Cellphone vendors could exit business if economy remains bleak - Page 9

For years, Motorola was one of the most admired, and profitable technology companies in the entire world. Things passed them by. there's no reason to think, in light of what's happening to Nokia now, with the disarray, and the desperation shown by what they're doing with Symbian, that they aren't going in the same direction.

I see nothing special about Nokia. they are an old fashioned phone manufacturer that can't do well in markets they don't understand. Two of the biggest come in mind, the US and Japan, which they are leaving, rather than trying to figure out how to succeed there.

That looks like what Motorola has been doing, pulling out of markets they haven't done well in.



They are a one business company. When they are having serious problems in the top end of their business, that's serious indeed. They've finally even admitted it.


No. I just am seeing a not very logical argument being presented here. So, I guess that does upset me.


I see no advantage there. Once a mnufacturer gets to a certain size, further size give them little in economiy of scale. Esp. when a competitor is rising so quickly.

Don't forget that Apple has far more advantage there in numerous areas than does Nokia. Apple uses vastly more flash than does Nokia, and flash is a major component of smartphones. In fact, I suspect very strongly that's why some other manufacturers are offering slots in their devices rather than competing with the built-in memory. They can offer the product more cheaply that way, and require their customer to later spend the money.

In addition, the iTouch, also very popular, uses most of the same components that the iPhone does. There isn't any smartphone that Nokia produces that comes even close to the sales of Apple's iPhone, and when the iTouch is included, well, who has the economies of scale? Apple! So that argument doesn't work in Nokia's favor.


Of course they do. But do you remember the skepticism about Apple's iPhone when it was first announced? It was said that this was a mature industry, not like when the iPod first came out. It was said that the big players would have enough time before the iPhone was available to duplicate Apple's efforts, and that shortly after the phone was available, the big guns would have competitive products on the market. It was said that Apple made a major mistake by not making a CDMA version available. It was said...but you know all that.

That all played into the mindshare of the product.

None of it was right.

The iPhone shot out of the race. It slowed down when Apple ran out of phones to sell, and people were waiting for the new one expected to be intro'd during the ADC, which it was. (one reason why Apple is pulling out of Macworld, as we've been discussing).


Ok, so I'm off by six months. It doesn't change the argument any.


I've seen it advertised in J&R's ads in the NYTimes.

It's just a minor revision of the N95, which hasn't gotten such great reviews here.

[quote]
When you still have that much of the smartphone market, you are obviously not king of the cheap phone, as I've said before. [/quot]

But that's what they are! Most of their phones are cheap phones. And their smartphone sales aren't keeping up.


I've already said that about it not being a new market. But, this is different for Apple and their competitors. Even with a fairly mature market (less so for the area of smartphones, which Apple just really entered with the 3G) Apple has jumped to a position that all the other makers are worried about. If they weren't, they wouldn't be trying to duplicate Apple's efforts, as feeble as those attempts may be.


The point to the argument is that the gap won't be closed, it will grow.

This discussion here can't take place without the acknowledging the other developments we are seeing right now.

If Apple had nothing really new to offer, I'd say you were correct. But they do, so you are not correct.

When you look at the new technologies that only they will apparently be able to offer, and the major games now coming out, as well as the heavy duty business software, it must be seen that this platform is moving much faster than any other.

We even now have stronger rumors of a "Zune Phone", and good luck to them with that.

The convergence of consumer technologies and business technologies is now well under way with the iPhone. Business people have already rated the iPhone as being much more reliable that any other.

There is no other device as well prepared to do this. RIM is faltering with both the Bold, and the Storm. Win Mobile is way behind, as is Palm, even with their new OS. The Android has promise, and other phone makers will likely take it up rather than the ancient, crumbling Symbian. But the many different configurations will make it difficult for developers as is being stated by some. Linux distro's other than Android are being used for a very few phones, but they are not polished, and are marginal.

Apple seems to be the only one that appears to have a strong plan for where they are going with this. The other companies are doing this ad hock, with no long range idea in mind. All they seem to be doing is trying to come out with some product, any product, that may dent Apple's quick rise.

Without long term plans, this will fail.

If Apple manages to continue doing this well, and incorporates these advanced chips and technologies that only they will have, into their devices, that, along with the much more avanced OS they have, will propel them much further in front.

