or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Analyst believes AT&T iPad data deal came with iPhone extension
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Analyst believes AT&T iPad data deal came with iPhone extension

post #1 of 28
Thread Starter 
One analyst has predicted, not declared, that AT&T likely agreed to offer no-contract iPad data plans in exchange for Apple extending its exclusive access to the iPhone in the U.S.

Comments from Brian Marshall with Broadpoint AmTech generated interest on the Web Thursday, as the analyst suggested a Verizon-compatible iPhone wouldn't be released until 2011. Marshall's speculative comments came out of a report from Computerworld, in which he suggested AT&T and Apple may have extended their exclusive agreement by six months. Headlines elsewhere incorrectly declared that Marshall was offering inside information of a formal deal between the two companies.

"[It was] speculation only," Marshall said in an e-mail to AppleInsider. "I think [AT&T] had to get something in return (i.e., 6 month extension on iPhone exclusivity)."

Marshall said he believes it's likely AT&T had to get something in return for offering "such attractive 3G data pricing." AT&T's $30-per-month unlimited data-only plan is half the price of its competitors.

Marshall told Computerworld, and said he believes AT&T was able to negotiate a six-month extension for the iPhone.

It's a change of tune for Marshall, who had previously predicted that Apple would turn to Verizon this year. The Broadpoint AmTech analyst also said before the iPad was announced that it was "a certainty" that Apple's tablet would be available through Verizon.

Marshall said he was "floored" when the iPad was announced as AT&T 3G only in the U.S. He said AT&T's competitively priced plans are likely what cut Verizon out of the picture.

Apple's iPad with 3G connectivity carries a $130 premium over the Wi-Fi-only model. Users can access unlimited data on the device through AT&T for $30 a month, or use up to 250MB for $15 per month. Both plans do not come with a contract and can be canceled at any time.
post #2 of 28
Was there any news here, or was it so subtle (or perhaps I am so dense) that I missed it altogether!?
post #3 of 28
Never mind competitors - $30 a month is half of what AT&T is charging me for my unlimited data PC card - which I only need because they do not offer tethering on the iPhone and the tethering I had on my old Treo 650 under Verizon was only good enough for emergencies.

Speculation is one thing - speculation by someone who actually knows what they are talking about can be more useful.

I would speculate that the low rate is partly due to an expectation that the majority of users will not be using it most of the time. I only use my 3G card when I travel and the local Wi-Fi isn't free or fast enough. Or maybe they figured that most folks would either be AT&T customers already or that such a low price would not prohibit someone who was not ready to switch to AT&T for phone service to go ahead and get AT&T for 3G data service.

If I were an AT&T competitor I would probably either want to make darn sure my network was as bullet proof as possible before going after the iDevice market to avoid the backlash that AT&T has suffered or wait until the 4G/LTE converged standard is pervasive enough to make a single devise able to be sold in all markets without needing multiple antennas etc.

But then I am not privy to all the parameters that go into corporate contracts of that level and what the various technical and market arms of each organization is up to in those arenas.
post #4 of 28
Please move on Apple. Make AT&T part of a painful past. I'm sick and tired of all the dropped calls.

THINK OF ALL THE FUTURE SUBSCRIBERS WAITING IN THE WINGS FOR AN IPHONE WITH A DECENT CONNECTION. MANY PEOPLE WON'T BUY AN IPHONE BECAUSE IT'S TIED TO AT&T.

I wanna buy an iPhone already......! And not for AT&T!
Nate
Reply
Nate
Reply
post #5 of 28
My wish was that Apple/AT&T would have a subsidized option for the 3G iPad. This would allow the price of the 3G hardware to be several hundred dollars less that it currently is (say $$399 for the 16GB version). Because I'm already an AT&T customer, I wouldn't really mind signing up for a 2 year contract.
post #6 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post



Marshall said he was "floored" when the iPad was announced as AT&T 3G only in the U.S.

He's not the only one. I really wanted to get one, but after two years of AT&T service, I just can't. With great regret, I intend to abandon my iPhone as soon as my contract is up next month. My iPhone is a part of me and I don't know how I lived without it, but I can't function with AT&T's service. I just can't complete a phone call in my area.

Having exclusivity in the phone space may be justifiable because of all this CMDA GSM business. As for the iPad, for Apple to make another product that forces customers to do business with this one telecom is just wrong IMHO. What's next? A new MacBook with a built in antenna that only works with AT&T?

