or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › RIM shares surge as BlackBerry sales hit record 7.8 million
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

RIM shares surge as BlackBerry sales hit record 7.8 million - Page 2

post #41 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

The FCC made them bid for a different spectrum. I know T-Mo didn't want to use that atypical frequency.

They weren't made to bid on it. They failed to buy up other spectrum earlier. They had to bid on what they could.
post #42 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Not as long as you're stuck with one carrier. You will eventually stagnate.

I agree with your point, but Apple has always made it a point (sometimes to an extreme) to make things as simple as possible and have always had a "one size fits most" approach to things. They have 3 laptops and 3 desktops (with minor variances within each line), 4 iPods (but all are used in generally the same way, ie. iTunes), and one phone with one carrier.

I do think making a CDMA phone for Verizon and Sprint would increase sales here in the States, but I believe Apple is trying to get the platform as wide ranging and mature as possible with their one GSM model world-wide, and then worry about the rest of the market later. Remember, we are only still less than 2 years removed from the original iPhone release, a relative infant when it comes to handset platforms, and look how far it's come in that time. I believe once Apple has fleshed this platform out to an acceptable level (for them), then, and only then, will they start considering making different models and working with different carriers. Until then, 1 carrier per country makes things a lot simpler than 3 or 4 per country.
post #43 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

The connection quality I can't argue about, but we really can't make any statements about MMS. No one knows that. Same thing with video.

I think we can say that video wouldn't haven't been available. The jailbroken video is pretty bad. The HW jsut can't handle it well enough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

They weren't made to bid on it. They failed to buy up other spectrum earlier. They had to bid on what they could.

I didn't know they had an earlier option for a normal spectrum.
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 #44 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I didn't know they had an earlier option for a normal spectrum.

They had the same options every other company had to buy up spectrum. Even Google bid on spectrum later. It was even thought, for a while, that Apple was going to bid.

You could bid on spectrum. You just have to show you can pay for it.

They made a bad decision.
post #45 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

I know you want to ignore this fact, but it still has to be acknowledged. Even with many more models and carriers, RIM's sales are not much better than Apple's with one phone and one carrier.

It should also be acknowledged that even though RIM has many more models, the iPhone is offered in MANY more countries than Blackberries.
post #46 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Not as long as you're stuck with one carrier. You will eventually stagnate.

This is why Apple had job openings for engineers with CDMA experience on their website a while back. This was reported many times in the news. Furthermore, there is no confirmation on the length of Apple and AT&T contract.
post #47 of 65
Where did I say anyone does not benefit from doing what Apple does not do?

Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Apple choose this approach so it is silly to say someone else shouldn't benefit from making a choice Apple refuses to make. Apple simplified their approach and that has some benefits and drawbacks as you note. The same is true for the RIMM decision.
post #48 of 65
Apple has 80 carriers. People have switched in droves. The iPhone has helped AT&T have the greatest growth year over year it has ever had. Most of these subscribers are coming from other carriers.

Why do you think Verizon would have made any difference in MMS and video? What's more likely is that Verizon would not have allowed the iPhone to have the App Store, Bluetooth, iTunes, WiFi and Google Maps.

Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

BUt the more carriers the greater the pentetration. People simply will not switch regardless if their carrier is inferior or whatever. The iPhone would have already had MMS texts and MMS pics plus video if it had been on Verizon on the other hand not to mention a better connection.
post #49 of 65
Well, I'm a iPhone developer who just bought a Curve 8900 primarily to handle support for my iPhone App.

There still isn't anything that comes close to the Blackberry when you need to move a lot of email, as far as I'm concerned. I'm pushing a handful of Gmail accounts to my phone, plus push-IM (MSN and Google Talk). There's also a native Gmail client that allows me to search through my various Gmail accounts. And there's GPS + Google Maps, of course. Go Google!

UMA was a pleasant surprise, and I feel like I'm 100 times more productive with a hardware keyboard, cut and paste, and real multitasking.

I've always carried around an iPod and a cell phone (among other things). I think the combination of iPod touch + Blackberry is absolutely the best thing going today. You have the best of both worlds, and sacrifice nothing.
post #50 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Where did I say anyone does not benefit from doing what Apple does not do?

I know you want to ignore this fact, but it still has to be acknowledged. Even with many more models and carriers, RIM's sales are not much better than Apple's with one phone and one carrier.

If the point isn't relevant then why are you trying to raise it?

Quote:
Apple has 80 carriers. People have switched in droves. The iPhone has helped AT&T have the greatest growth year over year it has ever had. Most of these subscribers are coming from other carriers.

Why do you think Verizon would have made any difference in MMS and video? What's more likely is that Verizon would not have allowed the iPhone to have the App Store, Bluetooth, iTunes, WiFi and Google Maps.

