I guess Apple also being more profitable than Dell despite selling less computers than them also doesn't mean much.
Completely different business models. Dell sells by the numbers and Apple sells by design. Design always has an advantage in the price you can charge. Sony does exactly the same thing. I own two Vaios for this very reason. They are awesome machines and I would never even consider another manufacturer. (sorry they are Vaio Laptops. My 2 macs are desktops)
This is the advantage Apple has there - they are very distinct from everyone else.
Possibly their mistake here was to try and apply that model to the iPhone - they thought they were distinct from everyone else producing mobile phones and therefore could make up their own rules but are finding very quickly they are playing in exactly the same space as other, far more experienced manufacturers.
And there will be periods when Dell is more profitable than Apple... swings and roundabouts...
If you spent more tie reading post then following the crowd you would see that i do own the products I criticize. I happen to live in the real world and not Steve Jobs pants. The points I made about the iPhone came from the very article that started this thread and from various news sources, sooooooo until you begin to have a clue what you are talking about, Foxtrot Oscar.
Do you own the iPhone? If yes, what don't you like about it? (You can point me to one of your prior posts as well that might address it). And if no, you trot off now, since you are blowing smoke.
Completely different business models. Dell sells by the numbers and Apple sells by design. Design always has an advantage in the price you can charge. Sony does exactly the same thing. I own two Vaios for this very reason. They are awesome machines and I would never even consider another manufacturer. (sorry they are Vaio Laptops. My 2 macs are desktops)
This is the advantage Apple has there - they are very distinct from everyone else.
Possibly their mistake here was to try and apply that model to the iPhone - they thought they were distinct from everyone else producing mobile phones and therefore could make up their own rules but are finding very quickly they are playing in exactly the same space as other, far more experienced manufacturers.
And there will be periods when Dell is more profitable than Apple... swings and roundabouts...
So you mean no phone is perfect, not even the N95, who would have thought.
No, I think there is more than a subtle difference between 'complete disaster' and 'not perfect.' But hey, if the N95 works for you (or others that own it) great; more power to you. Enjoy it!
I guess Apple also being more profitable than Dell despite selling less computers than them also doesn't mean much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
No, I think there is more than a subtle difference between 'complete disaster' and 'not perfect.' But hey, if the N95 works for you (or others that own it) great; more power to you. Enjoy it!
Mate, give the kiddies a break. Fantasy and make believe are important aspects of childhood. Trying to deprive them of these is a bit cruel, plenty of time for them to experience the full rigour of reality later in life.
I mean, 7M N95 sales is a disaster while 330K iPhone sales is a great success. You can't expect highly developed logical reasoning or mathematical ability at their age, it will come, in time.
Mate, give the kiddies a break. Fantasy and make believe are important aspects of childhood. Trying to deprive them of these is a bit cruel, plenty of time for them to experience the full rigour of reality later in life.
I mean, 7M N95 sales is a disaster while 330K iPhone sales is a great success. You can't expect highly developed logical reasoning or mathematical ability at their age, it will come, in time.
It benefits the consumer by killing the "full priced, crippled handset with a long contract" business model.
I'd like to say I agree with you 100% on this one, and it's exactly why I'm glad the current iPhone sales model has tanked in Europe. If it had been successful, Nokia, SE, Samsung, LG etc, would all have got a whiff of how they could fleece the consumers out of more money, tied into restrictive contracts and carriers. You yanks might be quite happy to put up with that, but in Europe we are most certainly not.
Last time I checked 4 million and 1.1 million are not even remotely close. iphone is also the most used phone for browsing the internet in the States and 2nd in the world despite with only 4 million units out there. Was the Voyaguer even a blip on the radar in terms of internet usage, iphone is leading in consumer satisfactory, we love our iphones, amd it shows in all the studies being released, consumers are using their iphones to watch media, listen to songs, than any other phone, anyways you slice it, the iphone is a game changer.
It's 4 million iphone worldwide vs. 1.1 million LG Voyagers sold by 1 American carrier, Verizon Wireless. Even Munster has estimated worldwide iphone shipment to be down to 1.6 million in Q1. How many of that comes from AT&T activation? If it comes down to less than 650K in AT&T activation in Q1, then add 1/2 of 900K in Christmas quarter --- it would equal the sales figure for the LG Voyager by Verizon Wireless during the same period.
