Apple expected to offer iPhone on new U.S. carriers within a year

[AppleInsider]

Apple's worldwide single-carrier exclusivity model for each nation is seen as fleeting, as a new report suggests the iPhone could be available for carriers other than AT&T in the U.S. within a year.

In his latest note to investors, Gene Munster, senior research analyst with Piper Jaffray, takes on 14 "unanswered questions" that surround Apple. They address the company's financial guidance, the iPhone, iTunes, iPods and Apple retail stores. One prediction suggests Apple would add new iPhone carriers in the U.S. with the debut of a new product in the summer of 2010.

"For various reasons the company moved from an exclusive relationship with French wireless carrier Orange to a multi-carrier model," Munster said. "In France, the company now enjoys dramatically higher market share (in the 40 percent range vs. about 15 percent in ROW) than in countries with exclusive carrier agreements (such as AT&T in the U.S. where the iPhone has market share in the mid-teens). We believe Apple is seeing the increased unit sell-through more than offset the slightly (~10 percent) deteriorated economics per unit involved in non-exclusive agreements."

This as the iPhone 3GS has had an outstanding launch, with Apple having trouble keeping the device in stock. The Piper Jaffray report states that the new iteration of the iPhone "seems to have exceeded Apple's internal expectations." Additionally, Munster does not believe Apple will offer another model below the $99 iPhone 3G with a cheap, mass-market device. Noting that $10 basic phone models dominate markets like India, he said Apple would likely pass on that segment of the market.

The Piper Jaffray analyst is not alone in believing the iPhone could jump ship next year, as others believe Apple is looking to Verizon as a possible alternative. Even Denny Strigle, Verizon's president, has been complimentary of the iPhone this year, as his company is rumored to be fast-tracking its new 4G network for launch by early 2010. AT&T, meanwhile, is said to be continuing its negotiations with Apple, in an attempt to keep the iPhone exclusive through 2011. While customers have been extremely satisfied with Apple's phone and have embraced it, many U.S. customers have been disappointed with the AT&T network.

In his report, Munster also believes that Apple is dissatisfied with the current status of video content offered in iTunes. Specifically, he said the video store is lacking HBO and is often tied to limited movie availability periods.

"We believe Apple is unhappy with the current status of video on the iTunes Store and is working to change it," Munster said. "These changes, however, will take time, in the form of lengthy negotiations, in order to bring the rights for TV and movies up to speed in a digital world."

Munster believes that Apple will eventually offer a monthly subscription offer for TV shows on iTunes. At a cost of $30 to $40 a month, he said the company could offer unlimited access to content from network and cable providers. If the Cupertino, Calif., company were to offer a subscription model, he believes it would replace a consumer's cable bill.

"While timing on the launch of such a new product is very uncertain given the negotiations that would need to take place, Apple may work to launch it simultaneously with a new version of Apple TV, or an undated Apple TV software within the next year," he said. "Moreover, we believe Apple has wisely avoided a subscription music model, as music listeners prefer to listen to their own music, and listen to it frequently. Movie watchers, on the other hand, prefer to rent, and typically only want to see a movie once or twice. Likewise, TV viewers are not accustomed to purchasing TV shows on an a-la-carte basis, and a subscription TV service would likely be more appealing."

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[ncee]

and then which the numbers climb (and the stock)

Skip

[ivan.rnn01]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

"In France, the company now enjoys dramatically higher market share (in the 40 percent range vs. about 15 percent in ROW) than in countries with exclusive carrier agreements (such as AT&T in the U.S. where the iPhone has market share in the mid-teens). We believe Apple is seeing the increased unit sell-through more than offset the slightly (~10 percent) deteriorated economics per unit involved in non-exclusive agreements."

Likely so...
P.S. And because we're so bright and generate huge revenue, we expect kinda reimbursement here. When do Apple think the fully functional movie rental capability will be available in french iTunes store?

[deep]

Unlimited cable TV service? That would be nice if there were to be a 1080i/p Apple TV.

[Carmissimo]

A subscription model for video content would be great but I'm into sports and hockey in particular. If I have a way of getting HD broadcasts of NHL gamess, my favourite team in particular, cable is in trouble.

