I think his idea is that the iPhone is somehow a substitute for being really special, like Verizon, and that, therefore, while the iPhone may somewhat drive ATT subscription rates, it doesn't really count because it's cheating.
Which is the most convoluted rationale for "the iPhone ain't shit" I've seen yet, and that's saying something.
The values fluctuate by what Apple is charging the carriers in their business model.
You people think like geeks --- the iphone is valued as "X" as a hardware/software combination. I say that the iphone is valued as "Y" as hardware/software/revenue sharing combo.
The same iphone would value a lot more without the revenue sharing.
My point is that Verizon is doing slightly better than ATT at some data points. This largely has nothing to do directly with the iPhone itself.
I agree Verizons network coverage is its strength. This allows them to charge a premium but that does not mean it will continue to be this way.
Basically all wireless carriers suck --- as long as Verizon suck less than the other carriers, then they will continue to charge more money than other carriers and still bring in more net adds than other carriers.
The values fluctuate by what Apple is charging the carriers in their business model.
You people think like geeks --- the iphone is valued as "X" as a hardware/software combination. I say that the iphone is valued as "Y" as hardware/software/revenue sharing combo.
The same iphone would value a lot more without the revenue sharing.
Yeah, and it would be worth even more if Apple payed ATT to use it, but that's not the case, is it?
You want to apply some arbitrary delta between "what the iPhone actually makes ATT" and "what the iPhone could make ATT under conditions I make up" and point to that delta as a downside, but the fact is that "what the iPhone actually makes ATT" is still a net positive, and a hefty one at that.
Implying that the iPhone is underperforming because in a parallel universe it might be more profitable than it is, is, as I say, convoluted.
You guys attempt to make it all soundso much more dramatic than it really is. Verizon made 73 cents more in ARPU and only has a .5% better churn rate.In Q1
What you don't seem to get is that we're talking simply enormous numbers of subscribers here.
For carriers the size of Verizon and ATT, 73 cents more APRU amounts to around $150 million more in revenue, per quarter, and $600 million more per year. Now consider that Verizon has beaten ATT in APRU by something like double that in some quarters, and the difference comes to more than a $1 billion/year pace. So... a billion a year doesn't mean anything? Wha?
Oh, and churn... you gotta remember, those percentages are monthly, not quarterly.
For ATT, having a .5% higher churn than VZW's means that they lose a bit north of 1 million more customers per quarter to churn than if they had VZW's churn rate. Or, about 4.4 million more customers lost per year. That's the entire population of South Carolina... PER YEAR.
Again, far from chicken feed.
Quote:
Verizon was actually down in new subscribers quarter over quarter from last year, while ATT was up. ATT had 4.3% higher service revenue growth.
Again, unfortunately, a lot of ATT's growth was due to low-ARPU, high-churn prepaid customers. In postpaid/contract customers, VZW routinely out net-adds ATT... yup, even post-iPhone. Hopefully the 3G iPhone can help ATT here.
Quote:
Yes people are willing to pay the additional cost. But don't treat it like some mystery why Verizon has a higher ARPU. They charge more.
Not in voice... ATT and VZW's voice pricing is actually very similar. But elsewhere, yes, VZW does charge more... because they can. Because with their quality, coverage, and customer service, they can get away with it.
They can charge more than ATT in some areas and still come away with superior customer retention/lower churn.
Quote:
As prices continue to decline and other mobile companies improve services and phones. The tide could turn for Verizons pricing.
People have been saying this for years. If it is happening, it's happening extremely slowly. Basically, you can't say that the king is eventually going to fall off the hill... you have to push him. No one's really done that yet, though we are starting to see some dents in the armor. T-Mobile is consistently rated #1 in customer service, quarter after quarter, and ATT's prepay ops (and yes, the iPhone) have made them a force in overall net adds (though they still lag VZW in postpaid/contract).
Looking at Sprint's ARPU this is next to meaningless.
ARPU is never meaningless... wireless execs would back over their grandmothers to get ARPU up.
It's just that a high ARPU doesn't automagically make your network flawlessly reliable or your customer service a paragon of excellence. And some of Sprint's high ARPU was 'bought'... Nextel had a very high ARPU, which is part of what made them an attractive acquisition for Sprint.