Who cares about "internet usage"? Verizon Wireless still has HIGHER data ARPU than AT&T Wireless after the iphone is launched.
1/3 of iphone users have to carry a second iphone --- I don't consider that satisfactory at all.
Of course it is, by the same metric that says Vista is a success story.
But like I said, as long as you are enjoying yours, I wish you well. And I do not begrudge your purchase, nor those of all the 7M (or whatever). It's just that I won't be buying one.
I will say one thing that's not fantasy: I am a pretty darn happy shareholder having bought a ton of AAPL just prior to Jan '07. It's going to help me enjoy a second childhood (and postpone the rigor of reality that will supposedly hit later in my life - ref. cnocbui #127)!
Do you own the iPhone? If yes, what don't you like about it? (You can point me to one of your prior posts as well that might address it). And if no, you trot off now, since you are blowing smoke.
Beep, beep, beep = the sound of you backing up.
I have said it more than once in this thread about what devices I own. If you are too lazy, dumb, etc... to scroll back and find it then continue to be lazy, dumb, etc.... It is on you. To date you have said nothing of importance but you do continue to grow your lemming status as an Apple zealot.
Yeah and Apple's going to be making a pile of cash on that one. Apple are in the business of seeling phones and making money. 1) They are selling bugger all phones and 2) They wont be making any money out of it.
In the first two quarters of sales Apple reported nearly half a billion in revenue from the iPhone.
Quote:
I'll bet you an A380 that they change their business model sometime very soon. So much for niche products that make them loads of cash - they are dumping stock in Germany. 99 Euros gets you an iPhone these days.
Yes I agree Apple will be changing its business model. Keeping the phone locked to one carrier is to help start the iPhone platform. I don't believe Apple ever intended this model for the long run.
Quote:
I wont bother with this one sorry. Try doing a bit more reading. Preferrably wiith both eyes open. But at least one.
Well bring me real information other than your own opinion and I will read it.
Quote:
Nice one Jules. As an American currently living in Europe, then on to somewhere else, I can say that many to most Americans need to get a passport and get out of the country and realize that abroad is not actually Canada or Mexico. This debate on the iPhone is proof positive of this.
This has nothing to do with being an American or not. I'm simply looking at sales and profits. Apple and its carrier partners are making money from the iPhone. This discussion of how many have been sold are besides that basic point.
Quote:
AT&T is not in the business of selling cell phones --- they are in the business of selling cell phone services. Out of 2.7 million net adds, AT&T had 1.2 million retail postpaid net adds, 750K retail prepaid net adds and 750K wholesale MVNO prepaid net adds (Tracfone). Out of the 900K iphone activations in the quarter, 40% came from new subscribers --- which means 13.3% of the 2.7 million net adds came from the iphone. Out of 2 million net adds, Verizon Wireless had 1.6 million retail postpaid net adds, 300K retail prepaid net adds and 100K wholesale MVNO prepaid net adds (GM OnStar, Helio).
You can chop it up any way you want, the fact still remains, AT&T has 70 million subscriber and Verizon has 63 million subscribers.
Where are you getting the 900,000 iPhone activations over Christmas? Exactly where are you getting that number? AT&T never reported it.
Lets say for the sake of argument AT&T did activate 900K iPhones. Why exactly would that be a failure? What other phone with a premium price and a premium contract sold far more over Christmas?
Quote:
350K units in Europe x $450 = $160 million.
The iPhone is sold in Europe using pounds and euros not dollars. The device plus tariff and accessories equal a billion product.
Quote:
But that's not the main point. The main point is that other carriers will see that Verizon has done ZERO advertising blitz, had not lowered monthly plan prices, gets to keep 100% of the revenue --- and the iphone activation is only slightly higher by a hair.
Verizon does indeed advertise as all the mobile carriers do. They have a huge marketing budget for television, internet and print. Verizon has just announced a $99 unlimited voice plan and a $30 unlimited data plan.