I really don't see where the others can offset this. Whenever they attempt to follow, Apple will be several steps ahead. They can't simply look at what what Apple's got in technology and OS, and say"Duplicate that, and do it fast!". It doesn't work that way. This isn't SciFi, where a new idea to win the war comes up today, and is ready tomorrow. it will take a couple of yeas to duplicate what Apple will have, and Apple won't be standing still.

No arguments about whether AT&T has profits from this now, or over two years, or whether Verizon will get the phone, or whether Nokia is a big company, or any other argument that's being presented, matters.

What matters is where that sales of the iPhone/iTouch are going, where the sales of the App Store is going, and where Apple's technology, both hardware and software is going.

And all of those are going to be well ahead of their competition.

If Apple can pull off what they seem to be pulling off, it could, as I mentioned, do to the smartphone industry what Apple did to the music player industry. Hard to believe? No, its not.

I read the review when it first came out, and I read it again now. The review is very much, meh. The only thing he's going to use it for is e-mail. That's very clear. If he didn't need RIM's e-mail, it's not likely he would use it at all. He finds a few thing nice, but is not terribly impressed. That's one reason why he's going to have an iYouch as well.

That negates the entire purpose of the Storm, which is supposed to compete with the iPhone on all levels. It can't.

People who need RIM's e-mail, need it. It pretty much ends there.

Should I quote all the bad things he had to say about it?

Did you read all the reviews I posted. I do hope you are in the middle of doing that now. There is one other that is not as bad as the others in there. You can quote from that if you like.

I don't have to. It's your statement that's in doubt, not my questioning of it.



Yes, but they aren't doing so well now. Their stock has also fallen far more than Apple's, and is being shorted even more so.


The one you linked to certainly isn't very positive. He's giving it a c+ at best.

[QUOTE=TBaggins;1352060]You've stated that Verizon is worried, so you're guilty of exactly what you're complaining about.[quote]

Well, I suppose you're right. I didn't mean it that way. What I meant was that they've stated that they needed a competitor to the iPhone, and the Storm is it. The fact that it was pretty late, and still released with plentiful bugs right before the holiday shopping season, is evidence that they felt that they just HAD to get this out, problems or not.


It wasn't required to say that, as I'm pretty sure we all know that. I've stated is several times. But, just like Apple's relationship with AT&T, and everyone else's relationship with the carriers, the carrier is a very important part of that relationship. That's one reason why Apple had to drag developers out of 10.5 to work on the iPhone. Dates must be met when dealing with partners that depend on release dates.

RIM's efforts with the Storm were apparently unsuccessful, so that Verizon was forced to release a faulty product, possibly months before it should have been released, even though it was already delayed for months. We can see the result.

So this phone was almost as much as a Verizon phone as a RIM phone.


They all have their weaknesses. The differences in churn rates isn't that much really.

While reception for Sprint, for the years I had it were also rated badly, I rarely had problems. I'm not always so sure what these numbers really reflect. When I first got the iPhone in September, the service wasn't so hot for the 3G service, but has improved remarkably as of late.


If you go over your argument, you will see that mostly, you've been arguing that very thing. It's not likely that any cell company doesn't pay though the nose for any hot product. The iPhone is just hotter than most, and so companies pay some more to get the advantages it offers them that other products do not.

If they weren't getting more out of the phone than they were losing, they wouldn't be doing it, so its not a valid argument.


You've said that its costing AT&T, and thus hurting their profits, rather than helped them, when it's not. One time charges mean little when looked at over the life of the contract.


I haven't seen you indicate that before. Maybe it was too subtle for me to catch.

Apple, and other companies all strive to drive a hard bargain. Sometimes they get all they want, sometimes, they don't. It doesn't bother me, and it doesn't bother the, as long as they know that what they got was what they needed. That's the difference between business people and people who were never in business. Business people keep their feelings out of relations, thought it may not always seem that to to the public. Of course, there will always be a few who don't. but they are rarely successful.


That's not the point! Everyone who has something that someone else want,s drives a hard bargain. That's the way it works. Jobs is not different than anyone else there. Apple is just more visible, and so it seems as though he's different there. He's not.