Though, ironically, the merger has ended up being a disaster for Sprint.
This is like Bill Gates laughing that he receives millions of spam everyday --- mostly on how to make a quick buck.
The value that the iphone is adding to AT&T --- is directly related to how competent AT&T is. If you know what you are doing (like Bill Gates and Verizon), then the iphone's value is dramatically reduced.
I have no idea what you're trying to say here.
Who says that Gates is competent? Wiley, not quite honest, sure.
The numbers show that the iPhone is adding high value. The numbers have been posted here several times. I you simply want to avoid them, go ahead.
At any rate, it makes no sense. Why do you say that the more competent AT&T is, the less value the iPhone has to them?
Tracfone's 9+ million subcribers is included in AT&T's SEC filings. AT&T doesn't exclude Tracfone's numbers from their ARPU calculation.
Verizon Wireless does separate the numbers --- by giving out RETAIL numbers. They would state we have so many RETAIL subscribers, so many RETAIL postpaid subscribers and that their RETAIL postpaid subscribers have xxx amount in ARPU. Verizon has a bunch of OnStar MVNO subscribers --- which is under the WHOLESALE column.
It's listed under leased lines, etc. an entirely different business. It's not listed under ARPU from phones.
I think his idea is that the iPhone is somehow a substitute for being really special, like Verizon, and that, therefore, while the iPhone may somewhat drive ATT subscription rates, it doesn't really count because it's cheating.
Which is the most convoluted rationale for "the iPhone ain't shit" I've seen yet, and that's saying something.
The values fluctuate by what Apple is charging the carriers in their business model.
You people think like geeks --- the iphone is valued as "X" as a hardware/software combination. I say that the iphone is valued as "Y" as hardware/software/revenue sharing combo.
The same iphone would value a lot more without the revenue sharing.
You're describing its value to Apple, not AT&T. AT&T's value from the iPhone is the ARPU, which has been establised as being almost twice that of other phones from any company, AT&T, Verison, Sprint, etc.
Because with their quality, coverage, and customer service, they can get away with it.
While the quality of their network is pretty good, the quality of their service is not. Every Verison customer I know complains about the service. That's true from what I read in forums as well. I've not seen a reliable survey saying that their service was superior.
The value that the iphone is adding to AT&T --- is directly related to how competent AT&T is. If you know what you are doing (like Bill Gates and Verizon), then the iphone's value is dramatically reduced.
Basically true. I mean yes, it is true that Verizon is executing better overall than ATT... you see it in the churn numbers, data ARPU, 3G rollout, JD Power surveys, Consumer Reports, etc. etc. Verizon does the day-to-day stuff better than ATT ('cept for prepaid, of course. VZW's offering in that segment is quite weak).
But that doesn't mean that the iPhone is near-useless to Verizon. While they certainly don't need it the way ATT does, there are definitely aspects of it VZW finds very attractive, particularly now (or rather, come June).
For example, Verizon has a pretty nicely built-out 3G network, and more data customers than any US carrier... do you think they're not drooling over the possibility of having the 3G iPhone on it? Data ARPU, uber alles. And how about the 'cool phone gap'... as a CDMA carrier, VZW doesn't get as good a selection of phones as GSM carriers do, particularly at the high end. Sure, they're trying to fight back there (the touchscreen Blackberry Thunder is a VZW exclusive, for example), but nothing would convert the 'phone snob' segment of the market as much as a VZW 3G iPhone. And those tend to be the data-using, high-ARPU customers so prized by all the carriers.
So having the iPhone would be a very significant plus for VZW... they just don't need it the way ATT did/does. So I guess I'm basically agreeing with you, while expanding on the point.
While the quality of their network is pretty good, the quality of their service is not. Every Verison customer I know complains about the service. That's true from what I read in forums as well. I've not seen a reliable survey saying that their service was superior.
I assume you're talking customer service? All I can say is, my anecdotal evidence contradicts your anecdotal evidence... VZW CS has been pretty good to me. I've only met one true bonehead there, and he did call back to apologize to me once he figured out he was wrong and I was right.
Anyways, ancedotal evidence, both yours and mine, is limited. The national wireless CS surveys (JD Power) show a pretty consistent pattern of T-Mobile coming in first in CS, Verizon second, ATT third, and Sprint dead last (and Sprint's CS truly is a chamber of horrors).
