It's pretty much a wash, actually. The net subscriber ads war between ATT and Verizon has been a back-and-forth dogfight of late (preceded by 2 years of Verizon mostly winning):
<image>
They also split the two most recent quarters (which aren't on the chart)... ATT won Q4 2007, Verizon won Q1 2008. So over the past 7 quarters, the tally is Verizon 4, ATT 3, if one cares about such things.
For some companies more than others. Verizon does a very good job on keeping churn down and consistently wins there:
<image>
And ARPU? Verizon consistently beats ATT, but both are consistently beaten by Alltel and Sprint (this is one of Sprint's very few silver linings of late):
<image>
Hope the info was of some use.
Those charts start in 2006 and go to Quarter 3 of 2007. I assume it is using calender year quarters? If so, then AT&T secured 25% more subscribers over Verizon for the quarter in which the iPhone premiered. Since it's the iPhone and perhaps even AT&T's subsequent rampant 3G rollout I think we need to look at numbers for the post-iPhone release to make a determination of how well AT&T is faring.
Those charts start in 2006 and go to Quarter 3 of 2007. I assume it is using calender year quarters? If so, then AT&T secured 25% more subscribers over Verizon for the quarter in which the iPhone premiered. Since it's the iPhone and perhaps even AT&T's subsequent rampant 3G rollout I think we need to look at numbers for the post-iPhone release to make a determination of how well AT&T is faring.
If you want to consider only quarters in which the iPhone was available, then the score is 2 to 2.
Personally, it doesn't matter much to me. I'm sure that whatever effect the iPhone is/isn't having for ATT, the 3G iPhone will have a greater and quite significant impact. I'd also expect that Verizon will eventually do a deal for the iPhone, perhaps as early as mid-2009, now that it seems that the ATT exclusive is only for two years.
If you want to consider only quarters in which the iPhone was available, then the score is 2 to 2.
Personally, it doesn't matter much to me. I'm sure that whatever effect the iPhone is/isn't having for ATT, the 3G iPhone will have a greater and quite significant impact. I'd also expect that Verizon will eventually do a deal for the iPhone, perhaps as early as mid-2009, now that it seems that the ATT exclusive is only for two years.
I'd say that AT&T is ahead of Verizon since the iPhone's introduction. I'm also not convinced about the 2 year deal or if Apple will ever do a CDMA version, despite the 500M CDMA subscribers throughout the world.
I'd say that AT&T is ahead of Verizon since the iPhone's introduction. I'm also not convinced about the 2 year deal or if Apple will ever do a CDMA version, despite the 500M CDMA subscribers throughout the world.
ATT is probably slightly ahead at the moment, because they had a monster Q4 in 2007. However, much as we'd like to pin it all on the iPhone, it was actually ATT's prepay products that were largely responsible... they accounted for over half of ATT's net adds during that (and some other) recent quarters. GoPhone is actually ATT's hero right now.
Far as the 2-year deal goes, well, considering Apple's now starting to bail on the single-carrier exclusive model (and wisely so), we'd all better hope the ATT deal is only two years.
Finally, I think a CDMA model is all but inevitable... it'll cost Apple far less to R&D a CDMA model than what they'll make back on sales to a worldwide market of 430 million (and growing) people. Yah, many of the CDMA carriers will be going to LTE (and WiMax), but those networks won't be fully rolled out for a couple of years yet.
Even Motorola, the class dunce among phone makers, was smart enough to do a CDMA verision of the RAZR, and they apparently did quite well with it, because they keep offering it and newer models as well.
It's pretty much a wash, actually. The net subscriber ads war between ATT and Verizon has been a back-and-forth dogfight of late (preceded by years of Verizon mostly winning):
They also split the two most recent quarters (which aren't on the chart)... ATT won Q4 2007, Verizon won Q1 2008. So over the past 7 quarters, the tally is Verizon 4, ATT 3, if one cares about such things.
For some companies more than others. Verizon does a very good job on keeping churn down and consistently wins there:
And ARPU? Verizon consistently beats ATT, but both are consistently beaten by Alltel and Sprint (this is one of Sprint's very few silver linings of late):
Hope the info was of some use.
.
All that really shows it that the bigger companies are pretty close, particularly AT&T and Verison.
