This is a clear example of statistics used poorly. You cannot draw the conclusions made in the article from the statistics given in the article. Lies, damn lies, and statistics!
And many more of us trapped on AT&T are waiting for iphone 5 to switch to verizon!
I wouldn't dream of downgrading to a service that doesn't allow voice and net access simultaneously so I ignored all the Verizon hype even though I love FiOS. So I haven't kept up with the latest Verizon offerings to be honest ... has Verizon got that sorted now?
I'm part of the 23% of iPhones on Verizon. But i'm surprised that ATT has such a little android %. What the hell are they selling other than iPhone? It's crazy to think that 92% of ATT's smartphone users are iPhone, or is it?
it's retention. People want the iPhone, and those who have one are more likely to get another when their contract is up.
AT&T has such a small percentage of android phones because any smartphone customer on AT&T already has an iPhone.
Verizon on the other hand, just got the iPhone this year. So any android customer has to wait for their contract to end before they switch to the iPhone. We'll see that android percentage drop much more in 2012.
People buy android phones* because they think "hey, it's just like the iPhone". Then after using it for a while they realize how poor the experience is, and see how their friends iPhones don't have the same problems. They are much less likely to buy another android handset.
I read the source material and it doesn't actually say what you or DED are implying.
It isn't a 10% decline in the number Android phones on the Verizon network.
What the report is saying is the number of Verizon customers with Android phones did not grow as fast as the number of Android phones on other carriers. Verizon's percentage share of the total Android market is down but you need to remember that the market has grown larger.
Think of it as saying there were 51 Android Phones on Verizon and 49 phones on other networks in March. Now there are 82 Android phones on Verizon but 118 on the other networks. Verizon's percentage of the total has dropped 10% despite having more phones.
Similarly AT&T is up 5 percentage points, but that doesn't mean that the iPhone is down. AT&T are simply selling more smartphones in total (both iPhones and Android).
I don't know which report you are reading, but it obviously WASN'T the Chitika Insight report. Here let me quote the pertinent portion for you:
Quote:
While Verizon still has four of the top five Android smartphones (Droid X, HTC Droid Incredible, Samsung Fascinate, Droid), its market share is clearly down. In contrast, AT&T’s share of the Android phone market is increasing, with devices such at the HTC Inspire gaining significant popularity among smartphone users. Both Sprint and T-Mobile remain relatively stable, thanks to the stability of their respective flagship devices (HTC Evo, MyTouch 4G).
As discussed by Ryan Cavanagh last week, Verizon’s share of iPhone traffic continues to increase, but it seems that Verizon is gaining market share in Apple’s prominent smartphone at the expense of its other, Android-running devices.
And to be perfectly accurate they are extrapolating hits to number of phones being used - logical but not necessarily accurate. It could be that fewer Android users are hitting their network. We would have to know more about their network to be able to judge the accuracy of their reported statistics - which we don't.
So the report is about the Verizon share of the US Android user base, nothing else. We all know that "smartphone" unit purchases continue to grow the market segment - that is not in dispute here, especially out of the "feature phone" segment. Neither Chitika, DED nor I stated or implied that Verizon experienced anything other than a shift in share of the US Android market percentage. You can't reliably read anything else into that without calculating against real numbers reported by Verizon or the rest of the market.
The questions posed were simply speculative - "what would have caused Verizon's share of the US Android market to decline, while Verizon's share of the US iPhone market increased?". Given the timing and events during that time period it is logical to speculate that Verizon shifted some of their US Android share to US iPhone share. The article didn't speculate on overall market growth - which we all know to be a given - Android has been used successfully by the carriers to draw former feature phone purchasers into the more lucrative smartphone purchase and get them on the more expensive voice/data plans.
Perhaps my previous points weren't concise enough to be clear.
In less than six months, Verizon Wireless' share of Android phones sold in the US has eroded from 51.4 percent to 41.1 percent, indicating a huge shift among Verizon subscribers to iPhone 4.
