The iPhone and the telecom revival

Posted on by Daniel J. McKeown

Telecom as an industry suffered one of the largest slumps any industry has ever seen between 2000 and 2003, and really has only recently emerged from the massive over-investment of the 1990s.

Those that are now fond of claiming that somehow this enormous buildout was somehow worth it in the end, on balance, are wrong.  The loss of financial investment is a sign that the market is not working (in this case it was quite overheated by 1999), not a sign that it is.  Massive, inefficient allocation of resources is not worthwhile given the opportunity cost.  Though an enormous amount of available long-haul capacity was built, it was just a minor side effect of some $1 trillion of financial losses, best exemplified by the bankrupt WorldCom and Global Crossing.

Recently the industry has seen a revival in fortunes.   As Businessweek noted last month:

‘Over the past year, however, the telecom industry has roared back to life. Credit a steady rise in appetite for broadband Internet connections, which enable easy consumption of watch-my-cat video clips, iPod music files, and such Web-inspired services as free Internet phoning. Indeed, this year broadband adoption among U.S. adults is expected to cross the important threshold of 50%. Capital spending is on the rise as companies invest to build high-speed networks. Private equity players are placing enormous bets on the industry, such as the $8.2 billion that Silver Lake Partners and the Texas Pacific Group agreed to pay for networking gearmaker Avaya on June 5. And the glut in broadband communications capacity is all but gone.‘

But as much as the increase in dealmaking is a good augur, the iPhone’s cultural effect is probably even greater.  Somehow, telecom has become very, very cool, and having the sleek, powerful iPhone has become an instant guarantor of status and attention.

Apple is really changing the telecom game, but not only by offering a much more open, web browser-based platform for applications than most cell phones along with the new design and materials including the shiny color touchscreen.

Building a device that has “Phone” in the name that does a lot of other useful tasks other than connect calls is a boon for telecom’s image.  Apple is moving their platform, with all its cool, from unconnected or sometimes-connected devices like iPods or computers to the always-connected iPhone.  Others will follow, and the network will continue to grow.  It’s just hard to predict how long it will take.  Welcome to the new connectedness.

[Read my and N. Rapp’s report on Apple from 2003.]

The most underrated bands of the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s

Posted on by Daniel J. McKeown

1960s: The Velvet Underground

Now this is a famous band, to some extent–but even allowing for all that it is the most underrated 60s band. Do you really know how good they were? To hear it all put out there in terms that those of you who fear the esoteric New York art band’s noisy early days (when the sound was heavily influenced by the legendary early members John Cale and Nico) can deal with skip forward to the late days of the group and the song “Stephanie Says.” No song has ever made a more convincing argument about how cold Alaska is, and few songwriters have captured the pop genius of the Lou Reed.

1970s: Television

Tom Verlaine invented the angular guitar hook sound of U2 all while forging a fascinating and complex punk sound that was still every bit as street as The Sex Pistols or the Ramones. Listen to “Prove It” from 1977 for a great example of the sound, or “Guiding Light” if you need a pop edge to it. (Attention Irish megastar fans: Television actually sounds nothing like U2, though what I said above about the guitar stylings is true.)

1980s: Pet Shop Boys

Nothing really comes to mind. Perhaps the early work of the Pet Shop Boys, while popular then, doesn’t get the attention alongside other dance classics the way it should. 1987’s “Actually” is a phenomenal album, and songs like “Shopping” would mix well into trance sets. (Well, I guess they probably roll like that in London, but here in San Francisco you’re just lucky if you don’t hear songs with lectures about “WHAT REAL HOUSE MUSIC IS” and “THESE DAYS EVERYBODY WANTS TO BE A DJ!” when you’re out. Actually, continuing on this tangent, I’ve been think of trying to compile a collection of such songs and release it as the “House Lecture Series” LP.)

1990s: Underworld

Underworld came out with a few long, melodic electronic tracks like “Born Slippy,” “Push Upstairs” and “Dirty Epic” that even got occasional airplay. But the 1996 album “Second Toughest in the Infants” is easily the greatest electronic album I’ve ever heard. Though it features none of the above-mentioned songs, it has an amazing opening triad (“Juanita/Kiteless/To Dream of Love”) and continues through a series of tracks that are both wide-ranging and highly consistent. “Pearl’s Girl” was the album single, where occasional shattered beats almost recall the drum-n-bass madness at the time, but then roll into the huge techno track with a star vocal turn by Karl Hyde.

Congratulations to Barry Bonds

Posted on by Daniel J. McKeown


Barry Bonds, the 40-something San Francisco Giants leftfielder, hit career home run number 751 recently, moving within striking distance of Hank Aaron’s all time record.
While the media has tried to single him out as an illegal steroid user (a charge not proven, as it is) and cheat, most fans know that whatever the details of the Balco case and whatever personal issues the man may have, Bonds is the greatest slugger in the history of baseball.

Leave it to a managing great to sum it up best:

‘Jim Leyland couldn’t be happier that his old star was elected by fans to start for the National League in next week’s All-Star game [to be held in San Francisco].

“People throughout the country obviously must not be as disgusted at Barry Bonds as some people have let on,” said the AL manager, who was Bonds’ first major league manager. “I think it’s a great story. I think he belongs there.”’

[photo: Reuters]

Commutation shows how culture of corruption continues

Posted on by Daniel J. McKeown

While people are right to howl about the arrogance, corruption and unfairness that George W. Bush’s commutation of Lewis Libby’s sentence entailed, from a strategic standpoint this is another political embarrassment for Republicans, who have another terrible decision done by their leader that they will have to try to (pretend to) run away from in the next elections. (Well maybe not if the nominee is Fred Thompson, who after all lobbied for a pardon.)

There’s no real limit to the brazen disdain for laws applying to them–so why not a pardon too?

Liberal blogs are voicing outrage and disdain. MSNBC anchor Keith Olberman made his contempt for the president clear in his special comment, which concluded thusly:

‘Pressure, negotiate, impeach — get you, Mr. Bush, and Mr. Cheney, two men who are now perilous to our Democracy, away from its helm.

And for you, Mr. Bush, and for Mr. Cheney, there is a lesser task.

You need merely achieve a very low threshold indeed.

Display just that iota of patriotism which Richard Nixon showed, on August 9th, 1974.

Resign.’

While Bush may not resign or be impeached, and Scooter Libby may not do thirty months in federal prison as sentenced, the Republican party might see many more months than that out of power as the political fallout unfolds in favor of Democrats, even as remaining power increasingly slides away from the isolated, lame duck president. Better to show that the Republican corruption that voters tried to punish in 2006 continues on than send one man to prison for his lies, which were probably told in service of the president and vice president. It’s not personal, really, (unless you’re, say, Joe Wilson), mainly it’s political.

Glenn Greenwald puts it this way:

‘That Lewis Libby has been protected by George Bush from the consequences of his crimes only highlights how corrupt and broken our political system is. It reveals nothing new. This is the natural, inevitable outgrowth of our rancid political culture, shaped and slavishly defended by our Beltway ruling class and our serious, sober opinion-making elite.’

So more votes against the Republican culture of corruption and the “Beltway ruling class” in 2008, right? That’s one way to think about it.

Speaking of 2008, it looks like Barack Obama is leading in fundraising for either party, and with an enormous base of donors. Might they not get the anti-Hillary election that they want over at the RNC after all?

And if you’re wondering why the debates are starting so early this time, why are you wondering that? Bush is finished politically, his followers are in shock and denial, and Obama looks ready to take advantage of the disillusionment.