Verizon pays the phone manufacturers for contract phones and exclusive Verizon distributed phones. Just as everyone else does.
Seriously that has a lot more to do with business and consumer sentiment than anything else. In a market downturn companies lay staff off. And what we have at the moment could very easily be construed as a market downturn.
Dell has been loosing revenue, marketshare, and stock price for the past couple of years. This is nothing new. The economic downturn is only making the situation worse.
Quote:
And there will be periods when Dell is more profitable than Apple... swings and roundabouts...
Possibly but Dell has grown so large in its computer business that their has been little growth left. Dell has attempted to enter other markets to help grow profits but has not been as successful in any other market but computers.
Apple as been either extremely to moderately successful in other markets while continuing to grow profits and marketshare in its core computer business.
I mean, 7M N95 sales is a disaster while 330K iPhone sales is a great success. You can't expect highly developed logical reasoning or mathematical ability at their age, it will come, in time.
This is not at all highly developed logical reasoning. This is biased factual inaccuracy.
A clear example is your comparison of the N95's worldwide sales for the year in comparison to the iPhones European sales for the first two months.
Again the N95 is sold on nearly every carrier in every industrialized nation in the world. The N95 is offered for free with a cheaper tariff. An entirely different situation from the iPhone that renders any comparison flawed.
Quote:
It's 4 million iphone worldwide vs. 1.1 million LG Voyagers sold by 1 American carrier, Verizon Wireless
The LG Voyager sells because its CHEAPER. Why can't you even pick a phone that costs the same.
Quote:
Who cares about "internet usage"? Verizon Wireless still has HIGHER data ARPU than AT&T Wireless after the iphone is launched.
Can you cite where these data usage numbers come from.
You first say who cares about internet usage. Then point that Verizon has a higher ARPU. Does it matter or not?
In fact it does matter as data contracts will be future revenue growth features for carriers.
Quote:
1/3 of iphone users have to carry a second iphone --- I don't consider that satisfactory at all.
This has nothing to do with the iPhone specifically. A lot of people carry two phones. Carrying two phones is nothing new.
Yes I agree Apple will be changing its business model. Keeping the phone locked to one carrier is to help start the iPhone platform. I don't believe Apple ever intended this model for the long run.
You can chop it up any way you want, the fact still remains, AT&T has 70 million subscriber and Verizon has 63 million subscribers.
Where are you getting the 900,000 iPhone activations over Christmas? Exactly where are you getting that number? AT&T never reported it.
Lets say for the sake of argument AT&T did activate 900K iPhones. Why exactly would that be a failure? What other phone with a premium price and a premium contract sold far more over Christmas?
The iPhone is sold in Europe using pounds and euros not dollars. The device plus tariff and accessories equal a billion product.
Verizon does indeed advertise as all the mobile carriers do. They have a huge marketing budget for television, internet and print. Verizon has just announced a $99 unlimited voice plan and a $30 unlimited data plan.
Verizon pays the phone manufacturers for contract phones and exclusive Verizon distributed phones. Just as everyone else does.
How did the one carrier launch in Europe help the iphone? Steve Jobs didn't even bother to announce it in person for Orange and Orange did a 1/2'assed announcement in Vietnam. Then all 3 carriers mysteriously not announcing any sales numbers.
And you can chop it any way you want --- without Tracfone, AT&T is nothing. Verizon Wireless has higher internal subscribers, higher percentage of postpaid, higher voice ARPU, higher data ARPU, lower churn, higher gross profit, higher net profit and higher profit margin than AT&T Wireless. Basically the score is 99 to 1 --- with AT&T Wireless winning by one single metric, which is the total subscriber count.
Guess what? Verizon Wireless doesn't care about that partiicular one. Verizon Wireless could have lowered prices, could have signed up with more MVNO's --- but did none of that.
AT&T's Q4 earnings call --- you can look at the transcript if you want. 900K activation in Q3 and Q4. 40% of them were from new subscribers.
269 pound = 540 USD (then you take out the various taxes) --- which mean that european iphone is generally 50-75 dollars more expensive than US iphone --- on a US dollar basis.
