sparsely populated communities. Average Revenue Per User (ARPU), CAPEX and OPEX determine which areas are serviced and those which are not. A small rural population of 2.000 can generate annual revenues around USD 48.000 (assuming ARPU of USD 2.00/month). Lets see how this compares with equipment cost. Equipment manufacturers do not publish price lists and almost all transactions are covered by Non Disclosure Agreements (NDA). However, by gleaning promotional materials it is possible to arrive at a good guestimate cost of a small BTS . To service a small subscription base of 2.000 you require an investment of about USD 90/subscriber (USD 90.000 per transceiver (TRX) including connectivity to the core network - BSC and MSC). About 70% of this cost is infrastructure related: air conditioning, security, generator sets, sleeping quarters, civil works etcetera. The cost of active elements (electronics) is roughly US...