If this isn't what antitrust laws were created for, I don't know what is.
post #7 of 28
did the analysts predict the dow would sell off today
post #8 of 28
Don't forget a possible further delay in allowing iPhones to tether on AT&T, thank you very much.
post #9 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRobin View Post

My wish was that Apple/AT&T would have a subsidized option for the 3G iPad. This would allow the price of the 3G hardware to be several hundred dollars less that it currently is (say $$399 for the 16GB version). Because I'm already an AT&T customer, I wouldn't really mind signing up for a 2 year contract.

"Subsidized" often means "considerably less than the cost to manufacture". For the iPad 3G 16GB, which is estimated to cost about $300 to manufacture, the subsidized price might reasonably be expected to be $99.
post #10 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tazznb View Post

Please move on Apple. Make AT&T part of a painful past. I'm sick and tired of all the dropped calls.

THINK OF ALL THE FUTURE SUBSCRIBERS WAITING IN THE WINGS FOR AN IPHONE WITH A DECENT CONNECTION. MANY PEOPLE WON'T BUY AN IPHONE BECAUSE IT'S TIED TO AT&T.

I wanna buy an iPhone already......! And not for AT&T!

Get over yourself. iPhone Sales continue to beat even the most bullish estimates for AT&T.

In six months we're nearing 2011 and the LTE transition. AT&T will continue to expand it's 3G signals as the fall back while it rolls LTE out.
post #11 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tazznb View Post

Please move on Apple. Make AT&T part of a painful past. I'm sick and tired of all the dropped calls.

THINK OF ALL THE FUTURE SUBSCRIBERS WAITING IN THE WINGS FOR AN IPHONE WITH A DECENT CONNECTION. MANY PEOPLE WON'T BUY AN IPHONE BECAUSE IT'S TIED TO AT&T.

I wanna buy an iPhone already......! And not for AT&T!

Amen!
post #12 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Get over yourself. iPhone Sales continue to beat even the most bullish estimates for AT&T.

In six months we're nearing 2011 and the LTE transition. AT&T will continue to expand it's 3G signals as the fall back while it rolls LTE out.

I sorry but I am one of those 3% who are not covered by AT&T. Verizon has better coverage.
post #13 of 28
[QUOTE=mdriftmeyer;1627610]Get over yourself. iPhone Sales continue to beat even the most bullish estimates for AT&T.

Imagine what sales would have looked like on a competent carrier
post #14 of 28
I think I'm going to write an update about this as a classic children's story and call it "The Boy Who Cried 'Verizon iPhone!'"

Come on, Apple, how many first-born children, virgin sacrifices, rain dances, Hail Marys, Mayan calendars, and Nostradamus predictions is it going to take to put the iPhone on Verizon's network?

Let's do it already so the forums can start speculating on something else!
post #15 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

AT&T's $30-per-month unlimited data-only plan is half the price of its competitors.

Except it isn't. It's two completely different types of plans. One plan (A) is for a single device (and a limited device, at that) for $30/month and the other plan (B) is for any number of fully capable devices (ie computers), possibilities for teethering, etc for $60/month. ATT's plan B is the exact same price as Verizon's plan B.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Foo2 View Post

Don't forget a possible further delay in allowing iPhones to tether on AT&T, thank you very much.

And when ATT does allow tethering, how much you want to bet it will cost an additional $30/month on top of what you are already paying. And guess what that gets you? Yup, you are right back to plan B again.
post #16 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseymac View Post

If this isn't what antitrust laws were created for, I don't know what is.

Please understand anti-trust law before making such a statement. Many products and services are provided by an exclusive provider. This, in and of itself, does not constitute an anti-trust violation.
post #17 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by FormerARSgm View Post

Please understand anti-trust law before making such a statement. Many products and services are provided by an exclusive provider. This, in and of itself, does not constitute an anti-trust violation.

Well, maybe it should.
post #18 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Get over yourself. iPhone Sales continue to beat even the most bullish estimates for AT&T.

In six months we're nearing 2011 and the LTE transition. AT&T will continue to expand it's 3G signals as the fall back while it rolls LTE out.

Even the strongest swimmer will go down in time if they remain tethered to an anchor (which is all AT&T is) Apple is at 4 fingers. When the iphone's excitement wears off, and they come to realize the lousy service they'll drop them like my brother is going to, and he is an Apple support tech. AT&T is the ONLY REASON I refuse to buy an iPhone.