Funny thing was, I was on Verizon's website yesterday comparing iPhone plans... not only did they not have a pic of the iPhone on the home page, but I didn't see an iPhone until I was several pages in, looking at all of the available smartphones.
There are many things that are less than a 20 minute ride from the US border that are not dreamt of in their philosophy, and Americans are the least travelled, least "aware of the world" group on the planet.
Sigh.
This seems to be a statement consistent with what Americans are portrayed as.
There exist more people in China who have no electricity, who have never seen a television, who have never read a book and who have never traveled past their village, then all Americans put together. And what of southeast Asia? India? Africa?
Is the average American less well traveled than the average citizen of Bangladesh?
Methinks that the philosophy expressed in the quoted post is an example of ignoring things as they exist in reality.
You do realize that AI is an Apple rumor site, do you not? Where do you think rumors come from?
The article presented the data as factual data. It did not cite any rumors, it cited hard facts. It then made unsupportable conclusions which in no way follow from the facts. The conclusions are not rumors. The conclusions are wild guesses, trussed up as reasonable extrapolations.
I stand by my opinion. Rumors ain't got nothing to do with nothing. This is bullshit masquerading as journalism.
How does it follow that VZ customers are switching to the iPhone?
Other possibilities include VZ's total sales being down, or non-iP VZ sales going up, or other carriers selling lots of Android while VZ's Android sales are flat or even higher.
I think DED needs lessons in basic logic. He does not have enough information, and makes assumptions not supported by facts.
He may be correct, but he has scant evidence and many assumptions.
Anyone as active in these fora as you, already know about the supporting other analyses that indicate the strength of that assertion. DED's bad was assuming the others were either not keeping track, or didn't know and didn't include the necessary other citations to support what he thought were obvious conclusions based on reports from NPD, Neilsen, and so on. But to challenge his assertions becuase he didn't provide the full brunt of evidence backing those assertions and already in evidence is pretty silly.
I sorta agree with your overall premise.... except I know dozens of people who are over 40 who all had a Blackberries a year ago. Now they all have Android or iOS. And that's a BIG jump from a QWERTY keyboard to a touchscreen.
It's also difficult to convince someone to buy a Mac instead of a $499 PC.
But Android phones and iPhones cost basically the same with a contract. My point is I don't think people have purchased enough Android apps to keep them on the Android platform. Most of the best Android apps are free anyway.
With iOS... there are also lots of accessories and charging docks/boomboxes.
Logically that makes sense, but I'm talking real world. My clients, who i help with these questions every day, won't even consider another transition. It's not because they like their Android - the conversations are funny, they always go the same way -
Me: Why'd you decide to with the Android phone?
Client: Oh I got this because my contract was up and Verizon didn't have iPhone, and I didn't want to give up Verizon.
Me: How's it working?
Client: It's kind of OK, I'm getting used to the keyboard, and the battery life isn't so hot
Me: Oh... that's too bad, now that they finally have the iPhone and you're stuck with that... You could always look into selling it and using the proceeds to cover the iPhone cost.
Client: Yeah... it's OK, I'm getting better with it, and I don't want to have to learn something new this quick...
Neither Chitika, DED nor I stated or implied that Verizon experienced anything other than a shift in share of the US Android market percentage.
I was reading this sentence of yours: Verizon showed an overall decline in total share of available "smartphone" population on their network of roughly 10% for Android against all other "smartphones" on their network
There is nothing in the data to say how Android is doing compared with the other Smartphones that Verizon sells.
It almost doesn't matter how flawed the original study is, because Daniel skews it so much it's laughable.
He claims that Verizon share going down 10% is "huge", but AT&T growing 5% is "just" a small increase.
C'mon, dude, the difference between 5% and 10% just isn't as great as you portray.
