or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › 2.5m AT&T iPhone users; Piper on WWDC Macs; 3G stock panic
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

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

post #81 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Honestly, I have nothing better to do on days the stock market is closed. Also, I really, really enjoy learning how to debate for effectively. Practice makes perfect, as they say.

There is debating and there is beating your head against a wall.
post #82 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post

There is debating and there is beating your head against a wall.

I do that too, but usually after first beating a dead horse.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #83 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I do that too, but usually after first beating a dead horse.

I've already had all these same debates with Samab. Its interesting to see him pulling out the same biased and flawed argument over and over.
post #84 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

This is great for them, no body says differently, but saying that a one year old platform is bad because these option won't be available for another month while overlooking all the benefits that the iPhone has over other devices is nothing but a slithery marketing tactic.

There is no one device that fits everyone's needs. If the LG Voyager is the choice for you then go for it. There are legitimate reasons to complain about the iPhone and Apple and iTunes and OS X and AppleTV or Steve Jobs or anything else associated with Apple, but I haven't read one argument that addresses those issues.

I didn't say that the iphone platform is bad because these things aren't available.

I was responding to a comment by wraithofwonder about why the LG Voyager is bad because iphone has all the software stuff.

The world isn't standing still. The second wave of Korean iphone clones are going to be close the gap even more. If a half-assed first attempt on a iphone clone beats iphones sales in america, then a 3/4 assed second attempt will do even more damage.
post #85 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

I didn't say that the iphone platform is bad because these things aren't available.

I was responding to a comment by wraithofwonder about why the LG Voyager is bad because iphone has all the software stuff.

The world isn't standing still. The second wave of Korean iphone clones are going to be close the gap even more. If a half-assed first attempt on a iphone clone beats iphones sales in america, then a 3/4 assed second attempt will do even more damage.

I don't recall the first wave. I've seen a lot of photoshopped images on Engadget, heard about a lot of vapotware and read the hyperbole term "iPhone killer" way to often to describe a phone that is attempting to directly to compete with the iPhone's target demographic.

None of this seems to be real or be making any impact at all. I want Nokia, RiM, SE, LG and everyone else to make a better OS for their phones. I want them to create a better ecosystem with integrated software that makes the cellphone an extension of the home compute, not a separate device.

These attempts to compete with the iPhone are just proof that Apple is dong something right. You can hate AT&T and you can iPhone as much as you want but you, and every cell phone user, will benefit from the iPhone being in the mix.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #86 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I don't recall the first wave. I've seen a lot of photoshopped images on Engadget, heard about a lot of vapotware and read the hyperbole term "iPhone killer" way to often to describe a phone that is attempting to directly to compete with the iPhone's target demographic.

None of this seems to be real or be making any impact at all. I want Nokia, RiM, SE, LG and everyone else to make a better OS for their phones. I want them to create a better ecosystem with integrated software that makes the cellphone an extension of the home compute, not a separate device.

These attempts to compete with the iPhone are just proof that Apple is dong something right. You can hate AT&T and you can iPhone as much as you want but you, and every cell phone user, will benefit from the iPhone being in the mix.

A walled garden is a walled garden --- it's not going to be a better ecosystem. The iphone ecosystem is also an ecosystem that pays the developers lesser money than some of the existing mobile ecosystems.

We only benefit when Apple failed on their full priced crippled phone with a long contract business model.
post #87 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

The iphone ecosystem is also an ecosystem that pays the developers lesser money than some of the existing mobile ecosystems.

Please explain.
post #88 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot View Post

Please explain.

The iphone ecosystem is similar to docomo imode, nokia content discoverer, qualcomm brew... In order to be on the deck, developers pay for app certification and pay a percentage of the app sales revenue to docomo, nokia or qualcomm --- and these people don't charge a 30% cut.
post #89 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

The iphone ecosystem is similar to docomo imode, nokia content discoverer, qualcomm brew... In order to be on the deck, developers pay for app certification and pay a percentage of the app sales revenue to docomo, nokia or qualcomm --- and these people don't charge a 30% cut.

Are you purposely leaving out the other details or are you not aware of them? You didn't state what the others charge per app, the cost of the intiial certification or costs for the development software. The only aspect you've quantified is what Apple charges.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #90 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Are you purposely leaving out the other details or are you not aware of them? You didn't state what the others charge per app, the cost of the intiial certification or costs for the development software. The only aspect you've quantified is what Apple charges.