Then there is Consumer Reports (which VZW routinely wins) and churn rates (again, routine VZW wins).
Not saying you haven't met your share of boneheads, but either CS standards/expectations in wireless are pretty low, or your experiences are somewhat atypical. Probably its a little of both.
PS- Latest JD Power wireless customer care survey I've read:
J.D. Power and Associates Reports:
T-Mobile Ranks Highest in Wireless Customer Care Performance for a
Seventh Consecutive Time
When Customer Care Issues Are Handled by an Automated Response System,
Wireless Provider Performance Drops Dramatically
WESTLAKE VILLAGE, Calif: 31 January 2008 — For a seventh consecutive reporting period, T-Mobile ranks highest among the five largest wireless carriers in customer service performance, according to the J.D. Power and Associates 2008 Wireless Customer Care Performance StudySM—Volume 1 released today.
Now in its sixth year, the semi-annual study provides a detailed report card on how well wireless providers service their customers in three point-of-contact methods: telephone calls with a service representative and/or automated response system (ARS); visits to a retail wireless store; and online Internet connection. Within each contact method, processing issues such as problem resolution efficiency and hold-time duration are also measured.
With an index score of 105, T-Mobile ranks highest in wireless customer care performance, followed by Verizon Wireless (101), Alltel, (99) and AT&T (99). In particular, customers report that T-Mobile displays strong performance in resolving problems in one contact and in its ARS point-of-contact method.
Now, iF Apple does come up with a line of phones, say a low cost, mid priced, and deluxe range, with a couple of storage options for each, THEN we may see a stampede!
Absolutely. But, we don't expect a stampede for the 3G iPhone in June?!?
I assume you're talking customer service? All I can say is, my anecdotal evidence contradicts your anecdotal evidence... VZW CS has been pretty good to me. I've only met one true bonehead there, and he did call back to apologize to me once he figured out he was wrong and I was right.
Anyways, ancedotal evidence, both yours and mine, is limited. The national wireless CS surveys (JD Power) show a pretty consistent pattern of T-Mobile coming in first in CS, Verizon second, ATT third, and Sprint dead last (and Sprint's CS truly is a chamber of horrors).
Then there is Consumer Reports (which VZW routinely wins) and churn rates (again, routine VZW wins).
Not saying you haven't met your share of boneheads, but either CS standards/expectations in wireless are pretty low, or your experiences are somewhat atypical. Probably its a little of both.
.
I don't ever recall CU saying that Verison's cust service was better. I haven't seen the others, care to share?
What you don't seem to get is that we're talking simply enormous numbers of subscribers here.
For carriers the size of Verizon and ATT, 73 cents more APRU amounts to around $150 million more in revenue, per quarter, and $600 million more per year. Now consider that Verizon has beaten ATT in APRU by something like double that in some quarters, and the difference comes to more than a $1 billion/year pace. So... a billion a year doesn't mean anything? Wha?
Oh, and churn... you gotta remember, those percentages are monthly, not quarterly.
For ATT, having a .5% higher churn than VZW's means that they lose a bit north of 1 million more customers per quarter to churn than if they had VZW's churn rate. Or, about 4.4 million more customers lost per year. That's the entire population of South Carolina... PER YEAR.
Again, far from chicken feed.
At the end of the story in all of this both are about equal in revenues. They both are making money hand over fist. Verizon is able to make as much money as ATT with around a million and a half less customers.
Quote:
Peoplebeen saying this for years. If it is happening, it's happening extremely slowly. Basically, you can't say that the king is eventually going to fall off the hill... you have to push him. No one's really done that yet, though we are starting to see some dents in the armor. T-Mobile is consistently rated #1 in customer service, quarter after quarter, and ATT's prepay ops (and yes, the iPhone) have made them a force in overall net adds (though they still lag VZW in postpaid/contract)..
I think this your perspective on the situation. I've never heard anyone call Verizon the king especially since ATT has the larger customer base. If anything Verizon is better at sqeezing more money from its customers.