Some remedial math about percentages
Percentages of the same number are "percentage points," so AT&T gained about 5% points and Verizon lost about 10% points. That means Verizon lost, proportional to the amount of Android phones out there in the US, twice as much share as AT&T gained. The rest of the ground Verizon gave up went to "other" carriers because Tmobile and Sprint remained static.
However, Verizon didn't "go down" 10%. Dropping from 51 to 41 is a loss of nearly 20%. Similarly, AT&T shifted from about 3-8 percent, which means its share more than doubled, but AT&T's share was tiny to start with, and Verizon's was more than half to start with.
It's a huge deal for Verizon to drop its ratio of all Android phones sold in the US that much, that quickly. You can personally attack DED all you want, but the conclusion drawn wasn't artfully construed by DED, it was REPORTED BY THE AD NETWORK! Read the last paragraph.
It's also a conclusion that is obvious to anyone who is not emotionally distressed by the reality that Verizon shifted from pushing Android in 2010 to promoting iPhone 4.
How does it follow that VZ customers are switching to the iPhone?
Other possibilities include VZ's total sales being down, or non-iP VZ sales going up, or other carriers selling lots of Android while VZ's Android sales are flat or even higher.
I think DED needs lessons in basic logic. He does not have enough information, and makes assumptions not supported by facts.
He may be correct, but he has scant evidence and many assumptions.
Remedial logic
You sound like somebody denigrating science for supporting evolution because you know it couldn't have happened.
We know Verizon's "total sales" are not down because it has been widely reported that Verizon gained new subscribers the fastest BY FAR, in the last quarter (nearly 1 M new). AT&T made some gains (90k), but Tmobile and Sprint actually lost subscribers (Sprint lost 15k).
Rather than speculating about "possibilities" that are not supported by facts, why don't you stick to facts that are widely reported? That's what DED does, and it's why he's right far more often than not.
There is factual basis for explaining why Verizon gave up 20% of its Android share while growing the fastest--by more than an order of magnitude--of US carriers. It has something to do with the most popular smartphone in the world being sold on its network for the first time.
Verizon sold more than half as many iPhones per quarter as Motorola MADE worldwide in the quarter. Verizon also sold 2x as many iPhones as it sold LTE phones, which it is heavily promoting. iPhones sell themselves. That's why Verizon gained so many new subscribers (people who wanted the iPhone but couldn't switch to AT&T, for example) while dramatically losing Android share.
If you can't tease that out logically, you are either not very smart, or you have some preexisting hope/expectation/faith that prevents you from seeing facts.
FWIW, ATT sold 5.6 million smartphones in the last quarter, 3.6 million of which were iPhones, tho no breakdown between 3GS and 4G models. Between qtr1 and 2 the number of iPhones activated stayed constant (3.6m per qtr), while the total number of smartphones went from 5.5 to 5.6 million. That shows non-Apple smartphone sales increasing ever so slightly at ATT.
Verizon is estimated to have sold 6.3 million smartphones in the most recent quarter, with 2.3 million of those being the iPhone. That leaves roughly 4 million smartphone activations that weren't iPhones
So between ATT and Verizon they activated an estimated 11.9 million smartphones, split nearly equally between non-Apple ones, overwhelmingly Android, and the iPhone.
Anyone as active in these fora as you, already know about the supporting other analyses that indicate the strength of that assertion. DED's bad was assuming the others were either not keeping track, or didn't know and didn't include the necessary other citations to support what he thought were obvious conclusions based on reports from NPD, Neilsen, and so on. But to challenge his assertions becuase he didn't provide the full brunt of evidence backing those assertions and already in evidence is pretty silly.
Nope. He took a wild-assed-guess and presented it as though it were based upon facts.
And BTW, I have seen zero evidence that there has been any "huge shift among Verizon subscribers to iPhone 4" from Android.
YOY, Verizon has roughly doubled their Android smartphone activations. Of course Apple's share of smartphone sales at Verizon is up 100% compared to this time last year.
