AT&T activates record 5.2 million iPhones, promotes non-Apple devices

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 73
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Ouch.



    (PS: Dont bother with this samab guy; he'll change the subject when loses the argument. Then goes into cold storage until the next Verizon story appears. Probably works in IR or PR for Verizon).



    There is no changing subject what so ever.



    Either you count voice-only subscribers for BOTH carriers or you count ereaders/connected devices for BOTH carriers. In either circumstance, Verizon is larger than AT&T by about 7 million subscribers.



    What solipsism was trying to say is that Verizon doesn't count these ereaders/connected devices in their press releases --- so they don't exist in real life. What it really means is that Verizon is crucified by solipsism for being conservative in their press releases. And AT&T gets applauded by solipsism for being fast and loose with their press releases.
  • Reply 42 of 73
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by samab View Post


    What solipsism was trying to say is that Verizon doesn't count these ereaders/connected devices in their press releases --- so they don't exist in real life.



    Aren?t you the guy who for years has been saying that AT&T?s wireless (voice) subscriber base is actually much lower because AT&T counts pre-paid plans? I think you are.
  • Reply 43 of 73
    newbeenewbee Posts: 2,055member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by samab View Post


    Here's a tip for you? You are comparing high-tech stocks which wall street only cares about growth vs. Ma Bell companies which give steady dividend.



    Wrong again ....Wall Street only "cares" about whether any stock makes them money or not.. they don't care how ..... but that doesn't even start to explain why you seem to think that "share price" is a measure of the "bottom line" of any company. Got anything else?
  • Reply 44 of 73
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBaggins View Post


    There's honestly very little chance of that happening. As you know, Verizon reports Friday morning, and they're all but assured of posting more than 700k net adds.



    As I said it earlier, you people are comparing apples with oranges. AT&T's subscriber count is 85 million voice subscribers + 8 million ereaders/connected devices in Q3. Verizon's subscriber count is 92 million voice subscribers + 8 million ereaders/connected devices in Q2.



    The difference between the two carriers is not 700K subscribers, but 7 million subscribers.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by r00fus View Post


    This.



    VZW, while evil, is well run and knows how to milk their customers.

    ATT is inefficient, bloated and bungles things repeatedly but has semi-decent customer service.



    ATT without the iPhone would have probably slipped massively and might even be in 3rd place. Remember, ATT only got where they were because of acquisitions not because they had the strongest value proposition (with the exception of the iPhone).



    I don't believe evil or not evil --- they are all for-profit companies. Google is evil, Apple is evil, everybody is evil.



    AT&T without the iPhone --- could have earned their net adds the old fashion way, built a better network.
  • Reply 45 of 73
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Aren?t you the guy who for years has been saying that AT&T?s wireless (voice) subscriber base is actually much lower because AT&T counts pre-paid plans? I think you are.



    Yes, AT&T's wireless voice subscriber base is actually much lower if you exclude MVNO's.



    It's a press release --- it is meant to be written to show your company in the best light. All the bad stuff are hidden in the footnotes in the SEC filings.
  • Reply 46 of 73
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by newbee View Post


    Wrong again ....Wall Street only "cares" about whether any stock makes them money or not.. they don't care how ..... but that doesn't even start to explain why you seem to think that "share price" is a measure of the "bottom line" of any company. Got anything else?



    There are growth stocks and there are non-growth utility stocks that pays regular dividends.



    But what is your point anyway with respect to the original discussion? Verizon has a more profitable wireless operation than AT&T --- since the iphone was launched. Verizon in Q2 (a iphone launch quarter) got more postpaid net add subscribers than AT&T.
  • Reply 47 of 73
    newbeenewbee Posts: 2,055member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by samab View Post


    Verizon has something like 99.9 million subscribers.



    Not according to Verizon's fincial records. You're off by 800,000. ... go figure!



    86.2 million retail customers; 92.1 million total customers, after divestitures and conforming adjustments related to the Alltel acquisition.





    http://investor.verizon.com/news/view.aspx?NewsID=1067
  • Reply 48 of 73
    mgl323mgl323 Posts: 247member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jayarr8 View Post


    Last year I had no reception problems with ATT. Within the last three months the calls are dropping like flies. With all the new ATT signups in LA, no wonder ATT has suspended its advertising highlighting best reception. NO BARS is getting too common.