Verizon spends their ad budget very wisely --- "the network" rules --- which is why they have a higher retail subscriber base than AT&T.
The LG Voyager sells because its CHEAPER. Why can't you even pick a phone that costs the same.
Can you cite where these data usage numbers come from.
You first say who cares about internet usage. Then point that Verizon has a higher ARPU. Does it matter or not?
In fact it does matter as data contracts will be future revenue growth features for carriers.
The LG Voyager has the same touch-based technology --- so comparing it is better than comparing the iphone with a N95. Sure the LG Voyager is cheaper --- that's my point throughout this thread. It's better for the consumer to kill off the "full priced, crippled handset with a long contract" by a "subsidized priced, crippled handset with a long contract".
Verizon Wireless has a total ARPU is $51.49 and data ARPU of $11.06
Of course, data contracts will be the future revenue growth. That's why AT&T's mix of prepaid and Tracfone subscriber net adds are garbage. Verizon had 1.7 million postpaid net adds in Q4 and AT&T Wireless had 1.2 million postpaid net adds in Q4.
And you can chop it any way you want --- without Tracfone, AT&T is nothing. Verizon Wireless has higher internal subscribers, higher percentage of postpaid, higher voice ARPU, higher data ARPU, lower churn, higher gross profit, higher net profit and higher profit margin than AT&T Wireless.
I would love to see where you got such detailed segment data for the wireless portion. (Seriously, I am not being snarky here). A comparison at the corporate level reveals that ATT has performed at least as well as - well, actually a tad better than - Verizon:
Comments
I guess Apple also being more profitable than Dell despite selling less computers than them also doesn't mean much.
Completely different business models. Dell sells by the numbers and Apple sells by design. Design always has an advantage in the price you can charge. Sony does exactly the same thing. I own two Vaios for this very reason. They are awesome machines and I would never even consider another manufacturer. (sorry they are Vaio Laptops. My 2 macs are desktops)
This is the advantage Apple has there - they are very distinct from everyone else.
Possibly their mistake here was to try and apply that model to the iPhone - they thought they were distinct from everyone else producing mobile phones and therefore could make up their own rules but are finding very quickly they are playing in exactly the same space as other, far more experienced manufacturers.
And there will be periods when Dell is more profitable than Apple... swings and roundabouts...
If you spent more tie reading post then following the crowd you would see that i do own the products I criticize. I happen to live in the real world and not Steve Jobs pants. The points I made about the iPhone came from the very article that started this thread and from various news sources, sooooooo until you begin to have a clue what you are talking about, Foxtrot Oscar.
Do you own the iPhone? If yes, what don't you like about it? (You can point me to one of your prior posts as well that might address it). And if no, you trot off now, since you are blowing smoke.
Completely different business models. Dell sells by the numbers and Apple sells by design. Design always has an advantage in the price you can charge. Sony does exactly the same thing. I own two Vaios for this very reason. They are awesome machines and I would never even consider another manufacturer. (sorry they are Vaio Laptops. My 2 macs are desktops)
This is the advantage Apple has there - they are very distinct from everyone else.
Possibly their mistake here was to try and apply that model to the iPhone - they thought they were distinct from everyone else producing mobile phones and therefore could make up their own rules but are finding very quickly they are playing in exactly the same space as other, far more experienced manufacturers.
And there will be periods when Dell is more profitable than Apple... swings and roundabouts...
Nice points.
So you mean no phone is perfect, not even the N95, who would have thought.
No, I think there is more than a subtle difference between 'complete disaster' and 'not perfect.' But hey, if the N95 works for you (or others that own it) great; more power to you. Enjoy it!
I guess Apple also being more profitable than Dell despite selling less computers than them also doesn't mean much.
No, I think there is more than a subtle difference between 'complete disaster' and 'not perfect.' But hey, if the N95 works for you (or others that own it) great; more power to you. Enjoy it!
Hey, the N95 is a success story. No question
Hey, the N95 is a success story. No question
Mate, give the kiddies a break. Fantasy and make believe are important aspects of childhood. Trying to deprive them of these is a bit cruel, plenty of time for them to experience the full rigour of reality later in life.