The charts show that Verizon has almost 25% of the U.S. iPhone market. Where do you think those customers are coming from (at the same time their Android share is declining). Yes, some from at&t but those numbers show me a story similar to what's posted .... just connect the dots.
Problem with this assumption is this little thing called "Contracts." You see, when someone signs a Contract with a carrier, they're locked into said carrier for 2 years (or in Verizon's case, a minimum of 20 months)
This is something that 'analysts' and pundits like DED seem to forget. Customers hate paying full price for phones, specifically on Verizon, so only a very small percentage of customers
the Motorola Droid 1, the first Android device on the carrier came out in November of 2009. Alright, now, 2 years (24 months) from there would be November of 2011. This means that the earliest MOST people could upgrade from a Droid to an Iphone in July.
Now, there is the odd customer who has an early upgrade. If you're on a "high value" plan you used to be able to get an upgrade every year, but these are ONLY primary lines on family plans and someone who's Not on the minimal plan with a single line. they're not the majority of users.
That means, AT MOST this data includes one month of users (plus annual upgraders) who switched from Android to the iPhone.
This means that Most of the Iphone users on Verizon were not existing Android Verizon users because most of those are still under contract. So while the iPhone might've prevented NEW smartphone users (or new verizon customers, though gain's weren't record breaking) from choosing android, it didn't pull EXISTING customers away. You won't see that until now.
And then, add to that the fact that Sprint finally posted a net gain in customers (for the first time ever) and the popularity of android there. or the fact that ATT FINALLY started releasing high end Android devices. The pie is getting bigger as well.
The reason people are questioning this data is because:
1) It completely forgets that fact that a majority of users sign contracts
2) It's being presented in a way that ignores the fact that the entire smartphone "pie" is getting larger, and the fact that other carriers are really stepping up their Android gain.
Comments
This is a clear example of statistics used poorly. You cannot draw the conclusions made in the article from the statistics given in the article. Lies, damn lies, and statistics!
We need some absolute numbers...
yea this is really inconclusive data.
And many more of us trapped on AT&T are waiting for iphone 5 to switch to verizon!
I wouldn't dream of downgrading to a service that doesn't allow voice and net access simultaneously so I ignored all the Verizon hype even though I love FiOS. So I haven't kept up with the latest Verizon offerings to be honest ... has Verizon got that sorted now?
You do realize that AI is an Apple rumor site, do you not? Where do you think rumors come from?
Look I am not admitting anything OK?
I'm part of the 23% of iPhones on Verizon. But i'm surprised that ATT has such a little android %. What the hell are they selling other than iPhone? It's crazy to think that 92% of ATT's smartphone users are iPhone, or is it?
it's retention. People want the iPhone, and those who have one are more likely to get another when their contract is up.
AT&T has such a small percentage of android phones because any smartphone customer on AT&T already has an iPhone.
Verizon on the other hand, just got the iPhone this year. So any android customer has to wait for their contract to end before they switch to the iPhone. We'll see that android percentage drop much more in 2012.
People buy android phones* because they think "hey, it's just like the iPhone". Then after using it for a while they realize how poor the experience is, and see how their friends iPhones don't have the same problems. They are much less likely to buy another android handset.
*or they just hate apple...
What people?
Huge numbers of prolific AI posters are the people he is referring to.
I read the source material and it doesn't actually say what you or DED are implying.
It isn't a 10% decline in the number Android phones on the Verizon network.
What the report is saying is the number of Verizon customers with Android phones did not grow as fast as the number of Android phones on other carriers. Verizon's percentage share of the total Android market is down but you need to remember that the market has grown larger.
Think of it as saying there were 51 Android Phones on Verizon and 49 phones on other networks in March. Now there are 82 Android phones on Verizon but 118 on the other networks. Verizon's percentage of the total has dropped 10% despite having more phones.
Similarly AT&T is up 5 percentage points, but that doesn't mean that the iPhone is down. AT&T are simply selling more smartphones in total (both iPhones and Android).