All that really shows it that the bigger companies are pretty close, particularly AT&T and Verison.
Which was kinda the point.
It also shows that Verizon consistently beats ATT in churn/customer loyalty and ARPU too... though I'd say the latter metric is overrated. Sprint, for example, has fabulous ARPU, but is currently self-destructing.
AT&T didn't attract massive net adds, it was Tracfone that did the job for the past 2 years.
As for ARPU, it's the law of the averages. Smaller carriers will have higher ARPU's than larger carriers --- because they can target a specific customer base.
It also shows that Verizon consistently beats ATT in churn/customer loyalty and ARPU too... though I'd say the latter metric is overrated. Sprint, for example, has fabulous ARPU, but is currently self-destructing.
.
Except that the data is too old to have any meaning in regard to the iPhone. It just gets in on the first quarter it was sold, and that shows the first real gain AT&T made against Verison.
So if anything, it has the beginning of the turnaround, but then cuts off, proving nothing about the current situation.
Except that the data is too old to have any meaning in regard to the iPhone. It just gets in on the first quarter it was sold, and that shows the first real gain AT&T made against Verison.
So if anything, it has the beginning of the turnaround, but then cuts off, proving nothing about the current situation.
Edit- Actually, wasn't Q2 2007 the first quarter the iPhone was sold? ATT lost that quarter.
Situation after the chart: ATT had a monster Q4 2007, beating VZW in net adds by quite a lot, but 56% of ATT's net adds were prepay (something like 1.5m, to the iPhone's 900k)... so, yay GoPhone and TracPhone. Q1 2008? Verizon shakes it off and beats ATT in net adds. ATT's results continue to be heavily prepay-dependent. Churn in both quarters? Same old story... VZW smokes ATT. ARPU? Same old story, VZW narrowly ahead of ATT, but Sprint remains ARPU champ, despite crashing and burning otherwise.
Edit- Actually, wasn't Q2 2007 the first quarter the iPhone was sold? ATT lost that quarter.
Situation after the chart: ATT had a monster Q4 2007, beating VZW in net adds by quite a lot, but 56% of ATT's net adds were prepay (something like 1.5m, to the iPhone's 900k)... so, yay GoPhone and TracPhone. Q1 2008? Verizon shakes it off and beats ATT in net adds. ATT's results continue to be heavily prepay-dependent. Churn in both quarters? Same old story... VZW smokes ATT. ARPU? Same old story, VZW narrowly ahead of ATT, but Sprint remains ARPU champ, despite crashing and burning otherwise.
You know I follow this stuff, Mel.
.
And only 40% of those 900K iphones were new subcribers.
You guys talk about prepay as though its a bad word. They are still paying customers. Prepay is becoming more and more popular in Europe.
The reason Verizon has a higher ARPU is the same reason the iPhone would not have worked on Verizon. They nickel and dime you for everything.
Look at Europe's postpaid plans --- they are really really expensive.
Nickel and diming --- means one thing --- the people who actually pay for those things actually use those things. The average joe's are not subsidizing the geeks (like us in these forums).
Edit- Actually, wasn't Q2 2007 the first quarter the iPhone was sold? ATT lost that quarter.
Apple's 2nd fiscal quarter, but such charts that cover multiple companies tend to use the calender year as companies use different fiscal years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab
And only 40% of those 900K iphones were new subcribers.
Would you get off this false pandering. It's unfathomable why you think 40% is a low percentage when no other cell phone has even come close to moving as many people to a new carrier. This speaks volumes for AT&T's decision to back the iPhone.
You guys talk about prepay as though its a bad word. They are still paying customers.
It's not so much that prepay is bad, as it's not nearly as good as contract, from a carrier's point of view.
ARPU for prepay tends to be a lot lower than it is for contract (sometimes as low as half of contract), and churn tends to be way, waaaaaay higher for prepay (5-7% per month is not uncommon)... and churn is an expense for a carrier. \
Quote:
The reason Verizon has a higher ARPU is the same reason the iPhone would not have worked on Verizon. They nickel and dime you for everything.
I dunno... much of the difference between Verizon and ATT's ARPU seems to be due to data. Most recent figures for dataARPU:
Would you get off this false pandering. It's unfathomable why you think 40% is a low percentage when no other cell phone has even come close to moving as many people to a new carrier. This speaks volumes for AT&T's decision to back the iPhone.