Well, the cost for the iphone SDK --- is to buy a mac first.

Sure the initial costs for the certification is more for the other platforms --- but they are also having hundreds of millions of potential customers.

You shouldn't even waste the time and effort to start a mobile app business with the prospect of selling only a couple of hundred of copies of your app.

You have to spend money to make money --- bigger initial certification costs shouldn't be a big problem if you can sell more copies to a larger audience.
post #91 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

Well, the cost for the iphone SDK --- is to buy a mac first.

Sure the initial costs for the certification is more for the other platforms --- but they are also having hundreds of millions of potential customers.

You shouldn't even waste the time and effort to start a mobile app business with the prospect of selling only a couple of hundred of copies of your app.

You have to spend money to make money --- bigger initial certification costs shouldn't be a big problem if you can sell more copies to a larger audience.

Besides the rest of this post being backwards, your first sentence is so absurd that I think I'm going to have to stop replying to you if I wish to remain civil.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #92 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Besides the rest of this post being backwards, your first sentence is so absurd that I think I'm going to have to stop replying to you if I wish to remain civil.

It is a relevant issue --- you can't use the SDK on a windows machine. That's an initial set-up cost --- just like the initial costs for certification of your mobile apps.
post #93 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

... developers pay for app certification and pay a percentage of the app sales revenue to docomo, nokia or qualcomm --- and these people don't charge a 30% cut.

No seems like they charge 40%.

http://www.forum.nokia.com/main/soft...ket/index.html
"Site registration and product uploads are free of charge. You set the price for your application and the revenue sharing model gives you 60% of the sales"

Greedy greedy Nokia!

I've heard that they even force the poor impoverished developers to buy their own computer.
Bloody cheek!
post #94 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

Well, the cost for the iphone SDK --- is to buy a mac first.

How is this different from the need to buy any computer?

Quote:
Sure the initial costs for the certification is more for the other platforms --- but they are also having hundreds of millions of potential customers. You shouldn't even waste the time and effort to start a mobile app business with the prospect of selling only a couple of hundred of copies of your app.

You have to look at quality as well as quantity. Look at development for the Mac. It represents billions in revenue for software developers, despite the fact that the Mac is only 6% of the computer market.

You grossly over state the advantage of quantity. There are many high quality applications for the Mac that are not ported for Windows. I've seen Widnows users wishing they could have these apps. This is because of quality. The quality of development on the Mac as well as quality and sophistication of the average Mac user.

Adobe sells 40% of its professional products to Mac users. Avid sells 60% of its professional products to Mac users. 20% of MS Office users are on the Mac. 10% of the retail Vista sales in the US are for the Mac. Huge sales far beyond the Mac's marketshare.
post #95 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

The iphone ecosystem is similar to docomo imode, nokia content discoverer, qualcomm brew... In order to be on the deck, developers pay for app certification and pay a percentage of the app sales revenue to docomo, nokia or qualcomm --- and these people don't charge a 30% cut.

You're right, some charge a 50% cut, as do the online stores. This has been discussed before.

They also don't offer the marketing services that Apple will be offering. It will actually be cheaper for smaller developers, as Apple will take care of the updates, etc. This brings the cost down for them. Also, everything will be there, this is unlike other systems, where it can be hard to find the software at all.

Apples OS is also agreed to be far more sophisticated than any of the other phone OSes, and the development system is also considered to be the best.

It's easy to ignore if you want to.
post #96 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

Well, the cost for the iphone SDK --- is to buy a mac first.

Sure the initial costs for the certification is more for the other platforms --- but they are also having hundreds of millions of potential customers.

You shouldn't even waste the time and effort to start a mobile app business with the prospect of selling only a couple of hundred of copies of your app.

You have to spend money to make money --- bigger initial certification costs shouldn't be a big problem if you can sell more copies to a larger audience.

Again, you're distorting the truth. It's ludicrous to complain about having to buy a Mac to do this. You have to buy a PC to do any of the others, why should this be different? Well, it isn't. Many of the developers will be Mac developers anyway, and so will have a Mac. Any $599 Mac Mini will work just fine.

And sure, you realized that you have to PAY for the use of SDK's on any other platform, AND you have to buy that PC. Don't say that developers will have one, because they may not.

You're just being prejudiced here, and it's hard to understand why.

