[quote name="nealg" url="/t/151473/at-t-sold-3-7m-iphones-in-q2-2012-5-1m-smartphones-total/40#post_2152735"] Are you sure that android phones cost less to subsidize? I haven't seen that mentioned anywhere. If you have a link, it would be greatly appreciated.
When I looked up data usage, I was surprised and wrong with my original statement. It appears that the article that I found talked about Android users using more data but it was close. The shopping issue and spending I am now recalling that this was not related to phones but was probably iPad and tablet related but gave an advantage to iOS.
Once Verizon and Sprint are aggressively advertising "New iPhones for $0!" I'm sure some of that discrepancy between Verizon and AT&T's numbers will vanish. Personally I think Sprint will benefit the most from a $0 iPhone considering they are already a less premium carrier catering to entry level buyers.
The big opportunity Apple has in the US market is having a strong contender on Boost/Cricket/Virgin Mobile. That's where Android is really winning. 3GS with CDMA radio? That could fit the bill priced at $149, and we'll see Apple selling 40+million iPhones on non-holiday quarters.
Apple will not be going back and producing a 3GS w/a CDMA radio. The US is one of the alrgest CDMA markets in the world and most of the rest of the world is GSM. If they were going to do that they would have done it last year and offered it to more carriers. I wouldn't be surprised to see the 3GS disappear from AT&T and have the iPhone 4 become the new free phone for all the carriers. The 3GS will begin getting pushed at an even lower price in other non-US markets. The only question is if Apple really wants 4 generations of their phones on sale at the same time. In a pre-paid market it makes a lot of sense. In the post-paid market that is what so much of the US is on, the customers would see the 3GS and 4 both free, and obviously go with the better phone. It only makes sense in pre-paid, non-subsidy situations.
People keep citing the 3GS as a big seller, but every report I have ever seen that includes any kind of breakdown puts very small numbers up for the 3GS. Example:
Apple will not be going back and producing a 3GS w/a CDMA radio. The US is one of the alrgest CDMA markets in the world and most of the rest of the world is GSM. If they were going to do that they would have done it last year and offered it to more carriers. I wouldn't be surprised to see the 3GS disappear from AT&T and have the iPhone 4 become the new free phone for all the carriers. The 3GS will begin getting pushed at an even lower price in other non-US markets. The only question is if Apple really wants 4 generations of their phones on sale at the same time. In a pre-paid market it makes a lot of sense. In the post-paid market that is what so much of the US is on, the customers would see the 3GS and 4 both free, and obviously go with the better phone. It only makes sense in pre-paid, non-subsidy situations.
People keep citing the 3GS as a big seller, but every report I have ever seen that includes any kind of breakdown puts very small numbers up for the 3GS. Example:
I really don't think AT&T is selling nearly as many of these.
The prepaid market is what I had in mind in my post. I think there are enough markets and enough potential demand (particularly China) for Apple to consider a CDMA 3GS. As I said in my post, low end CDMA carriers suck as Cricket, Boost, and Virgin Mobile would benefit from a $149 3GS and overall US iPhone sales could increase in a big way from the low end.
AT&T has been desperately trying to create and prop up other hero devices in the form of the Storm, Pre 2, and many others. Will someone please tell me again why they are trying so hard to bite the hand that feeds them>
While the iPhone has been good for AT&T it is not wise for any outlet to be overly dependent on one source for their goods lest their fate be too tightly dependent on the fate of their supplier.
I did have to chuckle at how badly their attempt to promote the Nokia phone played out, even after throwing $150 million away while promoting this Wintel turd.
Thanks for the link. I pulled this one part out for posting here
<<Of course, it’s not as if the smartphone business has been stagnant since the launch of the iPhone: Just the opposite. The primary reason carriers are willing to shoulder the additional subsidies of the iPhone is that the device has consistently proven it brings customers on board. Mobile operators with the iPhone have seen consistent, strong growth in the number of customers they have on postpaid subscription plans. Carriers without the iPhone (we’re looking at you, T-Mobile) are seeing postpaid customers flee to other carriers.>>
Comments
Are you sure that android phones cost less to subsidize? I haven't seen that mentioned anywhere. If you have a link, it would be greatly appreciated.
