2.5m AT&T iPhone users; Piper on WWDC Macs; 3G stock panic

[AppleInsider]

AT&T now counts more than 2.5 million iPhone users among its ranks. Also, analysts at Piper Jaffray give a 60 percent chance of Macs at WWDC; the New York Times has developed a new version of its Times Reader for the Mac; and a plunge in Apple stock value on Thursday was triggered by fears of an iPhone delay.

AT&T touts 2.5 million iPhone subscribers

AT&T can now lay claim to more than 2.5 million active iPhone subscribers, the carrier's chief financial officer Rick Lindner revealed Thursday.

Historically shy on details, the company also notes that the typical iPhone user on its network spends about $100 per month for service. This compares closely to fees spent for the BlackBerry Curve, he says, but nets AT&T more up front: where an iPhone sells for as much as $499, the Curve can be had for as little as $99 in the right conditions, Lindner says.

He notes, however, that pricing for an expected next-generation iPhone hasn't been set.

Piper: 60 percent shot at MacBook redesigns for WWDC

The 3G iPhone isn't the only likely star for WWDC, according to an investors' note from Piper Jaffray.

Senior analyst Gene Munster estimates that redesigned MacBooks, revealed first by AppleInsider, stand a 60 percent chance of an introduction at the developer conference in June. Those odds increase to 80 percent for a launch before the end of the summer, he adds.

The age of the systems' designs, combined with the looming education season, are both cited as support for the prediction.

In addition to Mac forecasts, Munster also echoes the most recent rumors and calls for a 3G iPhone announced at WWDC with availability by mid-June.

New York Times offers Times Reader for Mac

Readers interested in browsing the New York Times' back catalog from their Macs while offline now have access to a beta client of Times Reader for the platform.

The beta is free to try but requires the installation of Microsoft's cross-platform Silverlight plug-in; the final version is expected to require a paid Times subscription.

Brief Apple stock dive triggered by 3G delay rumor

If Apple's shareholders were wondering why their stock value plunged on Thursday, they may be surprised at the nature of the drop, according to a claim by Barron's.

Trader sources allege that the frantic sell-off was due to "rumors of a rumor" of a delay in the release of a 3G iPhone; shareholders were reacting to delays for a device that isn't confirmed yet, the report indicates.

Apple stocks promptly bounced back on Friday.

[samab]

It took 4.75 months for AT&T to get 500K iphone activations.

Extrapolate the numbers --- since Verizon launched the LG Voyager in mid Nov 2007, Verizon (which gets to keep all its Voyager customers becuase it's a CDMA phone) has outsold AT&T's iphone activation number.

[Jensonb]

Any hint of a Mac mini update at WWDC? I really want it to be then, since I'm buying one later that month. I don't want it to come in August like last year - I'm buying it in late June after my exams asa kind of celebration of freedom

[Foo2]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

Trader sources allege that the frantic sell-off was due to "rumors of a rumor" of a delay in the release of a 3G iPhone; shareholders were reacting to delays for a device that isn't confirmed yet, the report indicates.

Scott Moritz strikes again? Or some of his old buddies like Jim "the Gamer" Kramer that are still at thestreet[Walkers].com?

[TenoBell]

Extrapolate the numbers --- since Verizon launched the LG Voyager in mid Nov 2007, Verizon (which gets to keep all its Voyager customers becuase it's a CDMA phone) has outsold AT&T's iphone activation number.

You keep making this comparison which does not compare. Verizon does not sell the Voyager for $499, I doubt Verizon averages $100 per contract from it.

[samab]

Originally Posted by TenoBell

You keep making this comparison which does not compare. Verizon does not sell the Voyager for $499, Verizon does not average $100 per contract from it.

It does compare --- because AT&T's CFO is hinting at iphone subsidies in the future.

http://techland.blogs.fortune.cnn.co...phone-subsidy/

I can also say that even those iphone numbers were caused by the $200 price drop within 100 days of the launch.

Secondly --- Verizon Wireless' ARPU is higher than AT&T Wireless. More subscribers at Verizon Wireless are taking the $99 unlimited voice minute plans. VZW can get more money from LG Voyager users having the Get It Now deck so they can buy Guitar Hero game for $12 or get a daily VZ Navigator usage for $3.