You're trying very hard to convince yourself of something that isn't true.
post #97 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

They also don't offer the marketing services that Apple will be offering. It will actually be cheaper for smaller developers, as Apple will take care of the updates, etc. This brings the cost down for them. Also, everything will be there, this is unlike other systems, where it can be hard to find the software at all.

Apples OS is also agreed to be far more sophisticated than any of the other phone OSes, and the development system is also considered to be the best.

It's easy to ignore if you want to.

If it's on the deck, then it's on the deck. I don't think "marketing services" will matter much if you are the little software developers --- your apps will be on page 12.

While OS X is more sophisticated than every mobile OS on earth, all the other OS'es were also specifically designed for the mobile phone environment. You think that their limitations are limitations, they think that's an asset.
post #98 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

If it's on the deck, then it's on the deck. I don't think "marketing services" will matter much if you are the little software developers --- your apps will be on page 12.

This is a new platform where no one holds any inherent advantage. Whether from a big developer or small independent, I don't see any reason why the best apps won't become the most popular.

Quote:
While OS X is more sophisticated than every mobile OS on earth, all the other OS'es were also specifically designed for the mobile phone environment. You think that their limitations are limitations, they think that's an asset.

I haven't seen any of the other mobile OS brag that being less sophisticated is a virtue.

Its because they know apps developed for the iPhone will blow their simple mobile apps away.
post #99 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

If it's on the deck, then it's on the deck. I don't think "marketing services" will matter much if you are the little software developers --- your apps will be on page 12.

You're right, you're not thinking this through. It's like iTunes, everyone gets equal access. That was considered to one of the breakthroughs for the small labels and individual artists. It will be true here as well.

Quote:
While OS X is more sophisticated than every mobile OS on earth, all the other OS'es were also specifically designed for the mobile phone environment. You think that their limitations are limitations, they think that's an asset.

You're wrong there as well. You apparently don't read much. Virtually every developer thinks that the iPhone OS is of much greater value and potential. Simply put, they can do far more than with the much more limited OSes on the other phones. Even Nokia has realized that Symbian isn't up to snuff. Their more sophisticated smartphones will use Linux. Even Linux is way behind OS X in this regard, and there is nowhere near as good a developmental system available for it. The first question is, which distro? The limited resources available will make it difficult for the smaller developers.

Those other OSes were designed in a time when it was thought that more wasn't needed, and the resources on the phones couldn't support them anyway. Times are different. They will need to rewrite their OSes from the ground up to compete.

Advantage iPhone all around.
post #100 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

If it's on the deck, then it's on the deck. I don't think "marketing services" will matter much if you are the little software developers --- your apps will be on page 12.

While OS X is more sophisticated than every mobile OS on earth, all the other OS'es were also specifically designed for the mobile phone environment. You think that their limitations are limitations, they think that's an asset.

This has also been discussed before. "The mobile phone environment" is no more a hard and fast limitation than "the portable computer environment" or "the desktop computer environment" before that, back when a personal computer was a massive compromise compared to the big mainframes.

Apple always skates to where the puck is going to be, so they made a mobile OS for powerful hand held computers, not for limited cell phones.

The hardware only gets cheaper and faster, and there's Apple, with a readably extensible, scalable subset of their desktop OS. Cell phone manufacturers have spent years learning how to coax performance out of limited hardware, Apple waited till the hardware could support the performance they wanted.

And the one place where they have strongly differentiated their mobile version of OS X from the desktop is the one place where you want it differentiated: the UI, and they made that the best of breed.

As I've said before, Apple waited (or maybe it was just serendipitous timing) until there was hardware that could handle the OS they wanted to deploy. It just gets easier from here, as the hardware scales.

Other phone manufacturers are now obliged to figure out how to make their limited cell phone OSes perform like full blown computer operating systems.

One of the first fruits of Apple's approach is, in fact, the SDK, which has the amenities, consistency and end to end fit and finish of a desktop equivalent, which is quite a bit different from, say, the Symbian experience, which, from what I've read, even Nokia thinks kinda sucks.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #101 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

AT&T has been adding subscribers, on average, at a greater rate than Verizon has for a while now.


It's pretty much a wash, actually. The net subscriber ads war between ATT and Verizon has been a back-and-forth dogfight of late (preceded by years of Verizon mostly winning):





They also split the two most recent quarters (which aren't on the chart)... ATT won Q4 2007, Verizon won Q1 2008. So over the past 7 quarters, the tally is Verizon 4, ATT 3, if one cares about such things.


Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross

Churn is a problem in all cell companies around the world.


For some companies more than others. Verizon does a very good job on keeping churn down and consistently wins there:






And ARPU? Verizon consistently beats ATT, but both are consistently beaten by Alltel and Sprint (this is one of Sprint's very few silver linings of late):






Hope the info was of some use.

.
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
post #102 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins View Post

It's pretty much a wash, actually. The net subscriber ads war between ATT and Verizon has been a back-and-forth dogfight of late (preceded by 2 years of Verizon mostly winning):
<image>
They also split the two most recent quarters (which aren't on the chart)... ATT won Q4 2007, Verizon won Q1 2008. So over the past 7 quarters, the tally is Verizon 4, ATT 3, if one cares about such things.
For some companies more than others. Verizon does a very good job on keeping churn down and consistently wins there:
<image>
And ARPU? Verizon consistently beats ATT, but both are consistently beaten by Alltel and Sprint (this is one of Sprint's very few silver linings of late):
<image>
Hope the info was of some use.

Those charts start in 2006 and go to Quarter 3 of 2007. I assume it is using calender year quarters? If so, then AT&T secured 25% more subscribers over Verizon for the quarter in which the iPhone premiered. Since it's the iPhone and perhaps even AT&T's subsequent rampant 3G rollout I think we need to look at numbers for the post-iPhone release to make a determination of how well AT&T is faring.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #103 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Those charts start in 2006 and go to Quarter 3 of 2007. I assume it is using calender year quarters? If so, then AT&T secured 25% more subscribers over Verizon for the quarter in which the iPhone premiered. Since it's the iPhone and perhaps even AT&T's subsequent rampant 3G rollout I think we need to look at numbers for the post-iPhone release to make a determination of how well AT&T is faring.


If you want to consider only quarters in which the iPhone was available, then the score is 2 to 2.

Personally, it doesn't matter much to me. I'm sure that whatever effect the iPhone is/isn't having for ATT, the 3G iPhone will have a greater and quite significant impact. I'd also expect that Verizon will eventually do a deal for the iPhone, perhaps as early as mid-2009, now that it seems that the ATT exclusive is only for two years.


.
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
post #104 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins View Post

If you want to consider only quarters in which the iPhone was available, then the score is 2 to 2.

Personally, it doesn't matter much to me. I'm sure that whatever effect the iPhone is/isn't having for ATT, the 3G iPhone will have a greater and quite significant impact. I'd also expect that Verizon will eventually do a deal for the iPhone, perhaps as early as mid-2009, now that it seems that the ATT exclusive is only for two years.

I'd say that AT&T is ahead of Verizon since the iPhone's introduction. I'm also not convinced about the 2 year deal or if Apple will ever do a CDMA version, despite the 500M CDMA subscribers throughout the world.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #105 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I'd say that AT&T is ahead of Verizon since the iPhone's introduction. I'm also not convinced about the 2 year deal or if Apple will ever do a CDMA version, despite the 500M CDMA subscribers throughout the world.


ATT is probably slightly ahead at the moment, because they had a monster Q4 in 2007. However, much as we'd like to pin it all on the iPhone, it was actually ATT's prepay products that were largely responsible... they accounted for over half of ATT's net adds during that (and some other) recent quarters. GoPhone is actually ATT's hero right now.

Far as the 2-year deal goes, well, considering Apple's now starting to bail on the single-carrier exclusive model (and wisely so), we'd all better hope the ATT deal is only two years.

Finally, I think a CDMA model is all but inevitable... it'll cost Apple far less to R&D a CDMA model than what they'll make back on sales to a worldwide market of 430 million (and growing) people. Yah, many of the CDMA carriers will be going to LTE (and WiMax), but those networks won't be fully rolled out for a couple of years yet.

Even Motorola, the class dunce among phone makers, was smart enough to do a CDMA verision of the RAZR, and they apparently did quite well with it, because they keep offering it and newer models as well.

.
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
post #106 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins View Post

It's pretty much a wash, actually. The net subscriber ads war between ATT and Verizon has been a back-and-forth dogfight of late (preceded by years of Verizon mostly winning):





They also split the two most recent quarters (which aren't on the chart)... ATT won Q4 2007, Verizon won Q1 2008. So over the past 7 quarters, the tally is Verizon 4, ATT 3, if one cares about such things.





