That was a question I had: where's the money for Google? Are they in this to force competition only, or do they see this as a viable business model?
For those in the know: how much would they get per subscriber, assuming $20 for the "basics" as they call it, and $10 per Gig for data?
This is likely difficult to calculate, given they are using both T-Mobile _and_ Sprint, and they refund unused data. But I'd be curious nevertheless...
They don't need to make money; they earn more money off of advertisements served.
This plan enables people to be 'more online' while mobile, even in other countries.
Google has always been trying to lower the barriers to the internet (slow javascript -> Chrome (v8 engine), the internet baloons in africa, and now a global cellular/mobile internet service at decent rates).
People consume Google Maps on mobile. Maps is much more the global yellow pages of the 21st century than targeted banner ads or even web search could ever be. I don't know how much Google has started monetizing Maps yet, but the market potential is huge: "OK Google take me to an Italian restaurant" is still much more likely to end with money changing hands than "OK Google take me to a website that talks about pizza". I even think that the primary motivation for creating Android was to secure that spot. Fi would fit very well into that strategy, because Maps gets more powerful when the user is far from home. Therefore, unacceptable international data charges are disproportionally bad for Maps. If fi starts a race to the bottom for data roaming prices, Maps will benefit a lot.
For those in the know: how much would they get per subscriber, assuming $20 for the "basics" as they call it, and $10 per Gig for data?
This is likely difficult to calculate, given they are using both T-Mobile _and_ Sprint, and they refund unused data. But I'd be curious nevertheless...