Myself I see a subscription model for movies but TV would be a stop-gap thing. The day is probably not that far off when TV networks will offer their shows in decent HD via the net, free of charge. So you access TV shows via the Internet and you get your movie fix via a subscription model from a company like Apple.

Of course, service providers would dramatically increase the cost of an Internet connection in order to remain viable so us consumers will still pay. Also, this is a change that will be many years in the making. Ten years from now the current cable model will be on the verge of collapsing but we'll still be paying significant money for our TV fix.

From Apple's perspective, though, this is great news because the changes will allow them to grab a chunk of this market. I'm sure they'll make a boatload of cash because of it.

[Roc Ingersol]

Do people really think that Verizon's data network isn't going to crumble just like AT&Ts did? They dramatically oversold their capacity, just like ATT, based on usage patterns for crap phones.

The earliest adopters are going to proclaim VZW the greatest thing since sliced bread.
But give it a few months of selling like gangbusters and service is going to crap in the major markets.

[al_bundy]

in order to bring the iphone to VZ it will mean LTE and legacy CDMA support. that means that the expectation is that next year there will be chips and radios that can support all the carriers, technologies and be cheap enough to make the product at the right price

[BenRoethig]

Originally Posted by Roc Ingersol

Do people really think that Verizon's data network isn't going to crumble just like AT&Ts did? They dramatically oversold their capacity, just like ATT, based on usage patterns for crap phones.

The earliest adopters are going to proclaim VZW the greatest thing since sliced bread.
But give it a few months of selling like gangbusters and service is going to crap in the major markets.

I don't know. AT&T has never been very good when it comes to infrastructure.

[Expat]

Originally Posted by al_bundy

in order to bring the iphone to VZ it will mean LTE and legacy CDMA support

Hopefully Apple does support CDMA, or hopefully we get 4G. I know here in Canada, Telus and Bell are CDMA networks upping their 4G coverage in hopes of picking up the iPhone. I'm eagerly waiting myself - I want an iPhone but hate Rogers - what to do.

[charlituna]

Originally Posted by ivan.rnn01

Likely so...
P.S. And because we're so bright and generate huge revenue, we expect kinda reimbursement here. When do Apple think the fully functional movie rental capability will be available in french iTunes store?

the lack of locking is due to your laws which allow a customer to say on day one that he/she doesn't want a locked phone and it must be unlocked. Apple probably assumed everyone would use that law so why bother having them locked in the first place.

the movie issue is something totally unrelated to the phones. so don't expect it to be set up as some kind of payback. it will happen when the various laws, licenses etc can be set up to allow it. keep in mind that the studios have a lot of power on this issue. more than apple.

as for the rest of the article, is anyone really shocked. after all we saw mentions in the last year of ATT wanting to get an additional year on their contract so they would have the iphone into 2011. do the math and that tells us that some time around summer 2010, the old one runs out. but I don't think that they will run to another carrier. they are better off just unlocking the phone and letting anyone that can support the phone have the phone. let them do subsidies if they want, or folks can buy it full price from apple.

the only question that remains is if Apple would make a phone that can run on CDMA or just stick with the GSM unit. I think they will stick with GSM and then into whatever comes next. if Sprint, Verizon etc don't support that, it's on them.

[AjitMD]

If Apple wants to sell the iPhone in the VZN network, it will have to implement the CDMA/EDVO tech... even if LTE in included. Verizon will need time to implement the LTE network... it is quite complicated as they will need to upgrade their fiberoptic network, routers, switches to handle the data flow. The tower spacing may or may not be adequate. It is what is called, truck load upgrades. LTE will take time to be ubiquitous.

The big question will be the level of carrier subsidy by ATT if the contract is not exclusive. The key for the shareholders in maximizing sustained margins, profits... not market share like Nokia, etc with $50 phones (or less).

[paxman]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

Apple's worldwide single-carrier exclusivity model for each nation is seen as fleeting...

Good - now that the iphone is here and truly entrenched exclusivity deals are just bad business, and bad for consumers.