For some companies more than others. Verizon does a very good job on keeping churn down and consistently wins there:






And ARPU? Verizon consistently beats ATT, but both are consistently beaten by Alltel and Sprint (this is one of Sprint's very few silver linings of late):






Hope the info was of some use.

.

All that really shows it that the bigger companies are pretty close, particularly AT&T and Verison.
post #107 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

All that really shows it that the bigger companies are pretty close, particularly AT&T and Verison.

Which was kinda the point.

It also shows that Verizon consistently beats ATT in churn/customer loyalty and ARPU too... though I'd say the latter metric is overrated. Sprint, for example, has fabulous ARPU, but is currently self-destructing.




.
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
post #108 of 189
AT&T didn't attract massive net adds, it was Tracfone that did the job for the past 2 years.

As for ARPU, it's the law of the averages. Smaller carriers will have higher ARPU's than larger carriers --- because they can target a specific customer base.
post #109 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins View Post

Which was kinda the point.

It also shows that Verizon consistently beats ATT in churn/customer loyalty and ARPU too... though I'd say the latter metric is overrated. Sprint, for example, has fabulous ARPU, but is currently self-destructing.




.

Except that the data is too old to have any meaning in regard to the iPhone. It just gets in on the first quarter it was sold, and that shows the first real gain AT&T made against Verison.

So if anything, it has the beginning of the turnaround, but then cuts off, proving nothing about the current situation.
post #110 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Except that the data is too old to have any meaning in regard to the iPhone. It just gets in on the first quarter it was sold, and that shows the first real gain AT&T made against Verison.

So if anything, it has the beginning of the turnaround, but then cuts off, proving nothing about the current situation.


Edit- Actually, wasn't Q2 2007 the first quarter the iPhone was sold? ATT lost that quarter.

Situation after the chart: ATT had a monster Q4 2007, beating VZW in net adds by quite a lot, but 56% of ATT's net adds were prepay (something like 1.5m, to the iPhone's 900k)... so, yay GoPhone and TracPhone. Q1 2008? Verizon shakes it off and beats ATT in net adds. ATT's results continue to be heavily prepay-dependent. Churn in both quarters? Same old story... VZW smokes ATT. ARPU? Same old story, VZW narrowly ahead of ATT, but Sprint remains ARPU champ, despite crashing and burning otherwise.

You know I follow this stuff, Mel.

.
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
post #111 of 189
You guys talk about prepay as though its a bad word. They are still paying customers. Prepay is becoming more and more popular in Europe.

The reason Verizon has a higher ARPU is the same reason the iPhone would not have worked on Verizon. They nickel and dime you for everything.
post #112 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins View Post

Edit- Actually, wasn't Q2 2007 the first quarter the iPhone was sold? ATT lost that quarter.

Situation after the chart: ATT had a monster Q4 2007, beating VZW in net adds by quite a lot, but 56% of ATT's net adds were prepay (something like 1.5m, to the iPhone's 900k)... so, yay GoPhone and TracPhone. Q1 2008? Verizon shakes it off and beats ATT in net adds. ATT's results continue to be heavily prepay-dependent. Churn in both quarters? Same old story... VZW smokes ATT. ARPU? Same old story, VZW narrowly ahead of ATT, but Sprint remains ARPU champ, despite crashing and burning otherwise.

You know I follow this stuff, Mel.

.

And only 40% of those 900K iphones were new subcribers.
post #113 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

You guys talk about prepay as though its a bad word. They are still paying customers. Prepay is becoming more and more popular in Europe.

The reason Verizon has a higher ARPU is the same reason the iPhone would not have worked on Verizon. They nickel and dime you for everything.

Look at Europe's postpaid plans --- they are really really expensive.

Nickel and diming --- means one thing --- the people who actually pay for those things actually use those things. The average joe's are not subsidizing the geeks (like us in these forums).
post #114 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins View Post

Edit- Actually, wasn't Q2 2007 the first quarter the iPhone was sold? ATT lost that quarter.

Apple's 2nd fiscal quarter, but such charts that cover multiple companies tend to use the calender year as companies use different fiscal years.


Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

And only 40% of those 900K iphones were new subcribers.

Would you get off this false pandering. It's unfathomable why you think 40% is a low percentage when no other cell phone has even come close to moving as many people to a new carrier. This speaks volumes for AT&T's decision to back the iPhone.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #115 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

You guys talk about prepay as though its a bad word. They are still paying customers.