I'm not arguing that. I'm simply saying, in your statement that Apple needs Verizon more than Verizon needs them, that it's not true. Apple can do very well without Verizon, if they have to give up too much.


I'm not sure what that means. Of course, someone has to be able to pay for it. People do that all the time without being able to afford it. The smart ones give up something else.


Those numbers are absurd. It would add, at most 15% now, and half that, once China is here, and less when other countries sign on.

The iPhone without a data plan is pretty pointless. You might as well just buy the Touch.

A required data plan is pretty logical for a data centric phone. Being required to pay for navigation, media downloads, and visual voicemail are not logical. If you buy a Verizon phone with no WiFi then you are forced to get a data plan.

It's actually more useful without data than you let on.

Just the fact that it's a PDA would make it useful enough to me without data, let me sync my address book and calender with my computer. It's quite useful in letting my get rid of the iPod as well. Other phones do play music, but nothing else does anything like smart playlists that I know of. So I do believe there is plenty of benefit to using iPhone without a data plan. Just saying get a Touch means that the user still needs to carry a separate device to handle the phone part, and that doesn't address being able to sync the contacts.

Then you still need to get a plan with whatever services you need for the phone you did buy. So now you've bought two devices to pay for, and carry around.

Why bother? The truth is that unless you're in some local where service from one carrier is really better than another, the difference is too small to matter.

You're misunderstanding what I said. I don't know where to start, as I don't know how you got to that conclusion.

One thing I do know is that I can get 95%+ of my typical use of the iPhone without needing the benefits of the $30/mo. data plan that I supposedly absolutely must have in order to make good use of the device. An iPhone without a data plan would work just fine for me.

I am?

I took it from where Teno said that an iPhone without a data plan is pointless, and you replied that it wasn't as you could use it as a PDA etc. It also looked as though you were saying that a phone would also be required.

Where did I go wrong?

Ah, you added to the post. So you're saying that you don't need the data plan and can save the $30 a month.

I take it then that going on the internet either isn't important to you, or that doing it through WiFi, when available is sufficient?

You don't mind carrying two devices around? I find it annoying.

I get some through WiFi, but I also have computers readily available at work and at home.

I do mind carrying two devices around, I was trying to say that a dataless iPhone would still save me from that. That's why I find the iPhone to be handy. I'm not saying I don't get some benefit from mobile data, the little use I get doesn't seem to be worth what I'm paying.

Ok. I wonder how many more iPhones would be sold if they didn't need to be sold with a data plan? I also wonder if any carriers anywhere sells them without a data plan.

Wow... I go away for a few hours, and Mel's writing some freakin' novels here.

But more importantly, Mel - and please don't take this the wrong way - but whether you realize it or not, you have been somewhat unpleasant in this thread, in a way that I haven't seen from you since the days when I first got here. \

It's not entirely over our disagreements I think... and even if it is, you need to understand that I find some of the things you're saying to be just as illogical and uninformed as you think some of my points are. Yet, I'm not being huffy with you, because I respect you. Hopefully you're getting my point here, without me having to spell it out.

In any case, you've written volumes, and I'm a bit under the gun. But I'll see what I can do about responding, assuming you can handle disagreement with good grace, and not the uncharacteristic rudeness I've been seeing.

If not, just let me know, and I won't bother.



(I mean, geez, even Teno's been pleasant by comparison. )


...

Sorry if I seem unpleasant, but I've been getting a lot of this about this industry, and I guess I'm just getting tired of it.

By the way, I'm just answering you as you are answering me. When you break my posts down almost line by line, I have to answer them that way. It's why I don't often like to answer like that, but prefer to put an answer at the bottom of the post. It can be made briefer that way.

I suppose this can depend on your lifestyle. But many (if not most) of the apps on the iPhone are rendered useless without a constant data connection.

That's quite an indictment. We may disagree often, but I don't see how I'm rude or unpleasant in my posts.

True, but all of those apps are on the Touch too, which you recommended as the alternative, and that device doesn't have a cellular data plan. Seems like cause for cognitive dissonance.

A "road warrior" kind of person can clearly benefit from a cellular data plan. Someone like me, who might spend a lot of time at home, work or other houses or businesses that likely have WiFi, and not really on the road so much, don't benefit nearly as much from cellular data.