In his report, Munster also believes that Apple is dissatisfied with the current status of video content offered in iTunes.

I hope they are bloody dissatisfied! I do not understand why video rental is so hard to do. Get a huge library of movies and let people rent and watch sales of Apple TV take off. To really make it fly open it up for other on-line video sources.

[ivan.rnn01]

Originally Posted by charlituna

the lack of locking is due to your laws which allow a customer to say on day one that he/she doesn't want a locked phone and it must be unlocked. Apple probably assumed everyone would use that law so why bother having them locked in the first place.

Umm... I didn't write single word about unlocking. It's possible neither on day one, nor on day two, but after 6 months of contract have expired.
Orange used to not pull dirty tricks and to unlock phones without saying a word (just upon the request on their site), while other carriers are doing everything to waste as much of your time as possible, when you ask them to.

Originally Posted by charlituna

the movie issue is something totally unrelated to the phones. so don't expect it to be set up as some kind of payback. it will happen when the various laws, licenses etc can be set up to allow it. keep in mind that the studios have a lot of power on this issue. more than apple.

I was rather joking. Yet, it wouldn't do any harm, if Apple used more of their notoriety to have got it done in France. It works in UK and in Germany. And we have much more movie lovers and theater-goers, than any of them do.

Originally Posted by charlituna

as for the rest of the article, is anyone really shocked. after all we saw mentions in the last year of ATT wanting to get an additional year on their contract so they would have the iphone into 2011. do the math and that tells us that some time around summer 2010, the old one runs out. but I don't think that they will run to another carrier. they are better off just unlocking the phone and letting anyone that can support the phone have the phone. let them do subsidies if they want, or folks can buy it full price from apple.
the only question that remains is if Apple would make a phone that can run on CDMA or just stick with the GSM unit. I think they will stick with GSM and then into whatever comes next. if Sprint, Verizon etc don't support that, it's on them.

Time will tell. I don't see it being easily achievable in the Apple's philosophy of perfect cooperation of hardware and software components.

[teckstud]

I've always said the content of the iTunes movie/video library sucks and was chewed up and down here. And now you have it- Apple doesn't even like it. That's has always been on of the main problems with the AppleTV- the quality of what is offered in the jukebox itself. Most of the film in iTunes are just plain crap. I don't care if the new crappy ones are released day and date as the DVD. Where are the classics? Where are the non-english speaking films?

[Wiggin]

I have to agree with previous posts. If Apple were to launch the iPhone with Verizon and expect to be successful (granted, a relative term) it will need to include some form of CDMA, even if it's only the older 2G network. Otherwise your phone will be useless outside of major cities until at least later in 2011.

Of course, they could release it on Tmobile's network, but I'm not sure their market reach is sufficient to make up for lost revenue sharing from ATT with an exclusive contract.

[anonymouse]

Originally Posted by deep

Unlimited cable TV service? That would be nice if there were to be a 1080i/p Apple TV.

Do any networks/stations "broadcast" in 1080? (I don't think so.) So what would be the point in Apple going 1080 in Apple TV? (Well, maybe I'm wrong and there is a point, in which case I am eager to be enlightened.)

[teckstud]

Originally Posted by anonymouse

Do any networks/stations "broadcast" in 1080? (I don't think so.) So what would be the point in Apple going 1080 in Apple TV? (Well, maybe I'm wrong and there is a point, in which case I am eager to be enlightened.)

Yes they broadast in 1080i not 1080p.

[Galley]

Originally Posted by anonymouse

Do any networks/stations "broadcast" in 1080? (I don't think so.) So what would be the point in Apple going 1080 in Apple TV? (Well, maybe I'm wrong and there is a point, in which case I am eager to be enlightened.)

Many networks broadcast in 1080i; 1080p is only used for VOD.

[anonymouse]

Originally Posted by al_bundy

in order to bring the iphone to VZ it will mean LTE and legacy CDMA support. that means that the expectation is that next year there will be chips and radios that can support all the carriers, technologies and be cheap enough to make the product at the right price

I don't think this requires that Apple use chips/radios that support all carriers in each iPhone. I really don't see it as a big deal for them to produce different versions with different chips. On the other hand, it would be great if they did support all carriers in a single device. Hopefully, we will get there at some point in the future, one way or another.