I never said 40% is bad.
But I am saying that out of 2.7 million net adds in Q4, only 360K (40% of 900K) can be attributable to the iphone --- a 13.3% contribution.
It's not so much that prepay is bad, as it's not nearly as good as contract, from a carrier's point of view.
ARPU for prepay tends to be a lot lower than it is for contract (sometimes as low as half of contract), and churn tends to be way, waaaaaay higher for prepay (5-7% per month is not uncommon)... and churn is an expense for a carrier. \
This doesn't appear to be a significant problem for AT&T. Revenues and profits are better that ever.
Quote:
I dunno... much of the difference between Verizon and ATT's ARPU seems to be due to data. Most recent figures for dataARPU:
Verizon: $11.94
Sprint: $11.50
AT&T: $10.80
Oh it goes beyond data. People I know with Verizon are paying more than I for equal services. They also have to pay for services I pay nothing extra for.
But I am saying that out of 2.7 million net adds in Q4, only 360K (40% of 900K) can be attributable to the iphone --- a 13.3% contribution.
Again, you make that out to be poor. By your numbers, 13% of all new customers to AT&T came because of a single device, despite the higher than average initial price. Name one other carrier in any other market around the world who has gained anywhere near that percentage of new customers in a quarter because of a new device being offered on their network.
Oh it goes beyond data. People I know with Verizon are paying more than I for equal services. They also have to pay for services I pay nothing extra for.
People are willing to pay the extra premium for Verizon's service.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Again, you make that out to be poor. By your numbers, 13% of all new customers to AT&T came because of a single device, despite the higher than average initial price. Name one other carrier in any other market around the world who has gained anywhere near that percentage of new customers in a quarter because of a new device being offered on their network.
I am not saying that it's poor. I am saying that there are a million different OTHER reasons why AT&T attract their net adds.
This doesn't appear to be a significant problem for AT&T. Revenues and profits are better that ever.
It's all relative. Is ATT happy to take in all those prepay customers? Sure, even with the lower APRU and higher churn they bring. But do they wish they were getting Verizon-like postpaid(contract) numbers as well? You bet they do. The 3G iPhone should be of some help there.
Quote:
Oh it goes beyond data. People I know with Verizon are paying more than I for equal services. They also have to pay for services I pay nothing extra for.
And yet somehow Verizon always beats ATT in customer loyalty/churn. Kinda confirms what JD Power and Consumer Reports wireless surveys consistently say, which is that there's a quality gap between the two carries, in VZW's favor.
And, of course, some of the churn difference is due to ATT's higher reliance on prepaid. VZW actually has more postpaid customers than ATT does, total, but ATT has a lot more prepaid customers than VZW.
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab
I am not saying that it's poor. I am saying that there are a million different OTHER reasons why AT&T attract their net adds.
AT&T is not a ONE trick pony.
I'd tend to agree. There seems to be three major things fueling ATT's growth right now: prepaid, iPhone, and the continuing self-destruction of Sprint... all those customers fleeing Sprint-Nextel have to go somewhere, after all.
One mistake that's being made here is that some people are trying to make it out that if the iPhone isn't the only reason, or almost the only reason why people are crossing over to AT&T, then it isn't very important. That's so wrong, it's difficult to emphasize it enough.
No matter what, it's just one model of phone. ONE!
No matter how good, or popular it is, it's just ONE.
How does anyone in their right mind expect ONE phone to make up a large part of anything?
It can't!
The fact is that the numbers at Verison and AT&T don't matter at all in this discussion. The only thing we're talking about is the impact that the ONE iPhone model has had. And that's pretty large for ONE phone.
How many phone models does AT&T sell, or give away? How many does Verison have? That's the question to ask.
If the iPhone made up 13% of all new customers that came to AT&T, how many other phones would it have been competing against?
IF AT&T is not as good as Verison, that tells us even more about how important the iPhone is. Makes it even more relevant. Since it's agreed in the industry that AT&T gets about $95+ from the iPhone compared to about $50 for all other phones, it's bringing up AT&T's numbers as well. Prepaid brings those numbers down.
There's no doubt that its brought a big boost to AT&T. Denying that is just not sustainable, or believable.