That's the whole point, isn't it? Verizon charges $200 for a "iphone killer" and AT&T is hinting to drop the price of the iphone v2 to similar price levels.

[Robin Huber]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

New York Times offers Times Reader for Mac

I need a special piece of software blessed by Microsoft to read text offline on my Mac? Can't I just copy and paste from the NYT web page, or read it from my Safari's cache?

[TenoBell]

Originally Posted by samab

It does compare --- because AT&T's CFO is hinting at iphone subsidies in the future.

That's in the future. Your example is from the past when the prices are different.

I can also say that even those iphone numbers were caused by the $200 price drop within 100 days of the launch.

Yes increasing sales was the whole point of the $200 price drop.

Secondly --- Verizon Wireless' ARPU is higher than AT&T Wireless. More subscribers at Verizon Wireless are taking the $99 unlimited voice minute plans. VZW can get more money from LG Voyager users having the Get It Now deck so they can buy Guitar Hero game for $12 or get a daily VZ Navigator usage for $3.

Essentially the crux of your whole argument is Verizon having a slightly higher ARPU than AT&T. This really has nothing directly to do with individual phones. The iPhone could have a higher ARPU than the Voyager.

Verizon doesn't offer unlimited data for $99. I'm not sure what Guitar Hero has to do with any of this.

That's the whole point, isn't it? Verizon charges $200 for a "iphone killer" and AT&T is hinting to drop the price of the iphone v2 to similar price levels.

I'm not sure what this has to do with the fact that the iPhone is doing well for AT&T. Prices always go down over time.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by samab

It took 4.75 months for AT&T to get 500K iphone activations.

Extrapolate the numbers --- since Verizon launched the LG Voyager in mid Nov 2007, Verizon (which gets to keep all its Voyager customers becuase it's a CDMA phone) has outsold AT&T's iphone activation number.

Extrapolate what numbers? If you post the sales numbers of Verizon's LG Voyager I will gladly extrapolate them.

Originally Posted by TenoBell

Verizon doesn't offer unlimited data for $99.

Nor for $59, which is what I pay.

[Ireland]

edit.

[samab]

1.1 million Voyagers from mid Nov 2007 to April 11 2008.

http://english.etnews.co.kr/news/det...d=200804110002

AT&T activated 900K in christmas quarter --- so 1/2 of that is 450K. AT&T activated 500K from Jan 1 2008 to third week of May 2008 --- so that's about 350-375K.

[samab]

Originally Posted by TenoBell

That's in the future. Your example is from the past when the prices are different.

Essentially the crux of your whole argument is Verizon having a slightly higher ARPU than AT&T. This really has nothing directly to do with individual phones. The iPhone could have a higher ARPU than the Voyager.

I'm not sure what this has to do with the fact that the iPhone is doing well for AT&T. Prices always go down over time.

How much higher is the ARPU --- when you take out the revenue share??? AT&T said the ARPU for the iphone is in the mid 90's but if the revenue share is $18 (Munster) --- then you are back to mid $70's.

How is iphone doing well for AT&T --- when they refuse to give activation numbers now. Extrapolate the numbers and AT&T activated only 310-325K iphones in the first quarter.

[Booga]

Originally Posted by samab

1.1 million Voyagers from mid Nov 2007 to April 11 2008.

http://english.etnews.co.kr/news/det...d=200804110002

AT&T activated 900K in christmas quarter --- so 1/2 of that is 450K. AT&T activated 500K from Jan 1 2008 to third week of May 2008 --- so that's about 350-375K.

So your assumption is that sales of the iPhone were the same in October as in December? And that there were no pre-orders available for the Voyager? It seems more reasonable to assume 2Q was even and take a percentage, but I'd say it's more fair to include all, or almost all, 900K iPhones from Q4 of last year. In any case, my guess is the iPhone would come out slightly ahead. Considering the price difference, that seems to show a huge preference for the iPhone.

And that doesn't include any unlocked iPhones anywhere else, of course.