I mean, 7M N95 sales is a disaster while 330K iPhone sales is a great success. You can't expect highly developed logical reasoning or mathematical ability at their age, it will come, in time.
Mate, give the kiddies a break. Fantasy and make believe are important aspects of childhood. Trying to deprive them of these is a bit cruel, plenty of time for them to experience the full rigour of reality later in life.
I mean, 7M N95 sales is a disaster while 330K iPhone sales is a great success. You can't expect highly developed logical reasoning or mathematical ability at their age, it will come, in time.
Why don't you back that up, I don't believe you.
It benefits the consumer by killing the "full priced, crippled handset with a long contract" business model.
I'd like to say I agree with you 100% on this one, and it's exactly why I'm glad the current iPhone sales model has tanked in Europe. If it had been successful, Nokia, SE, Samsung, LG etc, would all have got a whiff of how they could fleece the consumers out of more money, tied into restrictive contracts and carriers. You yanks might be quite happy to put up with that, but in Europe we are most certainly not.
Last time I checked 4 million and 1.1 million are not even remotely close. iphone is also the most used phone for browsing the internet in the States and 2nd in the world despite with only 4 million units out there. Was the Voyaguer even a blip on the radar in terms of internet usage, iphone is leading in consumer satisfactory, we love our iphones, amd it shows in all the studies being released, consumers are using their iphones to watch media, listen to songs, than any other phone, anyways you slice it, the iphone is a game changer.
It's 4 million iphone worldwide vs. 1.1 million LG Voyagers sold by 1 American carrier, Verizon Wireless. Even Munster has estimated worldwide iphone shipment to be down to 1.6 million in Q1. How many of that comes from AT&T activation? If it comes down to less than 650K in AT&T activation in Q1, then add 1/2 of 900K in Christmas quarter --- it would equal the sales figure for the LG Voyager by Verizon Wireless during the same period.
Who cares about "internet usage"? Verizon Wireless still has HIGHER data ARPU than AT&T Wireless after the iphone is launched.
1/3 of iphone users have to carry a second iphone --- I don't consider that satisfactory at all.
Hey, the N95 is a success story. No question
Of course it is, by the same metric that says Vista is a success story.
But like I said, as long as you are enjoying yours, I wish you well. And I do not begrudge your purchase, nor those of all the 7M (or whatever). It's just that I won't be buying one.
I will say one thing that's not fantasy: I am a pretty darn happy shareholder having bought a ton of AAPL just prior to Jan '07. It's going to help me enjoy a second childhood (and postpone the rigor of reality that will supposedly hit later in my life - ref. cnocbui #127)!
Do you own the iPhone? If yes, what don't you like about it? (You can point me to one of your prior posts as well that might address it). And if no, you trot off now, since you are blowing smoke.
Beep, beep, beep = the sound of you backing up.
I have said it more than once in this thread about what devices I own. If you are too lazy, dumb, etc... to scroll back and find it then continue to be lazy, dumb, etc.... It is on you. To date you have said nothing of importance but you do continue to grow your lemming status as an Apple zealot.
Why don't you back that up, I don't believe you.
Ah, children:
7M = http://tinyurl.com/3hdydh
330K = http://tinyurl.com/3k8l84
You have lost the argument.
Ah, children:
7M = http://tinyurl.com/3hdydh
330K = http://tinyurl.com/3k8l84
You have lost the argument.
Don't confuse them with facts. Leave the blinders on dude.
Yeah and Apple's going to be making a pile of cash on that one. Apple are in the business of seeling phones and making money. 1) They are selling bugger all phones and 2) They wont be making any money out of it.
In the first two quarters of sales Apple reported nearly half a billion in revenue from the iPhone.
I'll bet you an A380 that they change their business model sometime very soon. So much for niche products that make them loads of cash - they are dumping stock in Germany. 99 Euros gets you an iPhone these days.
Yes I agree Apple will be changing its business model. Keeping the phone locked to one carrier is to help start the iPhone platform. I don't believe Apple ever intended this model for the long run.
I wont bother with this one sorry. Try doing a bit more reading. Preferrably wiith both eyes open. But at least one.
Well bring me real information other than your own opinion and I will read it.