[anonymouse]

Originally Posted by Galley

Many networks broadcast in 1080i; 1080p is only used for VOD.

Ah, very well, then. Get to it Apple!

EDIT: Or, not, based on later comments.

[Ireland]

Watch out Sky+

If Apple offered (as part of said service) live news, and optionally, "live sports" they would have a winner.

[rtdunham]

paxman: I agree the iTunes content is woeful.

anonymouse: examples of phones marketed with multiple radio chip choices?

me: does imminent verizon technology mean a verizon iPhone would have the same international usefulness the ATT phone has?

[15inchbrich]

Originally Posted by Wiggin

Of course, they could release it on Tmobile's network, but I'm not sure their market reach is sufficient to make up for lost revenue sharing from ATT with an exclusive contract.

Releasing it on T-Mobile would get the FCC off their back until Verizon got there act together....

[anonymouse]

Originally Posted by rtdunham

anonymouse: examples of phones marketed with multiple radio chip choices?

I think your question is mistaken in being directed to me. But, a quick search turns up this,

http://blogs.zdnet.com/cell-phones/?p=1433

so, it would seem not an entirely outlandish idea.

[anantksundaram]

Originally Posted by teckstud

Yes they broadast in 1080i not 1080p.

Don't know much about this stuff, but isn't 1080i really just a slightly fancied-up version of an underlying 720p broadcast? And, at this point - and perhaps into the foreseeable future - aren't almost all cable broadcasts 720p?

[Rot'nApple]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

Munster believes that Apple will eventually offer a monthly subscription offer for TV shows on iTunes. At a cost of $30 to $40 a month, he said the company could offer unlimited access to content from network and cable providers. If the Cupertino, Calif., company were to offer a subscription model, he believes it would replace a consumer's cable bill.

So I wouldn't need to pay my cable company in order to subscribe to Apple tv to view tv shows and movies on the tv in my living room?

Will shows come through broadband (the cable internet I have) but via through iTunes to AppleTV to my boobtube? Is that how it would work?

"...could offer unlimited access to content from network and cable providers" I wonder if this is why Apple is building that NC facility of "cloud" data to store the digitized cable shows???

If it does, that would be great. I have longed for the day where I could pick and choose the shows and movies I wish to see. My local Cable and Verizon each one-up each other with amount of channels, etc... I could have 140 channels and still flip through them all and say there is nothing on. Or pass by channels like the HSN or Mtv type channels etc I'm paying for but not interested in or be interested in a station that is provided only because it aires one or two shows I am interested in watching.

All the shows I enjoy viewing can probably fit on 3-5 channels if they were placed on those five channels in the various time slots.

This subscription approach by Apple, if one can choose to create their own tv line-up for the night is something I've been griping about for years. I hope this comes to fruition. Then it will be tv worth watching.

[anantksundaram]

Originally Posted by Roc Ingersol

Do people really think that Verizon's data network isn't going to crumble just like AT&Ts did? They dramatically oversold their capacity, just like ATT, based on usage patterns for crap phones.

The earliest adopters are going to proclaim VZW the greatest thing since sliced bread.
But give it a few months of selling like gangbusters and service is going to crap in the major markets.

You're exactly right. Verizon will be hoisted on its own petard if/when the iPhone gets on its system. The company will be scrambling.

[gronamox]

ATT is truly an awful corporation. It is the vestigial service of MA Bell, one of the oldest and most powerful of all monopolies. ATT took that reputation and joined the ranks of Evil Empires Inc. They overcharge for everything, and while the service is widespread, it is as unreliable as the first generation of companies ever were. The iphone hurt itself out of the gate by going with a company that many prospective customers despise and would never do business with again. Now they have gone to one of the toxic offspring of the bell system in California. Verizon is worse than Att. Customer service is a joke and a labyrinth where the answer is always NO. What about taking a company with wonderful service and a non-MEGA Attitude? T-Mobile is my favorite. Up here in Oregon, a local company, US Cellular is young but steady as a rock and very affordable. The giants are all here and they all have fancy stores, but they know US is the best. Come on Apple. Share the wealth. You were small, and believers made a giant out of you. Don't forget where you came from. And stop strangling the music business with iTunes. Monopolies never endure and your greed is apparent and repugnant. You are rapidly becoming the IBM of your time.

