I’m very pleased to post this piece from Kevin Tester, editor of MITE, with whom I have been knocking around the challenges facing satcoms buyers and the role of suppliers and service providers in creating solutions. Given our conversations he agreed to post this piece below, which will be the leader in the Feb/Mar 2013 edition of the magazine.

Caveat Emptor

When it comes to maritime satcoms, as with anything in life, you get what you pay for. Regardless of the technologies involved – traditional L-band services, conventional Ku-band VSAT or the new crop of high-performance Ka-band services that are due to start coming on stream from next year –  it is still very much a case of caveat emptor or buyer beware.

The biggest challenge confronting any vessel owner looking to upgrade their on-board communications facilities is to sift through and decode all the marketing messages spouted by vendors and determine what exactly it is they are getting. And then reaching a decision on whether the value it delivers matches cost. In theory nothing could be simpler. But in practice it is a very different story.

Satellite operators and airtime providers can contort, dynamically assign and apply a host of controls to pretty much any service offering.  They also tend to be very adept in ‘framing’ the message, the art of telling prospective customers what they want to hear, while carefully sidestepping any limitations of their ‘solutions’.

More than anywhere, this is evident in packages advertised as ‘unlimited’ or ‘unrestricted’. Invariably, these words are followed by an asterisk referring to some small-print, which, thanks to the wonderful invention of Fair Use Policies (FUPs), reveal a very different meaning to these words than you would ever find in the Oxford English Dictionary. These FUPs routinely block streaming video, VoIP services and other modern web applications deemed to be bandwidth hogs.

The airtime provider’s rationale for doing this is understandable. In historical terms, satellite bandwidth is cheaper than it has ever been. The fact we routinely compare airtime packages in terms of Gb – not Mb – is testament to the dramatic improvements that have taken place in a remarkably short period. But, it is not free.  No provider can stay in business if it delivers more bandwidth than it has negotiated from the satellite operator.

Vendors resort to these smoke and mirrors tactics in order to differentiate themselves and tempt prospective new business in what is a very cut-throat market. And, one supposes, to conceal the fact that broadband is increasingly turning into a commodity product. While individually their actions may be driven by commercial necessity, at the same time, collectively they risk damaging the industry’s reputation. What these trends do highlight is the need for greater transparency.

Matters are further complicated by the multi-tiered structure of the marketplace, comprising satellite operators, airtime providers, and countless different grades of resellers. How, for instance, do officially appointed ‘distribution partners’ differ from officially appointed ‘supply partners’? What do these badges mean to the end-user?

And what of the much vaunted value-add? Bundling an email client or utilities for managing crew calling/web-browsing really isn’t going to cut it anymore. In this respect, MTN Satellite and Marlink deserve credit for identifying opportunities where they can really help ship-owners deliver an improved performance. It is notable that the extra value they are offering cruise ships and passenger ferry operators derives from linking satellite to terrestrial wireless infrastructure.

Vendors retort that ship-owners know the price of everything, but the value of nothing. Inmarsat’s Frank Coles has openly criticised ship owners and managers for penny-pinching and haggling over trivial amounts, which pale into insignificance when compared to a vessel’s total running costs. And, to be fair, there is some truth in this.

In the upcoming issue of MITE, Parker-Kitiwake, a specialist provider of fuel condition monitoring services, says it could develop more sophisticated analysis tools, which would cut the risk of an unexpected engine failure and hefty repair bill, if it could get data off ships in a more timely fashion (see p18). Yet today, it is typically not allowed to send emails larger than 300k back to shore. And God forbid if you suggest adding an attachment. It makes you wonder whether the maritime industry is ready for – or indeed needs – an all-weather super-charged 50Mbps Ka-band satellite link.