Nice one Jules. As an American currently living in Europe, then on to somewhere else, I can say that many to most Americans need to get a passport and get out of the country and realize that abroad is not actually Canada or Mexico. This debate on the iPhone is proof positive of this.
This has nothing to do with being an American or not. I'm simply looking at sales and profits. Apple and its carrier partners are making money from the iPhone. This discussion of how many have been sold are besides that basic point.
AT&T is not in the business of selling cell phones --- they are in the business of selling cell phone services. Out of 2.7 million net adds, AT&T had 1.2 million retail postpaid net adds, 750K retail prepaid net adds and 750K wholesale MVNO prepaid net adds (Tracfone). Out of the 900K iphone activations in the quarter, 40% came from new subscribers --- which means 13.3% of the 2.7 million net adds came from the iphone. Out of 2 million net adds, Verizon Wireless had 1.6 million retail postpaid net adds, 300K retail prepaid net adds and 100K wholesale MVNO prepaid net adds (GM OnStar, Helio).
You can chop it up any way you want, the fact still remains, AT&T has 70 million subscriber and Verizon has 63 million subscribers.
Where are you getting the 900,000 iPhone activations over Christmas? Exactly where are you getting that number? AT&T never reported it.
Lets say for the sake of argument AT&T did activate 900K iPhones. Why exactly would that be a failure? What other phone with a premium price and a premium contract sold far more over Christmas?
350K units in Europe x $450 = $160 million.
The iPhone is sold in Europe using pounds and euros not dollars. The device plus tariff and accessories equal a billion product.
But that's not the main point. The main point is that other carriers will see that Verizon has done ZERO advertising blitz, had not lowered monthly plan prices, gets to keep 100% of the revenue --- and the iphone activation is only slightly higher by a hair.
Verizon does indeed advertise as all the mobile carriers do. They have a huge marketing budget for television, internet and print. Verizon has just announced a $99 unlimited voice plan and a $30 unlimited data plan.
Verizon pays the phone manufacturers for contract phones and exclusive Verizon distributed phones. Just as everyone else does.
Seriously that has a lot more to do with business and consumer sentiment than anything else. In a market downturn companies lay staff off. And what we have at the moment could very easily be construed as a market downturn.
Dell has been loosing revenue, marketshare, and stock price for the past couple of years. This is nothing new. The economic downturn is only making the situation worse.
And there will be periods when Dell is more profitable than Apple... swings and roundabouts...
Possibly but Dell has grown so large in its computer business that their has been little growth left. Dell has attempted to enter other markets to help grow profits but has not been as successful in any other market but computers.
Apple as been either extremely to moderately successful in other markets while continuing to grow profits and marketshare in its core computer business.
I mean, 7M N95 sales is a disaster while 330K iPhone sales is a great success. You can't expect highly developed logical reasoning or mathematical ability at their age, it will come, in time.
This is not at all highly developed logical reasoning. This is biased factual inaccuracy.
A clear example is your comparison of the N95's worldwide sales for the year in comparison to the iPhones European sales for the first two months.
Again the N95 is sold on nearly every carrier in every industrialized nation in the world. The N95 is offered for free with a cheaper tariff. An entirely different situation from the iPhone that renders any comparison flawed.
It's 4 million iphone worldwide vs. 1.1 million LG Voyagers sold by 1 American carrier, Verizon Wireless
The LG Voyager sells because its CHEAPER. Why can't you even pick a phone that costs the same.
Who cares about "internet usage"? Verizon Wireless still has HIGHER data ARPU than AT&T Wireless after the iphone is launched.
Can you cite where these data usage numbers come from.
You first say who cares about internet usage. Then point that Verizon has a higher ARPU. Does it matter or not?
In fact it does matter as data contracts will be future revenue growth features for carriers.
1/3 of iphone users have to carry a second iphone --- I don't consider that satisfactory at all.
This has nothing to do with the iPhone specifically. A lot of people carry two phones. Carrying two phones is nothing new.
Yes I agree Apple will be changing its business model. Keeping the phone locked to one carrier is to help start the iPhone platform. I don't believe Apple ever intended this model for the long run.