    Let's GO VERIZON. My contract with ATT is up...let's connect.



    I haven't have a problem with At&t so far in terms with reception and data speeds. I traveled to mostly all of LA and had pretty good service.
  • Reply 49 of 73
    tbagginstbaggins Posts: 2,306member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    I don’t think Android can be stopped in terms of marketshare. It’s the "soup kitchen" mobile OS for the downtrodden and impoverished handset vendors. Completely free and they can do what they want with it. I don’t see how Apple put a stop to that when they will continue to be the only vendor using iOS on an handset.



    I do think that Apple will continue to pull more and more revenue and profits from the industry, but I don’t see iOS for the iPhone ever topping Andorid OS for handsets again.





    I wouldn't throw in the towel just yet, Solip... many ppl who've used both prefer Apple's iOS devices to Android.



    The glaring competitive disadvantage may not be so much open vs closed but rather distribution/opportunity to buy (plus "Which network is good where I live?"). But EVEN IF Google's open model is inherently a lot better in terms of providing market share (and I don't automatically assume it is), I'm sure Apple would MUCH rather have, say, a long-term share of 30-35% in the US smartphone market rather 15 or 20%, or whatever it is they'd be able to sustain long-term in the US by continuing to go it alone via AT&T.



    The difference is worth literally BILLIONS to them every single year in terms of revenue. So why would they throw up their hands and say, "Ah well, we're closed, they're open, we're already hobbled, so why not tie our OTHER hand behind our backs as well?"



    I don't think that really works.







    / btw, Jobs doesn't refer to it as 'open vs closed', but rather 'fragmented vs integrated'... he may have a point



    ...
  • Reply 50 of 73
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by newbee View Post


    Not according to Verizon's fincial records. You're off by 800,000. ... go figure!



    86.2 million retail customers; 92.1 million total customers, after divestitures and conforming adjustments related to the Alltel acquisition.





    http://investor.verizon.com/news/view.aspx?NewsID=1067



    I was off by 200K --- I stated earlier it was 99.9 million subscribers, but it was actually 99.7 million subscribers.



    If you look at the actual quarter filing --- then you get the actual meaning for these numbers.



    Retail subscribers mean Verizon's own subscribers. Total subscribers mean it also include MVNO subscribers. Therefore Verizon has about 6 million MVNO subscribers.



    AT&T has only 74 million retail subscribers and 11 million MVNO subscribers (page 9).



    http://www.att.com/Investor/Growth_P...ster_Q3_10.pdf
  • Reply 51 of 73
    newbeenewbee Posts: 2,055member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by samab View Post


    But what is your point anyway with respect to the original discussion?



    In post #12 you said this:



    The iPhone has done NOTHING to AT&T's bottomline.



    My point is ... if you're going to post something as "fact" ...which is utterly false, be prepared to defend your "facts." AT&T have already stated in other articles that their customer base has added one million new activations due to iPhones.
  • Reply 52 of 73
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBaggins View Post


    I'm sure Apple would MUCH rather have, say, a long-term share of 30-35% in the US smartphone market rather 15 or 20%, or whatever it is they'd be able to sustain long-term in the US by continuing to go it alone via AT&T.



    Apple is comfortable to be with market share much lower than that. They have been doing it for the last 30 years.
  • Reply 53 of 73
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by newbee View Post


    In post #12 you said this:



    The iPhone has done NOTHING to AT&T's bottomline.



    My point is ... if you're going to post something as "fact" ...which is utterly false, be prepared to defend your "facts." AT&T have already stated in other articles that their customer base has added one million new activations due to iPhones.



    But that doesn't contribute to the bottomline at all. They are just buying market share with huge handset subsidies.



    AT&T's operating income didn't really change year to year in Q3, it went up by 1 cent per share. Massive iphone 4 sales, not really doing much to the bottomline.
  • Reply 54 of 73
    tbagginstbaggins Posts: 2,306member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by samab View Post


    Apple is comfortable to be with market share much lower than that. They have been doing it for the last 30 years.





    With Macs. But not with iPods, iPhones, iPads... basically everything else. And Apple has priced and promoted quite aggressively to ensure this has been the case.



    After all, you don't get the kind of revenue growth Apple's seen in the past few years by being 'comfortable' with low market share across your product line-up.