[Ken Burns Effect]

In Sweden there are four carriers!

Telia, Telenor, Tre and Halebop.

[teckstud]

Originally Posted by anantksundaram

Don't know much about this stuff, but isn't 1080i really just a slightly fancied-up version of an underlying 720p broadcast? And, at this point - and perhaps into the foreseeable future - aren't almost all cable broadcasts 720p?

Basically yes. Same for HD broacasts over air.
The jump from 480 to 720 is much more significant- simlar to the jump from VHS to DVD. For 720 to 1080 not so much. Less significant than DVD to Blu-ray.

[al_bundy]

Originally Posted by gronamox

ATT is truly an awful corporation. It is the vestigial service of MA Bell, one of the oldest and most powerful of all monopolies. ATT took that reputation and joined the ranks of Evil Empires Inc. They overcharge for everything, and while the service is widespread, it is as unreliable as the first generation of companies ever were. The iphone hurt itself out of the gate by going with a company that many prospective customers despise and would never do business with again. Now they have gone to one of the toxic offspring of the bell system in California. Verizon is worse than Att. Customer service is a joke and a labyrinth where the answer is always NO. What about taking a company with wonderful service and a non-MEGA Attitude? T-Mobile is my favorite. Up here in Oregon, a local company, US Cellular is young but steady as a rock and very affordable. The giants are all here and they all have fancy stores, but they know US is the best. Come on Apple. Share the wealth. You were small, and believers made a giant out of you. Don't forget where you came from. And stop strangling the music business with iTunes. Monopolies never endure and your greed is apparent and repugnant. You are rapidly becoming the IBM of your time.

t-mobile is a joke. if i ever talk to someone who has t-mo it's almost always a dropped call. doesn't matter if i use one of my cell phones or my landline. and they don't have a 3G network. RIM is sending them new release blackberries this year that are only 2G. i'll give my money to one of the baby bells before i give it to Deutch Telecom anyday

[bigmc6000]

Originally Posted by anantksundaram

Don't know much about this stuff, but isn't 1080i really just a slightly fancied-up version of an underlying 720p broadcast? And, at this point - and perhaps into the foreseeable future - aren't almost all cable broadcasts 720p?

It's a pixel/refresh issue. 720p refreshes the entire screen (1280x720) every 1/60th of a second (60Hz) (generally speaking, they can use any Hz they want but the generally accepted standard is 60Hz) whereas 1080i refreshes every other pixel (1920 x 1080) at 60Hz so the net effect is an entire screen refresh every 1/30th of a second. The data requirements for both are (assuming 60Hz) 720p: 55.296 Mpx/sec and 1080i 62.208 Mpx/sec.

In general 720p is desireable for sports and action shots whereas 1080i provides a clearer picture for static shots. Hence why ABC, Fox and ESPN broadcast in 720p whereas NBC, CBS, HBO, and Showtime broadcast in 1080i (yeah, I know, the NFL is on CBS but it would seem CBS cares more about 60 mins than they do the viewing quality of the NFL games).

EDIT: Those Hz #'s are for the US - the EU, for whatever reason, decided to go w/ the 50 Hz standard resulting in a lower quality picture, most noticeably when watching sports.

[anantksundaram]

Originally Posted by bigmc6000

It's a pixel/refresh issue. 720p refreshes the entire screen (1280x720) every 1/60th of a second (60Hz) (generally speaking, they can use any Hz they want but the generally accepted standard is 60Hz) whereas 1080i refreshes every other pixel (1920 x 1080) at 60Hz so the net effect is an entire screen refresh every 1/30th of a second. The data requirements for both are (assuming 60Hz) 720p: 55.296 Mpx/sec and 1080i 62.208 Mpx/sec.

