questions one might want to ask from other perspective is -
.1 who wants the VoIP infrastructure (those don’t haves, want to haves and already haves)
.2 who wants the customer base (debatable, already non-performing/paying mass)
.3 resulting brand integration and value proposition thereafter
.4 why now? one could always make the eBay wait and drop the pants down completely.

for instance in the land of rising sun Japan, Nokia seems a remote possibility. because the VoIP in deep design doesn’t really make a lot of sense here. the IP phones are offered right away by the network operators and already free as long as you are within. the cell-to-cell or cell-to-landline discounts/free-calls are practiced by network operators successfully here. handsets makers have very little room to maneuver or value addition of such a service. also with advancing generations 3G and so on the mobile phones already have enough mechanisms built-in.

at the moment if one clearly de-marks current usage patterns, Skype like IMs more or less enforce the need of the PC. when you are on move you have a mobile phone or PDA. mobile phones with their already small real-estate has big challenge, to offer the user with easy usability. as it is we got games, media players, TV channels, messaging and basic scheduling rather a tiny office (PC like desktop) in there. handling one more like VoIP, by virtue of network limitations/restrictions, would be really big challenge. the PC-Phone integration is happening at real good pace and closing the gap real fast. of course one might successfully argue there are so-many things missing from today’s functionality (audio-video chat for one – i tell you it sucks what is is right now)

well, i go back full circle here and say – eBay might be making a mistake yet again if they write Skype off without even exploiting its features. this is not the right time nor is the right way. one might take some clues from the AMD-ATI adventure.

@Tom: you’re probably right about what network operators would want – certainly walled-gardens are always more comfortable to them. But that doesn’t mean it’s ever good for us, their customers, as you note. That’s why, to me, it’s really far more interesting if Nokia owns Skype (without the operators).

@Stuart: I totally agree that Skype’s dominant position is not secured. Consider Netscape or Compuserve and countless other “sure thing” examples from the past.

this is why the indea of someone like nokia(or symbian or andriod) incorporating skype deap into there arcitecture makes sense.

of course i personally will always much prefer a thrid party workaround solution that by pass carrier charges(except for data) completely and allows any termination destination.