I don't think so. As the point of the Touch is to not pay a subscription service.


That's interesting. Last year I was telling you my iPhone spent a great deal of time connected to WiFi, and you argued that WiFi coverage wasn't good enough to depend on.

But anyway. Not being able to make money from data, the iPhone would not be worth the effort for AT&T. Which is why Verizon won't allow WiFi on its phones.

Of course, the fact that AT&T has so many free WiFi spots available to us iPhone users helps as well.

But it's still the same apps that on the iPhone demand / require an even higher cost subscription service. All of my PDA needs were handled without any kind of internet connection. I delayed buying a PDA phone a long time because I didn't want to pay for the extra service fees required to get one. So I had a phone and a PDA.


Maybe I did, I don't remember what I said last year about that. I was wrong if I said that.

Except that the data from their "surveys" have never been reconcile with the ACTUAL numbers.

Based on actual subscriber addition numbers in the SEC filings, Verizon Wireless has basically beaten AT&T Wireless in every quarter since the iphone has launched a year ago.

Umm... how many weeks 'til the VZW-Alltel merger is finalized and ATT is then behind by about 10 million customers?

Welcome to the #2 spot, AT&T Mobility.

Far as the rest of it goes, I seem to remember ChangeWave as being something of a joke.


...

Yes, you do seem xtra-grumpy. Kinda takes all the fun out of the convo. \

I dunno Mel, I don't think you're in any kind of place where a serious debate about this stuff is really possible right now. I could do it, but then I think you'd go aggro again somewhere in the conversation. And I'd rather not get aggro back at you.

But I will wish you a Merry Xmas. And even a Happy New Year.


...

I just don't agree that most of what I'm seeing in the arguments here are taking some important things into account. You seem to be arguing old issues, instead of the ones we'll be seeing in a few months, which will be more important. I can't get even an acknowledgement of my mentioning of those issues, that's why I'm grumpy about it. Even if there was no agreements on it, a mention of what I'm saying would be appreciated.

And yeah, of course:

The merger is an artificial way of increasing customers. We'll see how it all goes in the near future.

I'm sure change wave is less of a joke when its saying good things about Verizon.

It's only joke when ChangeWave never reconciles their suveys with actual subscriber addition numbers in the carriers' SEC filings.

ChangeWave has been saying that more people are planning to switch to AT&T than to Verizon for the last year in their surveys --- but the survey data doesn't reconcile with ACTUAL numbers in the SEC filings (where Verizon is beating AT&T in retail net adds, i.e. take out the Tracfone numbers in AT&T's net add).

The ChangeWave survey is about people planning to switch to AT&T --- not planning to switch to Tracfone.

Sure. Just ask ATT Mobility... the Cingular-ATT merger in '04 netted them 21 million new customers in an artificial way.

That's almost twice as many as the Alltel merger is netting VZW, so I guess ATT's merger was almost twice as 'artificial'.



Wouldn't know... I don't bother reading ChangeWave on anything, really.

I do remember them making some sort of pronouncements about Apple not that long ago that were pretty roundly dissed and laughed at. Samab's comments in the thread about how their survey projections don't match reality are well-taken too.


...

I don't think he means it isn't real. Just that it's a quick increase that has nothing to do with people moving to the company. Once the companies are one, we'll see what happens to the numbers.

I only have mu iPhone five days, but the only missing feature I have noticed is lack of "cut and paste" and "copy and paste" which we all expect will be in a software update soon.
Perhaps you shoul buy David Pogue's book, "iPhone: The missing manual". it is 300 pages of what the iPhon can do, easy, beautifully reading and fun. You may be looking at the 16 progams the phone comes with. Let Pogue guid you to some amazing applications that are out there, that do NOT exist on other platforms!

Sorry to resurrect this thread but I have a question about the Verizon-Alltel merger. One of the requirements of the merger is that in some states where Verizon and Alltel together dominate, Verizon must give up its newly acquired Alltel holdings. Western Montana is one such area. Those Alltel dealers there who will be affected hope that they'll be picked up by AT&T but is that possible considering Alltel is CDMA and AT&T is GSM? If I remember right, Sprint is the only other CDMA carrier. Does anyone have any thoughts on this?