All the other cell makers have numerous carries worldwide as well. What is your point in citing the information? People have come to AT&T no doubt about that but AT&T has no choice since that is the only egg in their basket driving their growth while they are losing landlines. Verizon is much more aggressive about building out FIOS to help them with the triple play. These large companies have more than one segment and you have to look at them as a whole.

Also what do you base your claim on that Verizon would not have allowed such things? Perhaps they offer Verizon specific services for dumb or feature phones but can you prove that smart phones aka WinCE, Palm or RIM devices have been locked down and not allowed to load apps? I've never seen nor heard this so I want to know the basis of the claim.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #51 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

RIM is sponsoring U2.
RIM should continue to do very well as long as they are affiliated with all the carriers and not just stuck with ONE CRAPPY ONE.
It's called penetration.

Over 70 countries is global penetration. Being on AT&T or Verizon is a large penetration in the US.

Being on every US Carrier would guarantee a POS product.
post #52 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Apple has 80 carriers. People have switched in droves. The iPhone has helped AT&T have the greatest growth year over year it has ever had. Most of these subscribers are coming from other carriers.

Why do you think Verizon would have made any difference in MMS and video? What's more likely is that Verizon would not have allowed the iPhone to have the App Store, Bluetooth, iTunes, WiFi and Google Maps.

Not more than likely. It was a deal breaker. Apple approached Verizon before AT&T.
post #53 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

It IS a disadvantage.I don't think anyone is denying that.

I am. The iPhone reputation hurt by cheap loose infrastructure, being PC-oriented, hailing PC philosophy and not being up to the deal, is far worse than perpetual complaints of Numbers 2,3..N, which can't afford selling iPhone.

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #54 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dueces View Post

It should also be acknowledged that even though RIM has many more models, the iPhone is offered in MANY more countries than Blackberries.

Really?

The Blackberry website lists 116 countries where you can get a Blackberry:
http://worldwide.blackberry.com/land...d=&providerID=

Whereas the Apple website lists 88 countries, with 3 coming soon:
http://www.apple.com/iphone/countries/

Perhaps I'm missing something?
post #55 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

RIM is sponsoring U2.
RIM should continue to do very well as long as they are affiliated with all the carriers and not just stuck with ONE CRAPPY ONE.
It's called penetration.

Sony/Ericsson has a lot of penetration and I don't see them doing better than Apple. Yes, they have more phones on the market. But that's not a sign that they're doing good. At one time, Motorola also had a lot of phones on the market. With every carrier. But that didn't prevent them from getting stagnant. Did it?

What we don't know is how much Apple is getting for this "exclusive deal" with ATT. You can bet that Apple is not giving it away cheap.

When the iPhone first came out it, was revealed that ATT was going to pay Apple about $480 per two year contract signed with an iPhone. (about $20 per month on a two year contract.) It was referred to as a form of "profit sharing". But ATT didn't have to subsidize the iPhone. This was part of the "exclusive deal".

When the iPhone 3G came out ATT began subsidizing the iPhone. The per month "profit sharing" part of the "exclusive deal" stopped. Instead ATT pays Apple a one time lump sum for each new contract with an iPhone. Plus they pay Apple full price for the iPhone. Which they eventually subsidize for $199.

So don't be so quick to assume that Apple would have done better with multiple carriers. For sure they would have sold more iPhones. But Apple would have made less money per iPhone. Figuring that ATT kicks back to Apple about $150 to $200 per two year iPhone contract. (No one knows how much for sure.) This was one of the main reason why (when they had the chance to) Verizon didn't make the "exclusive deal" with Apple for the iPhone.

So if you do the math, Apple would have to sell 30 to 40% more iPhones than they have, in order to make the same amount of money. If they didn't have this "exclusive deal" with ATT.
post #56 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivan.rnn01 View Post

I am. The iPhone reputation hurt by cheap loose infrastructure, being PC-oriented, hailing PC philosophy and not being up to the deal, is far worse than perpetual complaints of Numbers 2,3..N, which can't afford selling iPhone.

Well, of course, if Apple made some really bad deals with carriers, that would be true. But assuming they didn't, it wouldn't be true.
post #57 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidW View Post

Sony/Ericsson has a lot of penetration and I don't see them doing better than Apple. Yes, they have more phones on the market. But that's not a sign that they're doing good. At one time, Motorola also had a lot of phones on the market. With every carrier. But that didn't prevent them from getting stagnant. Did it?

Sony/Ericsson is in so much trouble, they've been thinking of closing down.
post #58 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

But they did maintain 40% gross margins. That's compared to what some people here constantly decry as Apple's "excessive" margins of about 34%.

Yeah, but the 40% is down from 49% in the trailing twelve months. (Although, RIM said it expected gross margin to go to 43%-44% in the next quarter).