In general 720p is desireable for sports and action shots whereas 1080i provides a clearer picture for static shots. Hence why ABC, Fox and ESPN broadcast in 720p whereas NBC, CBS, HBO, and Showtime broadcast in 1080i (yeah, I know, the NFL is on CBS but it would seem CBS cares more about 60 mins than they do the viewing quality of the NFL games).

Originally Posted by teckstud

Basically yes. Same for HD broacasts over air.
The jump from 480 to 720 is much more significant- simlar to the jump from VHS to DVD. For 720 to 1080 not so much. Less significant than DVD to Blu-ray.

Very useful. Thanks.

[al_bundy]

Originally Posted by AjitMD

If Apple wants to sell the iPhone in the VZN network, it will have to implement the CDMA/EDVO tech... even if LTE in included. Verizon will need time to implement the LTE network... it is quite complicated as they will need to upgrade their fiberoptic network, routers, switches to handle the data flow. The tower spacing may or may not be adequate. It is what is called, truck load upgrades. LTE will take time to be ubiquitous.

The big question will be the level of carrier subsidy by ATT if the contract is not exclusive. The key for the shareholders in maximizing sustained margins, profits... not market share like Nokia, etc with $50 phones (or less).

RIM already does this. they have CDMA phones that will work around the world and support every frequency and standard

[ghostface147]

Woohoo Cricket here I come.

[Enigmafan420]

I haven't read all the replies here so someone probably posted something like this already but...

If Verizon gets iPhone and all of a sudden has 6 million (or more) new data hogs, do you really think they can just absorb all that without issue? I doubt it.

AND-Verizon's customer service is at least as bad as AT&T's.

I DESPISE AT&T, don't get me wrong. But I seriously doubt Verizon would be much better.

My life philosophy: Careful what you ask for.

[Constable Odo]

Apple should stay the hell away from India. Those people are struggling to survive and they sure as hell don't need iPhones nor even be tempted by them. The people that can afford iPhones in India should just buy them on the black market and save Apple the trouble of making deals with any carriers. Those people in India were griping that the iPhone was too expensive. Why the heck were they even considering buying them if they don't have the money? Let Nokia, Samsung, LG or whoever the heck makes those really cheap phones and just turn them loose on that place. India should be the domain of Tracfone and Net10.

Apple should just target the richest countries in the world with the iPhone and provide the best quality and service they can possibly offer. If Apple could just capture just 20% of the world smartphone market and grab 40% to 50% of profits, they'd be sitting pretty.

[Maestro64]

If Apple and Verizon sign a deal can we guess at what the plan will looking like to consumer....

- Must buy music, apps, ring tone's and other things through a VZ version of itunes at a increased mark up. i.e revenue sharing with VZ
- Bluetooth data transfer disabled
- Wifi disable, enable for a monthly fee for VZ approved application
- GPS disable, enable for a monthly fee for VZ approved application
- Software update only after VZ blesses them
- VZ name all over the product and start up screen

I can not see it being any other way since this is exactly what VZ does with all their other phones form other manufactures, either they force Apple to do the above or all the other suppliers and end users will demand to have what the iphones has for the same costs.

[elroth]

Originally Posted by Ken Burns Effect

In Sweden there are four carriers!

Telia, Telenor, Tre and Halebop.

Didn't they have some big hits in the 70s? Oh, I guess that was ABBA. Never mind.

[Maestro64]

Originally Posted by Constable Odo

Apple should stay the hell away from India. Those people are struggling to survive and they sure as hell don't need iPhones nor even be tempted by them. The people that can afford iPhones in India should just buy them on the black market and save Apple the trouble of making deals with any carriers. Those people in India were griping that the iPhone was too expensive. Why the heck were they even considering buying them if they don't have the money? Let Nokia, Samsung, LG or whoever the heck makes those really cheap phones and just turn them loose on that place. India should be the domain of Tracfone and Net10.

Apple should just target the richest countries in the world with the iPhone and provide the best quality and service they can possibly offer. If Apple could just capture just 20% of the world smartphone market and grab 40% to 50% of profits, they'd be sitting pretty.

Lots of people in India have iphones, and that is exactly what they do, but a unlocked one from other places in the world.