I don't know which report you are reading, but it obviously WASN'T the Chitika Insight report. Here let me quote the pertinent portion for you:
While Verizon still has four of the top five Android smartphones (Droid X, HTC Droid Incredible, Samsung Fascinate, Droid), its market share is clearly down. In contrast, AT&T’s share of the Android phone market is increasing, with devices such at the HTC Inspire gaining significant popularity among smartphone users. Both Sprint and T-Mobile remain relatively stable, thanks to the stability of their respective flagship devices (HTC Evo, MyTouch 4G).
As discussed by Ryan Cavanagh last week, Verizon’s share of iPhone traffic continues to increase, but it seems that Verizon is gaining market share in Apple’s prominent smartphone at the expense of its other, Android-running devices.
And to be perfectly accurate they are extrapolating hits to number of phones being used - logical but not necessarily accurate. It could be that fewer Android users are hitting their network. We would have to know more about their network to be able to judge the accuracy of their reported statistics - which we don't.
So the report is about the Verizon share of the US Android user base, nothing else. We all know that "smartphone" unit purchases continue to grow the market segment - that is not in dispute here, especially out of the "feature phone" segment. Neither Chitika, DED nor I stated or implied that Verizon experienced anything other than a shift in share of the US Android market percentage. You can't reliably read anything else into that without calculating against real numbers reported by Verizon or the rest of the market.
The questions posed were simply speculative - "what would have caused Verizon's share of the US Android market to decline, while Verizon's share of the US iPhone market increased?". Given the timing and events during that time period it is logical to speculate that Verizon shifted some of their US Android share to US iPhone share. The article didn't speculate on overall market growth - which we all know to be a given - Android has been used successfully by the carriers to draw former feature phone purchasers into the more lucrative smartphone purchase and get them on the more expensive voice/data plans.
Perhaps my previous points weren't concise enough to be clear.
In less than six months, Verizon Wireless' share of Android phones sold in the US has eroded from 51.4 percent to 41.1 percent, indicating a huge shift among Verizon subscribers to iPhone 4.
Funny thing was, I was on Verizon's website yesterday comparing iPhone plans... not only did they not have a pic of the iPhone on the home page, but I didn't see an iPhone until I was several pages in, looking at all of the available smartphones.
Seems odd for such a hot selling product.
There are many things that are less than a 20 minute ride from the US border that are not dreamt of in their philosophy, and Americans are the least travelled, least "aware of the world" group on the planet.
Sigh.
This seems to be a statement consistent with what Americans are portrayed as.
There exist more people in China who have no electricity, who have never seen a television, who have never read a book and who have never traveled past their village, then all Americans put together. And what of southeast Asia? India? Africa?
Is the average American less well traveled than the average citizen of Bangladesh?
Methinks that the philosophy expressed in the quoted post is an example of ignoring things as they exist in reality.
You do realize that AI is an Apple rumor site, do you not? Where do you think rumors come from?
The article presented the data as factual data. It did not cite any rumors, it cited hard facts. It then made unsupportable conclusions which in no way follow from the facts. The conclusions are not rumors. The conclusions are wild guesses, trussed up as reasonable extrapolations.
I stand by my opinion. Rumors ain't got nothing to do with nothing. This is bullshit masquerading as journalism.
How does it follow that VZ customers are switching to the iPhone?
Other possibilities include VZ's total sales being down, or non-iP VZ sales going up, or other carriers selling lots of Android while VZ's Android sales are flat or even higher.
I think DED needs lessons in basic logic. He does not have enough information, and makes assumptions not supported by facts.
He may be correct, but he has scant evidence and many assumptions.
Anyone as active in these fora as you, already know about the supporting other analyses that indicate the strength of that assertion. DED's bad was assuming the others were either not keeping track, or didn't know and didn't include the necessary other citations to support what he thought were obvious conclusions based on reports from NPD, Neilsen, and so on. But to challenge his assertions becuase he didn't provide the full brunt of evidence backing those assertions and already in evidence is pretty silly.