It's not so much that prepay is bad, as it's not nearly as good as contract, from a carrier's point of view.

ARPU for prepay tends to be a lot lower than it is for contract (sometimes as low as half of contract), and churn tends to be way, waaaaaay higher for prepay (5-7% per month is not uncommon)... and churn is an expense for a carrier. \


Quote:
The reason Verizon has a higher ARPU is the same reason the iPhone would not have worked on Verizon. They nickel and dime you for everything.

I dunno... much of the difference between Verizon and ATT's ARPU seems to be due to data. Most recent figures for data ARPU:

Verizon: $11.94
Sprint: $11.50
AT&T: $10.80
T-Mobile at $8.50

http://www.chetansharma.com/blog/200...pdate-q1-2008/


.
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
post #116 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Would you get off this false pandering. It's unfathomable why you think 40% is a low percentage when no other cell phone has even come close to moving as many people to a new carrier. This speaks volumes for AT&T's decision to back the iPhone.

I never said 40% is bad.

But I am saying that out of 2.7 million net adds in Q4, only 360K (40% of 900K) can be attributable to the iphone --- a 13.3% contribution.
post #117 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins View Post

It's not so much that prepay is bad, as it's not nearly as good as contract, from a carrier's point of view.

ARPU for prepay tends to be a lot lower than it is for contract (sometimes as low as half of contract), and churn tends to be way, waaaaaay higher for prepay (5-7% per month is not uncommon)... and churn is an expense for a carrier. \

This doesn't appear to be a significant problem for AT&T. Revenues and profits are better that ever.




Quote:
I dunno... much of the difference between Verizon and ATT's ARPU seems to be due to data. Most recent figures for data ARPU:

Verizon: $11.94
Sprint: $11.50
AT&T: $10.80

Oh it goes beyond data. People I know with Verizon are paying more than I for equal services. They also have to pay for services I pay nothing extra for.
post #118 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

I never said 40% is bad.

But I am saying that out of 2.7 million net adds in Q4, only 360K (40% of 900K) can be attributable to the iphone --- a 13.3% contribution.

Again, you make that out to be poor. By your numbers, 13% of all new customers to AT&T came because of a single device, despite the higher than average initial price. Name one other carrier in any other market around the world who has gained anywhere near that percentage of new customers in a quarter because of a new device being offered on their network.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #119 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Oh it goes beyond data. People I know with Verizon are paying more than I for equal services. They also have to pay for services I pay nothing extra for.

People are willing to pay the extra premium for Verizon's service.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Again, you make that out to be poor. By your numbers, 13% of all new customers to AT&T came because of a single device, despite the higher than average initial price. Name one other carrier in any other market around the world who has gained anywhere near that percentage of new customers in a quarter because of a new device being offered on their network.

I am not saying that it's poor. I am saying that there are a million different OTHER reasons why AT&T attract their net adds.

AT&T is not a ONE trick pony.
post #120 of 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

This doesn't appear to be a significant problem for AT&T. Revenues and profits are better that ever.

It's all relative. Is ATT happy to take in all those prepay customers? Sure, even with the lower APRU and higher churn they bring. But do they wish they were getting Verizon-like postpaid(contract) numbers as well? You bet they do. The 3G iPhone should be of some help there.


Quote:
Oh it goes beyond data. People I know with Verizon are paying more than I for equal services. They also have to pay for services I pay nothing extra for.

And yet somehow Verizon always beats ATT in customer loyalty/churn. Kinda confirms what JD Power and Consumer Reports wireless surveys consistently say, which is that there's a quality gap between the two carries, in VZW's favor.

And, of course, some of the churn difference is due to ATT's higher reliance on prepaid. VZW actually has more postpaid customers than ATT does, total, but ATT has a lot more prepaid customers than VZW.


Quote:
Originally Posted by samab

I am not saying that it's poor. I am saying that there are a million different OTHER reasons why AT&T attract their net adds.

AT&T is not a ONE trick pony.

I'd tend to agree. There seems to be three major things fueling ATT's growth right now: prepaid, iPhone, and the continuing self-destruction of Sprint... all those customers fleeing Sprint-Nextel have to go somewhere, after all.


.
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › 2.5m AT&T iPhone users; Piper on WWDC Macs; 3G stock panic