    And even Mac market share has gone up, albeit slowly. They now have over 20 percent of the US consumer market. I just wish the worldwide numbers were better.



    ...
  • Reply 55 of 73
    newbeenewbee Posts: 2,055member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by samab View Post


    I was off by 200K --- I stated earlier it was 99.9 million subscribers, but it was actually 99.7 million subscribers.



    If you look at the actual quarter filing --- then you get the actual meaning for these numbers.



    Retail subscribers mean Verizon's own subscribers. Total subscribers mean it also include MVNO subscribers. Therefore Verizon has about 6 million MVNO subscribers.



    AT&T has only 74 million retail subscribers and 11 million MVNO subscribers (page 9).



    http://www.att.com/Investor/Growth_P...ster_Q3_10.pdf



    I'm not questioning the fact that Verizon is larger than AT&T.... just the 99.9 million figure that you threw out there. The 92.1 total figure is Verizon's figure, not mine (second bullet point under wireless on their quarterly report.) If they claim 92.1 TOTAL customers ... I'm not going to argue with them.
  • Reply 56 of 73
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by newbee View Post


    I'm not questioning the fact that Verizon is larger than AT&T.... just the 99.9 million figure that you threw out there. The 92.1 total figure is Verizon's figure, not mine (second bullet point under wireless on their quarterly report.) If they claim 92.1 TOTAL customers ... I'm not going to argue with them.



    The whole US economy went down the drain because of liar loans --- because these people just claim that they make x dollars per year.



    So you are basically blaming Verizon to be conservative with their press releases and giving AT&T the thumbs up with their fast and loose numbers. Who are you to argue if AT&T plays fast and loose with what their subscriber count is?



    If we use the same standard, then Verizon has 92.1 million subscribers and AT&T has only 85 million subscribers.
  • Reply 57 of 73
    newbeenewbee Posts: 2,055member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by samab View Post


    The whole US economy went down the drain because of liar loans --- because these people just claim that they make x dollars per year.

    So you are basically blaming Verizon to be conservative with their press releases and giving AT&T the thumbs up with their fast and loose numbers. Who are you to argue if AT&T plays fast and loose with what their subscriber count is?



    Stop putting words in my mouth ... I'm not claiming anything .... only quoting the exact words that Verizon used in their reports. Unlike some people, maybe even you (mr. 99.9 million) ... I'm not trying to spin it one way or another. I haven't mentioned AT&T at all, in this respect. If you're going to "veer off course" and put words in my mouth .... there's no point in continuing this "discussion" any further. Spin away ....
  • Reply 58 of 73
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by newbee View Post


    Stop putting words in my mouth ... I'm not claiming anything .... only quoting the exact words that Verizon used in their reports. Unlike some people, maybe even you (mr. 99.9 million) ... I'm not trying to spin it one way or another. I haven't mentioned AT&T at all, in this respect. If you're going to "veer off course" and put words in my mouth .... there's no point in continuing this "discussion" any further. Spin away ....



    I don't spin numbers at all.



    The whole discussion has been --- the numbers being thrown around was like comparing apples with oranges (that the two carriers were using different methods of counting subscribers)



    Why are you in this discussion at all if you aren't willing to talk about AT&T's side? Otherwise, the only reason to get into this discussion would be taking potshots at me.
  • Reply 59 of 73
    AT&T realizes that it most promote other phones in order to compensate for other carriers which will be carrying the IPHONE. Can they really make up the difference?? or Keep the current IPHONE customers at ATT????



    One thing is for sure if the CDMA IPHONE has the same multi-tasking features and other functions as the ATT version of the IPHONE, most people would rather go to Verizon.(providing Verizons network can handle the demand and the price of service is the same.)
  • Reply 60 of 73
    adonissmuadonissmu Posts: 1,772member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    I don?t think Android can be stopped in terms of marketshare. It?s the "soup kitchen" mobile OS for the downtrodden and impoverished handset vendors. Completely free and they can do what they want with it. I don?t see how Apple put a stop to that when they will continue to be the only vendor using iOS on an handset.



    I do think that Apple will continue to pull more and more revenue and profits from the industry, but I don?t see iOS for the iPhone ever topping Andorid OS for handsets again.



    For Business customers I think Iphone is more likely to win those customers as RIM keeps faltering.
Sign In or Register to comment.