I sorta agree with your overall premise.... except I know dozens of people who are over 40 who all had a Blackberries a year ago. Now they all have Android or iOS. And that's a BIG jump from a QWERTY keyboard to a touchscreen.
It's also difficult to convince someone to buy a Mac instead of a $499 PC.
But Android phones and iPhones cost basically the same with a contract. My point is I don't think people have purchased enough Android apps to keep them on the Android platform. Most of the best Android apps are free anyway.
With iOS... there are also lots of accessories and charging docks/boomboxes.
Logically that makes sense, but I'm talking real world. My clients, who i help with these questions every day, won't even consider another transition. It's not because they like their Android - the conversations are funny, they always go the same way -
Me: Why'd you decide to with the Android phone?
Client: Oh I got this because my contract was up and Verizon didn't have iPhone, and I didn't want to give up Verizon.
Me: How's it working?
Client: It's kind of OK, I'm getting used to the keyboard, and the battery life isn't so hot
Me: Oh... that's too bad, now that they finally have the iPhone and you're stuck with that... You could always look into selling it and using the proceeds to cover the iPhone cost.
Client: Yeah... it's OK, I'm getting better with it, and I don't want to have to learn something new this quick...
etc
I don't know which report you are reading, but it obviously WASN'T the Chitika Insight report. Here let me quote the pertinent portion for you:
<<<snip>>>
Perhaps my previous points weren't concise enough to be clear.
I think that the four of us who actually read the report all got it already, and everyone else is just here to bitch. Thanks for trying though.
Neither Chitika, DED nor I stated or implied that Verizon experienced anything other than a shift in share of the US Android market percentage.
I was reading this sentence of yours: Verizon showed an overall decline in total share of available "smartphone" population on their network of roughly 10% for Android against all other "smartphones" on their network
There is nothing in the data to say how Android is doing compared with the other Smartphones that Verizon sells.
It almost doesn't matter how flawed the original study is, because Daniel skews it so much it's laughable.
He claims that Verizon share going down 10% is "huge", but AT&T growing 5% is "just" a small increase.
C'mon, dude, the difference between 5% and 10% just isn't as great as you portray.
Some remedial math about percentages
Percentages of the same number are "percentage points," so AT&T gained about 5% points and Verizon lost about 10% points. That means Verizon lost, proportional to the amount of Android phones out there in the US, twice as much share as AT&T gained. The rest of the ground Verizon gave up went to "other" carriers because Tmobile and Sprint remained static.
However, Verizon didn't "go down" 10%. Dropping from 51 to 41 is a loss of nearly 20%. Similarly, AT&T shifted from about 3-8 percent, which means its share more than doubled, but AT&T's share was tiny to start with, and Verizon's was more than half to start with.
It's a huge deal for Verizon to drop its ratio of all Android phones sold in the US that much, that quickly. You can personally attack DED all you want, but the conclusion drawn wasn't artfully construed by DED, it was REPORTED BY THE AD NETWORK! Read the last paragraph.
It's also a conclusion that is obvious to anyone who is not emotionally distressed by the reality that Verizon shifted from pushing Android in 2010 to promoting iPhone 4.
How does it follow that VZ customers are switching to the iPhone?
Other possibilities include VZ's total sales being down, or non-iP VZ sales going up, or other carriers selling lots of Android while VZ's Android sales are flat or even higher.
I think DED needs lessons in basic logic. He does not have enough information, and makes assumptions not supported by facts.
He may be correct, but he has scant evidence and many assumptions.
Remedial logic
You sound like somebody denigrating science for supporting evolution because you know it couldn't have happened.
We know Verizon's "total sales" are not down because it has been widely reported that Verizon gained new subscribers the fastest BY FAR, in the last quarter (nearly 1 M new). AT&T made some gains (90k), but Tmobile and Sprint actually lost subscribers (Sprint lost 15k).
