There is a relatively new #5G report from @OxfordEconomics analyzing economic impact (losses) of banning #Huawei in different countries: resources.oxfordeconomics.com/hubfs/Huawei_5…
Their math might be right but several of their assumptions are flawed and ill-informed. [THREAD]
Their math might be right but several of their assumptions are flawed and ill-informed. [THREAD]
Assumption: RAN Market shares will remain the same over the next 10 YEARS. If Huawei is restricted, operators have to choose between Nokia or Ericsson since smaller vendors don't have "the same global reach or breadth of products and services [...] to successfully compete". p14
Why this is flawed: #5G is all about #virtualization virtualization, software defined radio (#SDR) networks. This creates a HUGE opportunity for new players to enter the market and the report completely ignores this development even though it's happening as we speak. Examples...
1) Vodafone opened a tender for their entire European RAN, >100.000 cell sites. Requirement: The RAN vendor has to be O-RAN compliant. (o-ran.org) None of the big players responded to that tender. But Samsung and 6 other smaller vendors did: mobileworldlive.com/featured-conte…
This example alone directly contradicts one of the report's key assumptions - that (1) RAN market shares will remain largely the same for the next 10 years and (2) new players will not disrupt the market. Both are simply wrong, already today.
Example 2: The report completely ignores #Samsung's increasing 5G investments and market shares. It is simply naive to think that Samsung is not a serious contender:
1) Samsung holds significantly more Standard Essential Patents (SEP) than Huawei. twobirds.com/~/media/pdfs/n…
1) Samsung holds significantly more Standard Essential Patents (SEP) than Huawei. twobirds.com/~/media/pdfs/n…
2) Already in 2018 Samsung announced to strategically invest $22 billion in 5G, automotive and AI. wsj.com/articles/samsu…
3) Samsung has A LOT of cash to strategically fund R&D, acquire #SDR start-ups or pay license fees.
bloomberg.com/opinion/articl…
3) Samsung has A LOT of cash to strategically fund R&D, acquire #SDR start-ups or pay license fees.
bloomberg.com/opinion/articl…
4) Lastly, in contrast to Nokia and Ericsson, Samsung...
+ builds mobile networks
+ mobile smartphones
+ designs their own chips
+ manufactures their own chips (foundry)
Even Huawei does not have foundries, even though they design their own chips through #HiSilicon.
+ builds mobile networks
+ mobile smartphones
+ designs their own chips
+ manufactures their own chips (foundry)
Even Huawei does not have foundries, even though they design their own chips through #HiSilicon.
Again, the @OxfordEconomics report ignores ALL these market developments that can be observed since several years (statista.com/infografik/196…)
Instead, they create the false dichotomy of "if you kick out Huawei, you are left with Nokia and Ericsson". This is simply not true for 5G.
Instead, they create the false dichotomy of "if you kick out Huawei, you are left with Nokia and Ericsson". This is simply not true for 5G.
There are a couple more assumptions in the report that are flawed, naive or ill-informed. But that's it from me, for now. Maybe more later. <3