[OccamsAftershave]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

Senior analyst Gene Munster estimates that redesigned MacBooks stand a ...80 percent for a launch before the end of the summer

By the end of the summer Montevina will have been out for several months, the old MB design one of longest in Apple's history, and the odds are only 80%? Does he think most resources have been moved to the iPhone?

[samab]

Originally Posted by Booga

So your assumption is that sales of the iPhone were the same in October as in December? And that there were no pre-orders available for the Voyager? It seems more reasonable to assume 2Q was even and take a percentage, but I'd say it's more fair to include all, or almost all, 900K iPhones from Q4 of last year. In any case, my guess is the iPhone would come out slightly ahead. Considering the price difference, that seems to show a huge preference for the iPhone.

And that doesn't include any unlocked iPhones anywhere else, of course.

Just look at the math.

It would take 725K iphones in the christmas quarter and 375K iphones in the first quarter --- just to break even with the LG Voyager.

725K out of 900K iphones is 80% allotment for 1/2 a quarter.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by samab

1.1 million Voyagers from mid Nov 2007 to April 11 2008.

http://english.etnews.co.kr/news/det...d=200804110002

AT&T activated 900K in christmas quarter --- so 1/2 of that is 450K. AT&T activated 500K from Jan 1 2008 to third week of May 2008 --- so that's about 350-375K.

So method of taking sales from Verizon from the before the start of Black Friday, the start of shopping and than then taking the mean average of sales from AT&T when you know perfectly well that the sales after Thanksgiving up through the end of the year are well above of that prior to Thanksgiving is poor logic.

Now, from a marketing POV it's acceptable to take two points because you are disclosing even though it's misleading. There is a reason that Verizon chose not to use the entire holiday quarter in their data.

I am not saying that AT&T activations did beat Verizon's for the associated cmartphones but the the numbers you offer lead to flawed math. I assume you know why Black Friday is so aptly named. If you can supply equal dates then we'll have something to compare.

[samab]

Originally Posted by solipsism

So method of taking sales from Verizon from the before the start of Black Friday, the start of shopping and than then taking the mean average of sales from AT&T when you know perfectly well that the sales after Thanksgiving up through the end of the year are well above of that prior to Thanksgiving is poor logic.

Now, from a marketing POV it's acceptable to take two points because you are disclosing even though it's misleading. There is a reason that Verizon chose not to use the entire holiday quarter in their data.

I am not saying that AT&T activations did beat Verizon's for the associated cmartphones but the the numbers you offer lead to flawed math. I assume you know why Black Friday is so aptly named. If you can supply equal dates then we'll have something to compare.

Not poor logic --- that's just the way it is because the Voyager was launched at that time. I am just using all the numbers that are available to us.

For all we know --- the massive $200 price drop for the iphone in Sept makes it more likely that the black friday effect was less than other consumer electronics (i.e. sales in October for the iphone were "artificially" higher because of the Sept price drop).

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by samab

Not poor logic --- that's just the way it is because the Voyager was launched at that time. I am just using all the numbers that are available to us.

For all we know --- the massive $200 price drop for the iphone in Sept makes it more likely that the black friday effect was less than other consumer electronics (i.e. sales in October for the iphone were "artificially" higher because of the Sept price drop).

But is illogical because you know that fromm Thanksgiving to the end of the year sales are higher, but you don't take that into consideration at all. You are fudging the math to make your argument. This is fine for marketing, the way MS used very specific dates for Zune sales to show that it was the number #2 PMP for that time frame (unable to locate source).

If you want to speculate that you think the LG Voyager activations were higher, that is fine, but to be a "mathamagician" only hurts your argument.

[samab]

Originally Posted by solipsism

But is illogical because you know that Thanksgiving to teh end of the year sales are higher, but you don't take that into consideration at all. You are fudging the math to make your argument. This is fine for marketing, the way MS used very specific dates for Zune sales to show that it was the number #2 PMP for that time frame (unable to locate source).

If you want to speculate that you think the LG Voyager activations were higher, that is fine, but to be a "mathamagician" only hurts your argument.

As I said earlier --- even if you account for the black friday effect --- it would take 80% of the Q4 amount to just break even with the Voyager.

So the first 1/2 of the christmas quarter accounts for 20% of the 900K iphones and the second 1/2 of the christmas quarter accounts for 80% of the 900K iphones --- that's break even with the Voyager.