What I have read is that one of the big costs to the phone companies is turnover. That is one place where the iPhone is better than Android
[URL=http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/08/01/survey-iphone-retention-94-vs-android-47/]http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/08/01/survey-iphone-retention-94-vs-android-47/[/URL]
It is last year and the timing favors Apple and the numbers are small but it was what I found on short notice.
There are also differences between iPhone and Android users which may make iPhone users more profitable to have
[URL=http://osxdaily.com/2011/08/22/ios-vs-android-user-profile-infographic/]http://osxdaily.com/2011/08/22/ios-vs-android-user-profile-infographic/[/URL]
Again, this survey is a year old but it is an interesting read.
When I looked up data usage, I was surprised and wrong with my original statement. It appears that the article that I found talked about Android users using more data but it was close. The shopping issue and spending I am now recalling that this was not related to phones but was probably iPad and tablet related but gave an advantage to iOS.
Neal[quote]
http://m.digitaltrends.com/mobile/are-iphone-subsidies-destroying-carriers/
double post
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook
Once Verizon and Sprint are aggressively advertising "New iPhones for $0!" I'm sure some of that discrepancy between Verizon and AT&T's numbers will vanish. Personally I think Sprint will benefit the most from a $0 iPhone considering they are already a less premium carrier catering to entry level buyers.
The big opportunity Apple has in the US market is having a strong contender on Boost/Cricket/Virgin Mobile. That's where Android is really winning. 3GS with CDMA radio? That could fit the bill priced at $149, and we'll see Apple selling 40+million iPhones on non-holiday quarters.
Apple will not be going back and producing a 3GS w/a CDMA radio. The US is one of the alrgest CDMA markets in the world and most of the rest of the world is GSM. If they were going to do that they would have done it last year and offered it to more carriers. I wouldn't be surprised to see the 3GS disappear from AT&T and have the iPhone 4 become the new free phone for all the carriers. The 3GS will begin getting pushed at an even lower price in other non-US markets. The only question is if Apple really wants 4 generations of their phones on sale at the same time. In a pre-paid market it makes a lot of sense. In the post-paid market that is what so much of the US is on, the customers would see the 3GS and 4 both free, and obviously go with the better phone. It only makes sense in pre-paid, non-subsidy situations.
People keep citing the 3GS as a big seller, but every report I have ever seen that includes any kind of breakdown puts very small numbers up for the 3GS. Example:
http://www.tuaw.com/2012/01/26/iphone-4s-accounts-for-89-percent-of-iphone-sales/
I really don't think AT&T is selling nearly as many of these.
The prepaid market is what I had in mind in my post. I think there are enough markets and enough potential demand (particularly China) for Apple to consider a CDMA 3GS. As I said in my post, low end CDMA carriers suck as Cricket, Boost, and Virgin Mobile would benefit from a $149 3GS and overall US iPhone sales could increase in a big way from the low end.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac Voyer
AT&T has been desperately trying to create and prop up other hero devices in the form of the Storm, Pre 2, and many others. Will someone please tell me again why they are trying so hard to bite the hand that feeds them>
While the iPhone has been good for AT&T it is not wise for any outlet to be overly dependent on one source for their goods lest their fate be too tightly dependent on the fate of their supplier.
I did have to chuckle at how badly their attempt to promote the Nokia phone played out, even after throwing $150 million away while promoting this Wintel turd.
Dasanman,
Thanks for the link. I pulled this one part out for posting here
<<Of course, it’s not as if the smartphone business has been stagnant since the launch of the iPhone: Just the opposite. The primary reason carriers are willing to shoulder the additional subsidies of the iPhone is that the device has consistently proven it brings customers on board. Mobile operators with the iPhone have seen consistent, strong growth in the number of customers they have on postpaid subscription plans. Carriers without the iPhone (we’re looking at you, T-Mobile) are seeing postpaid customers flee to other carriers.>>
Neal