Comments
It's pretty much a wash, actually. The net subscriber ads war between ATT and Verizon has been a back-and-forth dogfight of late (preceded by 2 years of Verizon mostly winning):
<image>
They also split the two most recent quarters (which aren't on the chart)... ATT won Q4 2007, Verizon won Q1 2008. So over the past 7 quarters, the tally is Verizon 4, ATT 3, if one cares about such things.
For some companies more than others. Verizon does a very good job on keeping churn down and consistently wins there:
<image>
And ARPU? Verizon consistently beats ATT, but both are consistently beaten by Alltel and Sprint (this is one of Sprint's very few silver linings of late):
<image>
Hope the info was of some use.
Those charts start in 2006 and go to Quarter 3 of 2007. I assume it is using calender year quarters? If so, then AT&T secured 25% more subscribers over Verizon for the quarter in which the iPhone premiered. Since it's the iPhone and perhaps even AT&T's subsequent rampant 3G rollout I think we need to look at numbers for the post-iPhone release to make a determination of how well AT&T is faring.
Those charts start in 2006 and go to Quarter 3 of 2007. I assume it is using calender year quarters? If so, then AT&T secured 25% more subscribers over Verizon for the quarter in which the iPhone premiered. Since it's the iPhone and perhaps even AT&T's subsequent rampant 3G rollout I think we need to look at numbers for the post-iPhone release to make a determination of how well AT&T is faring.
If you want to consider only quarters in which the iPhone was available, then the score is 2 to 2.
Personally, it doesn't matter much to me. I'm sure that whatever effect the iPhone is/isn't having for ATT, the 3G iPhone will have a greater and quite significant impact. I'd also expect that Verizon will eventually do a deal for the iPhone, perhaps as early as mid-2009, now that it seems that the ATT exclusive is only for two years.
.
If you want to consider only quarters in which the iPhone was available, then the score is 2 to 2.
Personally, it doesn't matter much to me. I'm sure that whatever effect the iPhone is/isn't having for ATT, the 3G iPhone will have a greater and quite significant impact. I'd also expect that Verizon will eventually do a deal for the iPhone, perhaps as early as mid-2009, now that it seems that the ATT exclusive is only for two years.
I'd say that AT&T is ahead of Verizon since the iPhone's introduction. I'm also not convinced about the 2 year deal or if Apple will ever do a CDMA version, despite the 500M CDMA subscribers throughout the world.
I'd say that AT&T is ahead of Verizon since the iPhone's introduction. I'm also not convinced about the 2 year deal or if Apple will ever do a CDMA version, despite the 500M CDMA subscribers throughout the world.
ATT is probably slightly ahead at the moment, because they had a monster Q4 in 2007. However, much as we'd like to pin it all on the iPhone, it was actually ATT's prepay products that were largely responsible... they accounted for over half of ATT's net adds during that (and some other) recent quarters. GoPhone is actually ATT's hero right now.
Far as the 2-year deal goes, well, considering Apple's now starting to bail on the single-carrier exclusive model (and wisely so), we'd all better hope the ATT deal is only two years.
Finally, I think a CDMA model is all but inevitable... it'll cost Apple far less to R&D a CDMA model than what they'll make back on sales to a worldwide market of 430 million (and growing) people. Yah, many of the CDMA carriers will be going to LTE (and WiMax), but those networks won't be fully rolled out for a couple of years yet.
Even Motorola, the class dunce among phone makers, was smart enough to do a CDMA verision of the RAZR, and they apparently did quite well with it, because they keep offering it and newer models as well.
.
It's pretty much a wash, actually. The net subscriber ads war between ATT and Verizon has been a back-and-forth dogfight of late (preceded by years of Verizon mostly winning):
They also split the two most recent quarters (which aren't on the chart)... ATT won Q4 2007, Verizon won Q1 2008. So over the past 7 quarters, the tally is Verizon 4, ATT 3, if one cares about such things.
For some companies more than others. Verizon does a very good job on keeping churn down and consistently wins there:
And ARPU? Verizon consistently beats ATT, but both are consistently beaten by Alltel and Sprint (this is one of Sprint's very few silver linings of late):
Hope the info was of some use.
.
All that really shows it that the bigger companies are pretty close, particularly AT&T and Verison.
All that really shows it that the bigger companies are pretty close, particularly AT&T and Verison.