That's a massive black friday effect just to break even with the Voyager.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by Foo2

Scott Moritz strikes again? Or some of his old buddies like Jim "the Gamer" Kramer that are still at thestreet[Walkers].com?

Nah. I was talking to my broker today. He confirms that the street was awash in this rumor. He said it was just a general feeling, but that it was gone today.

This is why I've said that the rise in price due to a new phone was already in the stock price. If the stock keeps going back up, it may even drop after the announcement. The same thing for the new Macbooks. If people run the price up because of that, it will drop if the new machines aren't announced.

By the way, most of this isn't rumors.

A rumor is when someone says that they have some direct knowledge that something is going to happen, or is happening..

Most of what we read is a logical extrapolation of what is known into a prediction of what will happen. It's very different.

[TenoBell]

Originally Posted by samab

How much higher is the ARPU --- when you take out the revenue share??? AT&T said the ARPU for the iphone is in the mid 90's but if the revenue share is $18 (Munster) --- then you are back to mid $70's.

Just in this article AT&T said the average is $100 with the cost of the unsubsidized phone.

How is iphone doing well for AT&T --- when they refuse to give activation numbers now. Extrapolate the numbers and AT&T activated only 310-325K iphones in the first quarter.

After we've gone around many time about this you still give no context as to why selling 325K is a low number for a phone that sells for $499 and averages $100 in service fees. What other phone is selling better at these prices? The LG Voyager doesn't count because the price is not comparable.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by samab

How much higher is the ARPU --- when you take out the revenue share??? AT&T said the ARPU for the iphone is in the mid 90's but if the revenue share is $18 (Munster) --- then you are back to mid $70's.

We don't know what the revenue share is. I've seen estimates that it is $9.

Even if it were as high as $18, we don't know if it is taken before the $90 number, or after.

How is iphone doing well for AT&T --- when they refuse to give activation numbers now. Extrapolate the numbers and AT&T activated only 310-325K iphones in the first quarter.

It's doing well because half of the iPhone buyers are coming from other networks, more than a few from Verison. Can that be said about the Voyager? I don't think so.

[samab]

Originally Posted by TenoBell

After we've gone around many time about this you still give no context as to why selling 325K is a low number for a phone that sells for $499 and averages $100 in service fees. What other phone is selling better at these prices? The LG Voyager doesn't count because the price is not comparable.

Originally Posted by melgross

It's doing well because half of the iPhone buyers are coming from other networks, more than a few from Verison. Can that be said about the Voyager? I don't think so.

It is a very low number for AT&T because only 40% of that comes from new subscribers. And it's not $100, it's closer to $85.

AT&T got the iphone so that they can try to get as much of high quality postpaid net adds as possible.

It didn't do the job because Verizon Wireless didn't blink and got more postpaid net adds than AT&T.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by samab

It is a very low number for AT&T because only 40% of that comes from new subscribers. And it's not $100, it's closer to $85.

AT&T got the iphone so that they can try to get as much of high quality postpaid net adds as possible.

It didn't do the job because Verizon Wireless didn't blink and got more postpaid net adds than AT&T.

One thing has nothing to do with the other.

Verison doesn't get many subscribers because of their phones. they get about as many as AT&T does for their phones,other than for the iPhone, which add to that considerably. That's the difference.

Both networks get, and lose, subscribers all the time. Churn is a problem in all cell companies around the world. AT&T has been adding subscribers, on average, at a greater rate than Verison has for a while now.

It's not closer to $85, it's around $95 and a bit higher, according to AT&T. Compared to $50 for all phones.

[echosonic]

Originally Posted by Foo2

Scott Moritz strikes again? Or some of his old buddies like Jim "the Gamer" Kramer that are still at thestreet[Walkers].com?

ummmm....yeah. can anybody tell me when was the last time Apple had an actual product delay where a date was announced and then reneged upon? anybody?

Is it just me? i can't remember any for oh, 10 years...

[anantksundaram]

Let it go guys..... this samab person has a Verizon obsession, for whatever reason. Perhaps he is an employee, or an analyst covering the company, or whatever......

[samab]

Originally Posted by melgross

One thing has nothing to do with the other.