Again, I am not saying it's bad, but rather that they are going to be under competitive pressure from Apple's 3rd Gen phone and Pre 1st Gen; i.e., their margins will continue to be under pressure, given the greater pricing pressure and higher costs associated with a product portfolio that has to keep apace.

(Btw, you can't really compare to Apple's 34%, since its product mix is quite different from RIM's)
post #59 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Yeah, but the 40% is down from 49% in the trailing twelve months. (Although, RIM said it expected gross margin to go to 43%-44% in the next quarter).

Again, I am not saying it's bad, but rather that they are going to be under competitive pressure from Apple's 3rd Gen phone and Pre 1st Gen; i.e., their margins will continue to be under pressure, given the greater pricing pressure and higher costs associated with a product portfolio that has to keep apace.

(Btw, you can't really compare to Apple's 34%, since its product mix is quite different from RIM's)

Well, their sales last quarter came above projections, as did their subscriber growth.

We'll just have to wait a couple of weeks to see how Apple did here. Will Apple make 4 million in sales? Will their gross margins drop as well?

You know, we ARE in the middle of a major worldwide recession which is the worst in 60 years. You've got to temper your expectations because of that.
post #60 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Well, of course, if Apple made some really bad deals with carriers, that would be true. But assuming they didn't, it wouldn't be true.


That is the advantage of Apple's strategy and iPhone itself in the end. DavidW showed above it was reasonable from financial point of view too.

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #61 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

If the point isn't relevant then why are you trying to raise it?

I did not raise that issue, you did.

Quote:
All the other cell makers have numerous carries worldwide as well. What is your point in citing the information?

We are specifically talking about BlackBerry which is not on as many carriers world wide.

Quote:
People have come to AT&T no doubt about that but AT&T has no choice since that is the only egg in their basket driving their growth while they are losing landlines. Verizon is much more aggressive about building out FIOS to help them with the triple play. These large companies have more than one segment and you have to look at them as a whole.

The iPhone isn't the only phone AT&T offers, it is helping to drive people to its service, most people are purchasing other phones. But my point was specifically about AT&T versus Verizon.

Quote:
Also what do you base your claim on that Verizon would not have allowed such things? Perhaps they offer Verizon specific services for dumb or feature phones but can you prove that smart phones aka WinCE, Palm or RIM devices have been locked down and not allowed to load apps? I've never seen nor heard this so I want to know the basis of the claim.

The BlackBerry Storm does not have WiFi. Verizon only allows its own GPS service. Other examples of Verizon locking down it phones and charging extra for services.
post #62 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

I did not raise that issue, you did.

Check yourself before you wreck yourself. Let me help you.

Quote:
I know you want to ignore this fact, but it still has to be acknowledged. Even with many more models and carriers, RIM's sales are not much better than Apple's with one phone and one carrier.

What is the point of raising this information about Apple's self-imposed limitation?

Quote:
We are specifically talking about BlackBerry which is not on as many carriers world wide.

So you've provided data that shows that number of carriers above or below certain points would change Blackberry sales?

This is a strange tactic here. You toss out the information with a clear inference in mind, but then slap people around for drawing the obvious conclusion from it. This is why I'm now asking for your conclusions. Why would you expect Apple to be acknowledged for being on one U.S. carrier but not do the same for RIM with regard to worldwide carriers? Where is the information about number of worldwide carriers being negatively associated with growth?

Quote:
The iPhone isn't the only phone AT&T offers, it is helping to drive people to its service, most people are purchasing other phones. But my point was specifically about AT&T versus Verizon.

Verizon has done a pretty good job of answering and hasn't been harmed at all by the iPhone. Both networks have expanded through obtaining exclusive phones at certain times and also by acquisitions. Verizon is the largest cell provider out there. Again you offer a claim but not a conclusion. Does Verizon not offer phones that would drive people to continue to join their network? Have they ignored Apple or AT&T? Have you seen something of note with regard to churn rate? Please state the claim.

Quote:
The BlackBerry Storm does not have WiFi.

How does this support Verizon not allowing apps to be loaded?

Quote:
Verizon only allows its own GPS service.

They also allow you to separate it from the data plan so your choice isn't pay more for data whether you would use it for that purpose or not.

Quote:
Other examples of Verizon locking down it phones and charging extra for services.

This has nothing to do with apps on smart phones. Was I a bit pissed when I couldn't load ringtones on my Razr back in 2006 unless they were purchased through Verizon? Yes however again, with the half conclusions, how is Apple operating a closed wall store where you are not only limited to apps by them (legally) and Apple must bless and can unbless them at anytime any different now in 2009? Most providers have learned and now have open networks. Meanwhile Apple is stuck in 2006 with their model repeating the mistakes of the past. Imagine the uproar if Apple limited any other item them they sold to data and apps only from them. People would go nuts.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #63 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Not as long as you're stuck with one carrier. You will eventually stagnate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

As usual you fail to look at the big picture. You are looking at one device on one carrier and suggesting that it will always be that way. You also aren't considering that the Storm/Thunder, RiM's direct competitor to the iPhone, and other higher-end devices also have exclusive deals with carriers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

That's now and I actually agree with you , but how can you not think that being locked into AT&T is not a disadvantage going into the future?

