James.Cridland.net

James Cridland's blog

Where radio and new platforms collide. With beer.

« Vote for me! Or someone else! | Blog index | My life in the cloud »

An Economist conference about telecoms

Posted on Thursday, April 24th, 2008 at 2:03pm. #

To a conference run by The Economist, focusing on the telecoms industry. (And for telecoms, incidentally, think ‘mobile’: fixed-line is so passé these days, and not one person really mentioned it).

The conference was ‘Chatham House rules’, i.e. anything specific said would remain within the room and wouldn’t be reported on. Which makes for a quite difficult blog posting.

A few things, though, that I can probably mention (given lack of specifics and/or checking it’s already publicly known): Denis McCauley from the Economist Intelligence Unit used a nice phrase to describe those that are self-publishers on the web, or those that are really heavy users of email, IM, etc, as “compulsive communicators”. I like that phrase, and will nick it shamelessly.

Jon Fredrik Baksaas from Telenor gave us the rather amazing statistic that more tracks are downloaded in Norway from Telenor (over mobile) than from iTunes. That’s quite a story, even if it dates from July of last year.

We learnt that the penetration of 3G-enabled handsets is around 30% in the UK (which took me rather by surprise).

Ben Verwaayen from BT Group said a few good things about products needing to “fit into your lifestyle”, and expand on their boundaries. TV for example is currently a standalone technology, but TV broadcasters are now having to expand and open up their content to be available in other places (like iPlayer). For radio, of course, this has never been more relevant.

Finally, Ian Pearson, formerly a BT futurologist, was excellent. His twenty-minute speech was captivating and incredibly exciting. One of his gems: “Throw your five year plans in the bin. They’re not relevant any more. Look at an eighteen month plan instead.” I’m not sure I agree to always look solely at the short term, but his point - that of rapidly-changing technology - was a good one and well made.

A good morning, and one well out of my specialist area.

Photo: John Levett. It’s the Economist’s building (which I wasn’t in). Used under licence.

2 comments

Ashley Brown said at April 24th, 2008 at 3:04pm

That’s not how the Chatham House Rule works! You can report *what* was said, just not who said it or their affiliation.

Doug Clow said at April 25th, 2008 at 12:06pm

Fascinating stuff, as ever, but I think you may have the Chatham House rule a bit wrong - as I understand it (and as Chatham House itself have it), the rule says that you can use the information freely, but you must not identify the source, by name or attribution. So you could publish all the interesting stuff you’d picked up there, and say that it had come from the meeting, but not say who had said it.

Obviously the people in the room might have had a different understanding and that would be the rule with moral force here. Lots of people use ‘Chatham House rules’ to loosely mean “don’t quote people on contentious things they may say”, rather than the strict actual rule. You were there so much better placed than I am to judge here!

Leave a comment

This website's Gravatar enabled (that's the pictures on the right)

To prove you're human, type the two words below into the box provided.