It has everything to do with the other thing.

AT&T was willing to pay a king's ransom because they thought the jesus phone would do wonders to their postpaid net adds. Verizon wasn't willing because they knew any decent copycat korean phone would basically negate the iphone effect.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by echosonic

ummmm....yeah. can anybody tell me when was the last time Apple had an actual product delay where a date was announced and then reneged upon? anybody?

Is it just me? i can't remember any for oh, 10 years...

I believe Apple stated that they planned to release Leopard at last years WWDC and moved it back to October.

[samab]

Originally Posted by echosonic

ummmm....yeah. can anybody tell me when was the last time Apple had an actual product delay where a date was announced and then reneged upon? anybody?

Is it just me? i can't remember any for oh, 10 years...

Leopard was delayed.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by samab

Verizon wasn't willing because they knew any decent copycat korean phone would basically negate the iphone effect.

How many copycat, decent or otherwise, phones are out there? I know Meizu had a laundry list of features that they touted as gospel, but continually fell off as they actually tried to make the device. A year and a half since the iPhone was announced and Meizu posted photoshoped images and still no device.

Honestly, I really don't know what your main argument is here. You seem to keep shifting your focus. Are you saying that the iPhone is a failure for both Apple and AT&T? Are you saying that if another phone sold more than the iPhone that AT&T is not profiting from the deal with Apple or that Apple should stop making the device?

As Melgross pointed out, the number of people moving to AT&T specifically for the iPhone and the number of people moving from a standard phone with a lower monthly charge to a smartphone with a higher monthly charge is abnormally high? Do you have any data that suggests the LG Voyager is doing the same thing for Verizon?

[samab]

Originally Posted by solipsism

As Melgross pointed out, the number of people moving to AT&T specifically for the iPhone and the number of people moving from a standard phone with a lower monthly charge to a smartphone with a higher monthly charge is abnormally high? Do you have any data that suggests the LG Voyager is doing the same thing for Verizon?

You have to remember that 900K activation in the christmas quarter at 40% new subscribers is 360K net adds.

That's it folks --- out of 2.7 million net adds in the AT&T's christmas quarter net adds, the iphone contributed 360K (a 13% contribution).

The number of existing AT&T subscribers switching to the $99 unlimited voice plan is actually larger than the number of existing AT&T subscribers switching to the iphone plan. And the carrier who started the $99 unlimited voice plan (Verizon) has attracted even more people to switch to the $99 unlimited voice plan.

Most of the Verizon phones are 3G with idiotic things like mobile tv --- that's why Verizon's data ARPU is higher than AT&T's data ARPU.

[Tofino]

Originally Posted by samab

Leopard was delayed.

please stop feeding the troll...

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by samab

You have to remember that 900K activation in the christmas quarter at 40% new subscribers is 360K net adds.

That's it folks --- out of 2.7 million net adds in the AT&T's christmas quarter net adds, the iphone contributed 360K (a 13% contribution).

The number of existing AT&T subscribers switching to the $99 unlimited voice plan is actually larger than the number of existing AT&T subscribers switching to the iphone plan. And the carrier who started the $99 unlimited voice plan (Verizon) has attracted even more people to switch to the $99 unlimited voice plan.

Most of the Verizon phones are 3G with idiotic things like mobile tv --- that's why Verizon's data ARPU is higher than AT&T's data ARPU.

I'm still not following your train of thought here. What does, your suggested, 360k iPhone contracts have to do with the number of people signing up for unlimited voice? Why are you connecting them? AT&T had 71.4M customers as of January 2008. With that many customers and unlimited voice plans I would expect that the number of people on that plan are much more than the number of iPhone users on AT&T's network. Less than 0.5% percent of AT&T's entire subscriber base has to signup for unlimited calls to equal 360k.

And are saying that the iPhone on the AT&T bringing in 13% of all their new subscribers for an entire season is subpar? That is a single cell phone credited with bringing in 360,000 new people to a carrier. Also, don't forget that the unlimited/unlimited data plan is only $20 but it is requirement for all iPhone's on AT&T's network.

[JeffDM]

The idea of a "rumor of a rumor" is almost foreign to me, I don't really know what to make of the phrase.