Which was kinda the point.
It also shows that Verizon consistently beats ATT in churn/customer loyalty and ARPU too... though I'd say the latter metric is overrated. Sprint, for example, has fabulous ARPU, but is currently self-destructing.
.
As for ARPU, it's the law of the averages. Smaller carriers will have higher ARPU's than larger carriers --- because they can target a specific customer base.
Which was kinda the point.
It also shows that Verizon consistently beats ATT in churn/customer loyalty and ARPU too... though I'd say the latter metric is overrated. Sprint, for example, has fabulous ARPU, but is currently self-destructing.
.
Except that the data is too old to have any meaning in regard to the iPhone. It just gets in on the first quarter it was sold, and that shows the first real gain AT&T made against Verison.
So if anything, it has the beginning of the turnaround, but then cuts off, proving nothing about the current situation.
Except that the data is too old to have any meaning in regard to the iPhone. It just gets in on the first quarter it was sold, and that shows the first real gain AT&T made against Verison.
So if anything, it has the beginning of the turnaround, but then cuts off, proving nothing about the current situation.
Edit- Actually, wasn't Q2 2007 the first quarter the iPhone was sold? ATT lost that quarter.
Situation after the chart: ATT had a monster Q4 2007, beating VZW in net adds by quite a lot, but 56% of ATT's net adds were prepay (something like 1.5m, to the iPhone's 900k)... so, yay GoPhone and TracPhone. Q1 2008? Verizon shakes it off and beats ATT in net adds. ATT's results continue to be heavily prepay-dependent. Churn in both quarters? Same old story... VZW smokes ATT. ARPU? Same old story, VZW narrowly ahead of ATT, but Sprint remains ARPU champ, despite crashing and burning otherwise.
You know I follow this stuff, Mel.
.
The reason Verizon has a higher ARPU is the same reason the iPhone would not have worked on Verizon. They nickel and dime you for everything.
Edit- Actually, wasn't Q2 2007 the first quarter the iPhone was sold? ATT lost that quarter.
Situation after the chart: ATT had a monster Q4 2007, beating VZW in net adds by quite a lot, but 56% of ATT's net adds were prepay (something like 1.5m, to the iPhone's 900k)... so, yay GoPhone and TracPhone. Q1 2008? Verizon shakes it off and beats ATT in net adds. ATT's results continue to be heavily prepay-dependent. Churn in both quarters? Same old story... VZW smokes ATT. ARPU? Same old story, VZW narrowly ahead of ATT, but Sprint remains ARPU champ, despite crashing and burning otherwise.
You know I follow this stuff, Mel.
.
And only 40% of those 900K iphones were new subcribers.
You guys talk about prepay as though its a bad word. They are still paying customers. Prepay is becoming more and more popular in Europe.
The reason Verizon has a higher ARPU is the same reason the iPhone would not have worked on Verizon. They nickel and dime you for everything.
Look at Europe's postpaid plans --- they are really really expensive.
Nickel and diming --- means one thing --- the people who actually pay for those things actually use those things. The average joe's are not subsidizing the geeks (like us in these forums).
Edit- Actually, wasn't Q2 2007 the first quarter the iPhone was sold? ATT lost that quarter.
Apple's 2nd fiscal quarter, but such charts that cover multiple companies tend to use the calender year as companies use different fiscal years.
And only 40% of those 900K iphones were new subcribers.
Would you get off this false pandering. It's unfathomable why you think 40% is a low percentage when no other cell phone has even come close to moving as many people to a new carrier. This speaks volumes for AT&T's decision to back the iPhone.
You guys talk about prepay as though its a bad word. They are still paying customers.
It's not so much that prepay is bad, as it's not nearly as good as contract, from a carrier's point of view.
ARPU for prepay tends to be a lot lower than it is for contract (sometimes as low as half of contract), and churn tends to be way, waaaaaay higher for prepay (5-7% per month is not uncommon)... and churn is an expense for a carrier.
The reason Verizon has a higher ARPU is the same reason the iPhone would not have worked on Verizon. They nickel and dime you for everything.
I dunno... much of the difference between Verizon and ATT's ARPU seems to be due to data. Most recent figures for data ARPU:
Verizon: $11.94
Sprint: $11.50
AT&T: $10.80
T-Mobile at $8.50
http://www.chetansharma.com/blog/200...pdate-q1-2008/
.