Nobody says that's forever - even tho' consolidation/recession may only leave 2 or at most 3 relevant companies standing in a year or three - how many besides Verizon and AT&T have the resources to build out a full 4G infrastructure? Most don't even have adquate 3G yet.

People are also not mentioning one unique thing about the history of the iPhone - the first phone where the phone maker got a cellco to modify ITS own systems to accomodate phone features rather than vice-versa, e.g., the reason my LG phone has 15 features Verizon won't let me use. By definition, since AT&T agreed to let Apple determine how the iP would function, every function is always supported (if ATT's up to snuff at least, e.g., it still can't provide even good phone service in Manhattan).

Mods had to be made to accommodate Apple's plans, e.g., visual voicemail, which is why that feature doesn't function on jail-broke iPhones. Once the model was established companies around the world began to fall into place. (Btw, nobody's mentioned how many countries the Blackberry's in. Does anyone know?)


Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Now I know for a fact that you are certifiably crazy- How many Blackberries are there that are on how many different US carriers alone vs. the iPhone exclusivity in the US with only AT&T? We're talking RIM -not STorm/Thunder.

Blackberry had (pre-iPhone at least) no such leverage, and having "exclusive phones" on different networks in no way implies meaningful input by the device manufacturer, rather "we'll buy that design from you if you agree not to sell it to some other carrier." Maybe Apple's given them (and Nokia and Google) more power in the process, or not. I have no idea, but the old model has been dented, if not broken by Apple.

HP has configs you can only buy at Best Buy. Which means nothing technologically important about an HP computer bought at BestBuy. I.e., all marketing, no tech. And in the case of RIM, being able to market to their corporate base by saying, you're on "X" cellco? No prob. We got a phone for that." Whereas Apple went for the consumer market first, and is happy to sell to business - on their (existing, but maybe expanding) terms. (Which may yet turn out to be an Achilles heel for Apple which still seems ambivalent about how it will or won't market to businesses.)

I think it also hasn't been mentioned that, relevant to the future, RIM has achieved one kind of leverage, in the opposite direction from Apple. In this quarter they ALSO reported that over 50% of their sales, for the first time, were to consumers rather than business. Not too many business-oriented companies whose products and sales model are based on corps break out into the mainstream that way. There have to be some savvy and adapable folks over there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

BUt the more carriers the greater the pentetration. People simply will not switch regardless if their carrier is inferior or whatever. The iPhone would have already had MMS texts and MMS pics plus video if it had been on Verizon on the other hand not to mention a better connection.

Partiencel, grasshopper, patience. All is still up for grabs in the 4G future, including the possibility that Apple may decide to purchase (seamlessly swistching) cell bandwidth from multiple carriers and "create" its own "best of breed" cell service. May or not be a good business idea, but if any company has the heft and buzz to do something like this, it's Apple.

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply
post #64 of 65
All good and well, but I still can't help but wonder how this would play out if Apple had let their AT&T contract expire and started selling iPhone on Verizon's network instead of waiting till 2010.

The Storm's fun (ESPECIALLY once it's running on an upgraded software version than what mine came with) and I'm glad they finally launched their app store.
post #65 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiFivinFisto View Post

All good and well, but I still can't help but wonder how this would play out if Apple had let their AT&T contract expire and started selling iPhone on Verizon's network instead of waiting till 2010.

You're making an assumption that you don't know is true.

How can you talk about Apple letting its contract expire, when you have no idea what that contract is? You might as well talk about AT&T allowing the contract to expire, and why would they?

We have all read about the contract being for five years. Is that true? We don't know. Does it cover every phone Apple comes out with? We don't know?

Verizon has been making noise about writing widgets that will run on every phone they will sell in the future. Would Apple allow Verizon dictate what runs on their phone? Unlikely. But you never know how Verizon is using that for leverage over Apple in public statements now, for when the phone COULD run on their LTE network in sometime 2010 when it arrives.

That's assuming that Apple's contract with AT&T would allow it.

Quote:
The Storm's fun (ESPECIALLY once it's running on an upgraded software version than what mine came with) and I'm glad they finally launched their app store.

It sure ain't fun typing on it! I tried for a while, but it isn't worth it. Like all the reviews have said about it. It's great at receiving e-mails, but sucks at sending them.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › RIM shares surge as BlackBerry sales hit record 7.8 million