BTW I know I can't be the only one out here with this opinion, Mr. AT&T employee.
Nate
Reply
Nate
Reply
post #19 of 28
To paraphrase Mel Gibson in Brave Heart, I want AT&T's CEO to present himself to iPhone users and apologize to everyone for his companies poor performance and give back his multi million dollar bonuses because he certainly did not earn it. AT&T pocketed a lot of money and failed to provide adequate basic service let alone customer support. Funny how Applerates amount the top and AT&T is consistanly is the worst.
post #20 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRobin View Post

My wish was that Apple/AT&T would have a subsidized option for the 3G iPad. This would allow the price of the 3G hardware to be several hundred dollars less that it currently is (say $$399 for the 16GB version). Because I'm already an AT&T customer, I wouldn't really mind signing up for a 2 year contract.

What?!? Why would you want that. AT&T makes a killing on "subsidized" plans because they charge double the going rate. An iPad data only plan on subsidized contract would be $60/month like the 3G modems. I'm sure they'd be at that monthly rate happy to knock $300 off the price for you up front... Is that really what you wanted? Hint get out your calculator before you decide.

The truth is we're all getting screwed on the iPhone contracts. WHY do people not see this? Over the 2 year contract on an iPhone you pay AT&T at least $2000 depending on the plan. I do it, but only because I have no choice in the US. I'd far rather pay the $800 up front for my iPhone and be on a prepaid plan... only AT&T won't even provide service an unlocked iPhone without a contract

Regardless what I really wanted to say is that I'm holding out hope that these prepaid data plans are available on the iPhone 4G and I can finally go back to PrePaid minutes as well.
post #21 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by tcphoto View Post

To paraphrase Mel Gibson in Brave Heart, I want AT&T's CEO to present himself to iPhone users and apologize to everyone for his companies poor performance and give back his multi million dollar bonuses because he certainly did not earn it. AT&T pocketed a lot of money and failed to provide adequate basic service let alone customer support. Funny how Applerates amount the top and AT&T is consistanly is the worst.

You've got the order wrong:
"AT&T pocketed a lot of money"

"[CEO received] his multi million dollar bonuses"

That's how it works... CEO's earn bonuses for increasing shareholder value, no for "broke even but made a lot of customers really happy". I know it's hard to believe but AT&T does have a lots of satisfied and silent customers, I'm not one of them (satisfied or silent), but they do exist.
post #22 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tazznb View Post

Even the strongest swimmer will go down in time if they remain tethered to an anchor (which is all AT&T is) Apple is at 4 fingers. When the iphone's excitement wears off, and they come to realize the lousy service they'll drop them like my brother is going to, and he is an Apple support tech. AT&T is the ONLY REASON I refuse to buy an iPhone.

BTW I know I can't be the only one out here with this opinion, Mr. AT&T employee.

Well, obviously, service varries by region. However, outside of a dead zone near my in-law's house (which has was fixed several months ago) I find AT&T's coverage in NJ fine. I really have no complaints about coverage where I live, work or travel in the state... go figure!
And in my place of work, I have significantly better reception than Verizon--I often get "You get service in here??!?" comments from coworkers...



[full disclosure:] Oh, we had some trouble with data on LBI in the summer for a week too...
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
post #23 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

"[It was] speculation only," Marshall said in an e-mail to AppleInsider. "I think [AT&T] had to get something in return (i.e., 6 month extension on iPhone exclusivity)."

Marshall said he believes it's likely AT&T had to get something in return for offering "such attractive 3G data pricing." AT&T's $30-per-month unlimited data-only plan is half the price of its competitors.

iPad exclusivity itself is not enough "in return"? This is bogus reasoning, hopefully it is also untrue.
post #24 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post

Well, obviously, service varries by region. However, outside of a dead zone near my in-law's house (which has was fixed several months ago) I find AT&T's coverage in NJ fine. I really have no complaints about coverage where I live, work or travel in the state... go figure!
And in my place of work, I have significantly better reception than Verizon--I often get "You get service in here??!?" comments from coworkers...



[full disclosure:] Oh, we had some trouble with data on LBI in the summer for a week too...

I drive from North Jersey to South Jersey daily for work, and I've randomly dropped calls EVERYWHERE!

To make a ten minute call using AT&T takes 25 minutes on my blackberry.

AT&T is the George W. Bush of the cell phone industry; they've failed at all things.
Nate
Reply
Nate
Reply
post #25 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseymac View Post

He's not the only one. I really wanted to get one, but after two years of AT&T service, I just can't. With great regret, I intend to abandon my iPhone as soon as my contract is up next month. My iPhone is a part of me and I don't know how I lived without it, but I can't function with AT&T's service. I just can't complete a phone call in my area.

Having exclusivity in the phone space may be justifiable because of all this CMDA GSM business. As for the iPad, for Apple to make another product that forces customers to do business with this one telecom is just wrong IMHO. What's next? A new MacBook with a built in antenna that only works with AT&T?

If this isn't what antitrust laws were created for, I don't know what is.