Rather than speculating about "possibilities" that are not supported by facts, why don't you stick to facts that are widely reported? That's what DED does, and it's why he's right far more often than not.
There is factual basis for explaining why Verizon gave up 20% of its Android share while growing the fastest--by more than an order of magnitude--of US carriers. It has something to do with the most popular smartphone in the world being sold on its network for the first time.
Verizon sold more than half as many iPhones per quarter as Motorola MADE worldwide in the quarter. Verizon also sold 2x as many iPhones as it sold LTE phones, which it is heavily promoting. iPhones sell themselves. That's why Verizon gained so many new subscribers (people who wanted the iPhone but couldn't switch to AT&T, for example) while dramatically losing Android share.
If you can't tease that out logically, you are either not very smart, or you have some preexisting hope/expectation/faith that prevents you from seeing facts.
http://www.iphoneanswers.net/2559/at...activated.html
http://venturebeat.com/2011/04/20/att-q1-2011-earnings/
Verizon is estimated to have sold 6.3 million smartphones in the most recent quarter, with 2.3 million of those being the iPhone. That leaves roughly 4 million smartphone activations that weren't iPhones
http://mobile.eweek.com/c/a/Mobile-a...Ramped-614451/
So between ATT and Verizon they activated an estimated 11.9 million smartphones, split nearly equally between non-Apple ones, overwhelmingly Android, and the iPhone.
Anyone as active in these fora as you, already know about the supporting other analyses that indicate the strength of that assertion. DED's bad was assuming the others were either not keeping track, or didn't know and didn't include the necessary other citations to support what he thought were obvious conclusions based on reports from NPD, Neilsen, and so on. But to challenge his assertions becuase he didn't provide the full brunt of evidence backing those assertions and already in evidence is pretty silly.
Nope. He took a wild-assed-guess and presented it as though it were based upon facts.
And BTW, I have seen zero evidence that there has been any "huge shift among Verizon subscribers to iPhone 4" from Android.
What people?
Plenty on here. You must be new.
Plenty on here. You must be new.
YOY, Verizon has roughly doubled their Android smartphone activations. Of course Apple's share of smartphone sales at Verizon is up 100% compared to this time last year.
The charts show that Verizon has almost 25% of the U.S. iPhone market. Where do you think those customers are coming from (at the same time their Android share is declining). Yes, some from at&t but those numbers show me a story similar to what's posted .... just connect the dots.
Problem with this assumption is this little thing called "Contracts." You see, when someone signs a Contract with a carrier, they're locked into said carrier for 2 years (or in Verizon's case, a minimum of 20 months)
This is something that 'analysts' and pundits like DED seem to forget. Customers hate paying full price for phones, specifically on Verizon, so only a very small percentage of customers
the Motorola Droid 1, the first Android device on the carrier came out in November of 2009. Alright, now, 2 years (24 months) from there would be November of 2011. This means that the earliest MOST people could upgrade from a Droid to an Iphone in July.
Now, there is the odd customer who has an early upgrade. If you're on a "high value" plan you used to be able to get an upgrade every year, but these are ONLY primary lines on family plans and someone who's Not on the minimal plan with a single line. they're not the majority of users.
That means, AT MOST this data includes one month of users (plus annual upgraders) who switched from Android to the iPhone.
This means that Most of the Iphone users on Verizon were not existing Android Verizon users because most of those are still under contract. So while the iPhone might've prevented NEW smartphone users (or new verizon customers, though gain's weren't record breaking) from choosing android, it didn't pull EXISTING customers away. You won't see that until now.
And then, add to that the fact that Sprint finally posted a net gain in customers (for the first time ever) and the popularity of android there. or the fact that ATT FINALLY started releasing high end Android devices. The pie is getting bigger as well.
The reason people are questioning this data is because:
1) It completely forgets that fact that a majority of users sign contracts
2) It's being presented in a way that ignores the fact that the entire smartphone "pie" is getting larger, and the fact that other carriers are really stepping up their Android gain.