Would you get off this false pandering. It's unfathomable why you think 40% is a low percentage when no other cell phone has even come close to moving as many people to a new carrier. This speaks volumes for AT&T's decision to back the iPhone.
I never said 40% is bad.
But I am saying that out of 2.7 million net adds in Q4, only 360K (40% of 900K) can be attributable to the iphone --- a 13.3% contribution.
It's not so much that prepay is bad, as it's not nearly as good as contract, from a carrier's point of view.
ARPU for prepay tends to be a lot lower than it is for contract (sometimes as low as half of contract), and churn tends to be way, waaaaaay higher for prepay (5-7% per month is not uncommon)... and churn is an expense for a carrier.
This doesn't appear to be a significant problem for AT&T. Revenues and profits are better that ever.
I dunno... much of the difference between Verizon and ATT's ARPU seems to be due to data. Most recent figures for data ARPU:
Verizon: $11.94
Sprint: $11.50
AT&T: $10.80
Oh it goes beyond data. People I know with Verizon are paying more than I for equal services. They also have to pay for services I pay nothing extra for.
I never said 40% is bad.
But I am saying that out of 2.7 million net adds in Q4, only 360K (40% of 900K) can be attributable to the iphone --- a 13.3% contribution.
Again, you make that out to be poor. By your numbers, 13% of all new customers to AT&T came because of a single device, despite the higher than average initial price. Name one other carrier in any other market around the world who has gained anywhere near that percentage of new customers in a quarter because of a new device being offered on their network.
Oh it goes beyond data. People I know with Verizon are paying more than I for equal services. They also have to pay for services I pay nothing extra for.
People are willing to pay the extra premium for Verizon's service.
Again, you make that out to be poor. By your numbers, 13% of all new customers to AT&T came because of a single device, despite the higher than average initial price. Name one other carrier in any other market around the world who has gained anywhere near that percentage of new customers in a quarter because of a new device being offered on their network.
I am not saying that it's poor. I am saying that there are a million different OTHER reasons why AT&T attract their net adds.
AT&T is not a ONE trick pony.
This doesn't appear to be a significant problem for AT&T. Revenues and profits are better that ever.
It's all relative. Is ATT happy to take in all those prepay customers? Sure, even with the lower APRU and higher churn they bring. But do they wish they were getting Verizon-like postpaid(contract) numbers as well? You bet they do. The 3G iPhone should be of some help there.
Oh it goes beyond data. People I know with Verizon are paying more than I for equal services. They also have to pay for services I pay nothing extra for.
And yet somehow Verizon always beats ATT in customer loyalty/churn. Kinda confirms what JD Power and Consumer Reports wireless surveys consistently say, which is that there's a quality gap between the two carries, in VZW's favor.
And, of course, some of the churn difference is due to ATT's higher reliance on prepaid. VZW actually has more postpaid customers than ATT does, total, but ATT has a lot more prepaid customers than VZW.
I am not saying that it's poor. I am saying that there are a million different OTHER reasons why AT&T attract their net adds.
AT&T is not a ONE trick pony.
I'd tend to agree. There seems to be three major things fueling ATT's growth right now: prepaid, iPhone, and the continuing self-destruction of Sprint... all those customers fleeing Sprint-Nextel have to go somewhere, after all.
.
No matter what, it's just one model of phone. ONE!
No matter how good, or popular it is, it's just ONE.
How does anyone in their right mind expect ONE phone to make up a large part of anything?
It can't!
The fact is that the numbers at Verison and AT&T don't matter at all in this discussion. The only thing we're talking about is the impact that the ONE iPhone model has had. And that's pretty large for ONE phone.
How many phone models does AT&T sell, or give away? How many does Verison have? That's the question to ask.
If the iPhone made up 13% of all new customers that came to AT&T, how many other phones would it have been competing against?
IF AT&T is not as good as Verison, that tells us even more about how important the iPhone is. Makes it even more relevant. Since it's agreed in the industry that AT&T gets about $95+ from the iPhone compared to about $50 for all other phones, it's bringing up AT&T's numbers as well. Prepaid brings those numbers down.
There's no doubt that its brought a big boost to AT&T. Denying that is just not sustainable, or believable.