Have you called AT&T and told them directly of where the dropped calls happen?
post #26 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRobin View Post

My wish was that Apple/AT&T would have a subsidized option for the 3G iPad. This would allow the price of the 3G hardware to be several hundred dollars less that it currently is (say $$399 for the 16GB version). Because I'm already an AT&T customer, I wouldn't really mind signing up for a 2 year contract.

trouble is that so many folks have had a bad time with ATT that they would not want that 2 year contract.

And since ATT really doesn't want folks using 3g unless they have to, the contract wouldn't make sense. you would be paying every month and using 3g willy nilly instead of what they want which is to sign up only when you really need it, and then dropping it when you don't and using wifi in between. thus sparing their network of more overload

as for the pricing, it is likely that they had no choice as the ipad is an iphone OS device and not a computer. It is possible that Apple was smart enough to put in the contract that all iphone OS devices would be at that upper limit on price (or less).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldandintheway View Post

Imagine what sales would have looked like on a competent carrier

People like to say that but in fact no one can say with any knowledge that had the iphone gone to Verizon instead of ATT (or Sprint or T-Mobile) the outcome wouldn't be the same.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseymac View Post

If this isn't what antitrust laws were created for, I don't know what is.

you don't understand antitrust if you think this is anything in that realm.

perhaps it is time to follow the example of Europe and such and drop all carrier/device exclusives. Require devices to cover all the bands appropriate to the style (CDMA v GSM) they wish to use etc. But that is nothing to do with antitrust.

Antitrust is about artificially impeding competition by abusing the strength of a naturally occurring monopoly to strength something totally unrelated.

Example. In the 90s, Microsoft's Windows OS by virtue of being 'the best' and 'most available' captured around 90% of the personal computer market. They didn't do anything shady, they just used good business sense in offering OEM etc. Apple and the other boys didn't do this but that's not Microsoft's fault. Trouble was that they got too big for their britches. See they weren't grabbing the market in web software, particularly browsers which were the new hip thing. So they changed their OEM license making it a requirement that the companies instead their web browser and no others figuring if Internet Explorer was already there folks wouldn't bother getting something else. And then as salt to the wound they yanked all access to the appropriate APIs from Netscape and tried to sue them for reverse engineering Windows to get the details. Oops. The courts didn't buy their 'naturally related items' schtick and legally slapped them down.

Apple went through a similar gig with Psystar who tried to argue that there is a Macintosh computer market and Apple had abusively monopolized it by denying OEM licenses. The courts said no, there's no such market, Hardware and OS software are actually related and thus not inherently abusive to tie and Apple does not have anything close to power in the appropriate market. so anti-trust is out the door.

With Adobe's alleged lawsuit we might get a judgement on the whole App Store but I suspect that it will come out on Apple's side as a related item. Thus not an antitrust issue.

and so on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cxc273 View Post

I think I'm going to write an update about this as a classic children's story and call it "The Boy Who Cried 'Verizon iPhone!'"

Come on, Apple, how many first-born children, virgin sacrifices, rain dances, Hail Marys, Mayan calendars, and Nostradamus predictions is it going to take to put the iPhone on Verizon's network?

One thing that most of these articles don't point out is that Verizon is totally different tech. this isn't like T-Mobile which is GSM but on a different frequency. It's a total flip. It would be like trying to play a laser disc in a blu-ray player.

Forgetting the contract which supposedly is 5 years (so 2012) the only way Verizon can get the iphone is a total overhaul of their network to GSM, which is mega expensive and time consuming. Or the move to LTE hoping that the iphone goes the same way (which is logical to assume). But the iphone isn't likely to go Verizon LTE until the network is so saturated with coverage that there's no need to drop back to CDMA which will be the backup. Because it just doesn't make any business sense to make a GSM/LTE and a CDMA/LTE line up.

Heck if you needed a sign that Apple is not going to go CDMA look at China. Probably the worlds biggest CDMA market and yet their iphone is GSM.
post #27 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Was there any news here, or was it so subtle (or perhaps I am so dense) that I missed it altogether!?

Not sure but read an article not to long ago that stated text mash use packets that require nonpower snd here we are being charged twice. If I text my wife on AT&T from my AT&T ohine that's a double fee. Should be illigalls. Hope it's regulated one day. The data pack should be no mote then $10. Other countries get TV. At best. It should be optional. AT&T is working off if greed. Someday the karma will return to them.
post #28 of 28
We'll never know AT&Ts deal with APPLE and whether its an extension or a GRACE PERIOD in prep for losingexclusivity.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Analyst believes AT&T iPad data deal came with iPhone extension