[winterspan]

Originally Posted by samab

It took 4.75 months for AT&T to get 500K iphone activations.

Extrapolate the numbers --- since Verizon launched the LG Voyager in mid Nov 2007, Verizon (which gets to keep all its Voyager customers becuase it's a CDMA phone) has outsold AT&T's iphone activation number.

Who the f**k cares? Seriously, how is that relevant to anything? This isn't a forum for cellular carrier fanboys! The LG Voyager is a pile of shit and yes I've used one many times. Even sub-par crap like that sells well on Verizon because they have starved their customers of decent mobile phones since their inception. I would know since I've had service with them for years in different states. Besides, the "Voyager" isn't really a smartphone, It's sold subsidized on contract, and it doesn't require a ~$75+/month unlimited data contract. The iPhone is still only 2G, it costs at least $400, and requires an expensive data plan. If the new iPhone launches with 3G/HSDPA and GPS, the iTunes app store opens, and it's sold subsidized @ $250-$299, it is definitely going to attract a lot of users. That said, AT&T has a long way to go to catch up to Verizon in coverage areas, especially 3G.

Originally Posted by samab

AT&T was willing to pay a king's ransom because they thought the jesus phone would do wonders to their postpaid net adds. Verizon wasn't willing because they knew any decent copycat korean phone would basically negate the iphone effect.

I think I'm seeing a pattern here... Are you a Verizon employee or do you just like to **** their ****? AT&T was willing to concede a lot to get the iPhone because they saw the incredible potential Apple has to completely change the market, just as they did with the iPod. And mark my words, they certainly will! I'm going to copy your post and make note of it so I can bring it up 2 years from now, and we'll all laugh at how stupid you sounded ---- Just like the reactions on here when the original iPod was announced.

"MP3 player? That POS will be a flop!"
"Only 5 Gigs? for $400? My 'Rio' is way better"
...
...

[justinglen]

Originally Posted by winterspan

Who the f**k cares?

Here, here! Cheers on that one!

[melgross]

Originally Posted by samab

It has everything to do with the other thing.

AT&T was willing to pay a king's ransom because they thought the jesus phone would do wonders to their postpaid net adds. Verizon wasn't willing because they knew any decent copycat korean phone would basically negate the iphone effect.

Except that you're wrong again.

AT&T is making a much greater profit on these phones than anyone else makes on most of their phones, perhaps more than anyone with anyone else's phone. You've been quoting incorrect numbers for those profits, as you know. Therefore, AT&T hasn't paid to get the phone, because even with the fee Apple imposes, their profits are still almost twice anything else. That's just good business.

For the past few months, people have been waiting for the 3G version of this phone. Perhaps you are not aware of the large number of people who are doing that?

I intend to buy three after it comes out, and many people interviewed have said the same thing.

To expect sales levels of expensive phones, even the iPhone to continue to stay steady when an expected large upgrade is expected, is foolish.

By using terms like "the Jesus phone", you only damage the seriousness of your argument, because it shows that you are not serious, but that you have some sort of prejudice against it from the start.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by samab

You have to remember that 900K activation in the christmas quarter at 40% new subscribers is 360K net adds.

That's it folks --- out of 2.7 million net adds in the AT&T's christmas quarter net adds, the iphone contributed 360K (a 13% contribution).

The number of existing AT&T subscribers switching to the $99 unlimited voice plan is actually larger than the number of existing AT&T subscribers switching to the iphone plan. And the carrier who started the $99 unlimited voice plan (Verizon) has attracted even more people to switch to the $99 unlimited voice plan.

Most of the Verizon phones are 3G with idiotic things like mobile tv --- that's why Verizon's data ARPU is higher than AT&T's data ARPU.

And for those adds, AT&T is earning as much money as twice the number of other phones.

Profit is what it's all about.

[Sabon]

Update the Mac Mini. Update the Mac Mini. Update the Mac Mini.

I have nothing else to say.

[samab]

Originally Posted by melgross

And for those adds, AT&T is earning as much money as twice the number of other phones.

Profit is what it's all about.

Or they can sell you a zero dollar cheap phone and you get the $99 unlimited voice plan.

It's easier to make money that way.