Due to the Wells Fargo product launch, there have recently been a tremendous number of articles written about the WAP solution. Most of us know the standard pro’s and con’s:
Pro’s –
* Relatively inexpensive
* Quick to implement
* Perception of technologically advanced
(i.e. for having a live mobile offering)
Con’s –
Dependent upon phone browser
Difficulty in consistent rendering to thousands of different handsets
However, there is potentially another negative aspect that is not as well known – carrier fees. In the June 2007 issue of US Banker John Engen discusses the WAP solution with a number of subject matter experts including Bob Egan (chief analyst at Tower Group) and Dan Schatt (analyst at Celent.) In the article, which I highly recommend reading, Engen writes, “even so, Egan says he knows of at least one situation where a carrier is threatening to block access to a bank’s mobile site, because of no financial agreement. ‘At the end of the day, the carrier can control and block domain addresses,’ Schatt says. ‘They might not want to exercise that power, but that’s the reality.’”
Now, obviously a carrier blocking a bank’s domain would be aggressive, but it’s not out of the realm of possibility. Also, isn’t this similar to the topic of net neutrality? (learn more: savetheinternet.com) I’d love to hear what others think about this topic.