You can chop it up any way you want, the fact still remains, AT&T has 70 million subscriber and Verizon has 63 million subscribers.
Where are you getting the 900,000 iPhone activations over Christmas? Exactly where are you getting that number? AT&T never reported it.
Lets say for the sake of argument AT&T did activate 900K iPhones. Why exactly would that be a failure? What other phone with a premium price and a premium contract sold far more over Christmas?
The iPhone is sold in Europe using pounds and euros not dollars. The device plus tariff and accessories equal a billion product.
Verizon does indeed advertise as all the mobile carriers do. They have a huge marketing budget for television, internet and print. Verizon has just announced a $99 unlimited voice plan and a $30 unlimited data plan.
Verizon pays the phone manufacturers for contract phones and exclusive Verizon distributed phones. Just as everyone else does.
How did the one carrier launch in Europe help the iphone? Steve Jobs didn't even bother to announce it in person for Orange and Orange did a 1/2'assed announcement in Vietnam. Then all 3 carriers mysteriously not announcing any sales numbers.
And you can chop it any way you want --- without Tracfone, AT&T is nothing. Verizon Wireless has higher internal subscribers, higher percentage of postpaid, higher voice ARPU, higher data ARPU, lower churn, higher gross profit, higher net profit and higher profit margin than AT&T Wireless. Basically the score is 99 to 1 --- with AT&T Wireless winning by one single metric, which is the total subscriber count.
Guess what? Verizon Wireless doesn't care about that partiicular one. Verizon Wireless could have lowered prices, could have signed up with more MVNO's --- but did none of that.
AT&T's Q4 earnings call --- you can look at the transcript if you want. 900K activation in Q3 and Q4. 40% of them were from new subscribers.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/6165...ar-news-friday
269 pound = 540 USD (then you take out the various taxes) --- which mean that european iphone is generally 50-75 dollars more expensive than US iphone --- on a US dollar basis.
Verizon spends their ad budget very wisely --- "the network" rules --- which is why they have a higher retail subscriber base than AT&T.
The LG Voyager sells because its CHEAPER. Why can't you even pick a phone that costs the same.
Can you cite where these data usage numbers come from.
You first say who cares about internet usage. Then point that Verizon has a higher ARPU. Does it matter or not?
In fact it does matter as data contracts will be future revenue growth features for carriers.
The LG Voyager has the same touch-based technology --- so comparing it is better than comparing the iphone with a N95. Sure the LG Voyager is cheaper --- that's my point throughout this thread. It's better for the consumer to kill off the "full priced, crippled handset with a long contract" by a "subsidized priced, crippled handset with a long contract".
Verizon Wireless has a total ARPU is $51.49 and data ARPU of $11.06
http://investor.verizon.com/news/view.aspx?NewsID=885
AT&T Wireless has a total ARPU of $50.28 and data ARPU is 18% of that (about $9.05).
http://www.att.com/Investor/ATT_Annu...ullFinalAR.pdf
Of course, data contracts will be the future revenue growth. That's why AT&T's mix of prepaid and Tracfone subscriber net adds are garbage. Verizon had 1.7 million postpaid net adds in Q4 and AT&T Wireless had 1.2 million postpaid net adds in Q4.
And you can chop it any way you want --- without Tracfone, AT&T is nothing. Verizon Wireless has higher internal subscribers, higher percentage of postpaid, higher voice ARPU, higher data ARPU, lower churn, higher gross profit, higher net profit and higher profit margin than AT&T Wireless.
I would love to see where you got such detailed segment data for the wireless portion. (Seriously, I am not being snarky here). A comparison at the corporate level reveals that ATT has performed at least as well as - well, actually a tad better than - Verizon:
ATT
Profit Margin '07 10.05%
Oper Margin '07 17.16%
EBITDA Margin '07 35.30%
ROA '07 4.38%
1-yr stock perf -4.6%
5-yr stock perf +82.1%
Verizon
Profit Margin '07 5.89%
Oper Margin '07 16.67%
EBITDA Margin '07 33.48%
ROA '07 2.93%
1-yr stock perf -5.3%
5-yr stock perf +7.1%
Source: finance.google.com