PS- Latest JD Power wireless customer care survey I've read:
J.D. Power and Associates Reports:
T-Mobile Ranks Highest in Wireless Customer Care Performance for a
Seventh Consecutive Time
When Customer Care Issues Are Handled by an Automated Response System,
Wireless Provider Performance Drops Dramatically
WESTLAKE VILLAGE, Calif: 31 January 2008 ? For a seventh consecutive reporting period, T-Mobile ranks highest among the five largest wireless carriers in customer service performance, according to the J.D. Power and Associates 2008 Wireless Customer Care Performance StudySM?Volume 1 released today.
Now in its sixth year, the semi-annual study provides a detailed report card on how well wireless providers service their customers in three point-of-contact methods: telephone calls with a service representative and/or automated response system (ARS); visits to a retail wireless store; and online Internet connection. Within each contact method, processing issues such as problem resolution efficiency and hold-time duration are also measured.
With an index score of 105, T-Mobile ranks highest in wireless customer care performance, followed by Verizon Wireless (101), Alltel, (99) and AT&T (99). In particular, customers report that T-Mobile displays strong performance in resolving problems in one contact and in its ARS point-of-contact method.
It's $10.645 billion in service revenue (i.e. excluding handset revenue) for Q1 divided by 71.367 million subscribers (which specifically mentioned to be including resellers) divided by 3 (each quarter has 3 months) --- which is $49.72 (which is close enough to the actual ARPU number of $50.18).
If I use your method and divide by 62 million subscribers (Tracfone has about 9+ million subscribers) --- AT&T would have $57 ARPU.
You're describing its value to Apple, not AT&T. AT&T's value from the iPhone is the ARPU, which has been establised as being almost twice that of other phones from any company, AT&T, Verison, Sprint, etc.
Why do you ignore that over and again?
It's called supply AND demand --- value is determined by a 2 way street.
Comments
I think his idea is that the iPhone is somehow a substitute for being really special, like Verizon, and that, therefore, while the iPhone may somewhat drive ATT subscription rates, it doesn't really count because it's cheating.
Which is the most convoluted rationale for "the iPhone ain't shit" I've seen yet, and that's saying something.
The values fluctuate by what Apple is charging the carriers in their business model.
You people think like geeks --- the iphone is valued as "X" as a hardware/software combination. I say that the iphone is valued as "Y" as hardware/software/revenue sharing combo.
The same iphone would value a lot more without the revenue sharing.
My point is that Verizon is doing slightly better than ATT at some data points. This largely has nothing to do directly with the iPhone itself.
I agree Verizons network coverage is its strength. This allows them to charge a premium but that does not mean it will continue to be this way.
Basically all wireless carriers suck --- as long as Verizon suck less than the other carriers, then they will continue to charge more money than other carriers and still bring in more net adds than other carriers.
The values fluctuate by what Apple is charging the carriers in their business model.
You people think like geeks --- the iphone is valued as "X" as a hardware/software combination. I say that the iphone is valued as "Y" as hardware/software/revenue sharing combo.
The same iphone would value a lot more without the revenue sharing.
Yeah, and it would be worth even more if Apple payed ATT to use it, but that's not the case, is it?
You want to apply some arbitrary delta between "what the iPhone actually makes ATT" and "what the iPhone could make ATT under conditions I make up" and point to that delta as a downside, but the fact is that "what the iPhone actually makes ATT" is still a net positive, and a hefty one at that.
Implying that the iPhone is underperforming because in a parallel universe it might be more profitable than it is, is, as I say, convoluted.
You guys attempt to make it all soundso much more dramatic than it really is. Verizon made 73 cents more in ARPU and only has a .5% better churn rate.In Q1
What you don't seem to get is that we're talking simply enormous numbers of subscribers here.
For carriers the size of Verizon and ATT, 73 cents more APRU amounts to around $150 million more in revenue, per quarter, and $600 million more per year. Now consider that Verizon has beaten ATT in APRU by something like double that in some quarters, and the difference comes to more than a $1 billion/year pace. So... a billion a year doesn't mean anything? Wha?
Oh, and churn... you gotta remember, those percentages are monthly, not quarterly.
For ATT, having a .5% higher churn than VZW's means that they lose a bit north of 1 million more customers per quarter to churn than if they had VZW's churn rate. Or, about 4.4 million more customers lost per year. That's the entire population of South Carolina... PER YEAR.
Again, far from chicken feed.
Verizon was actually down in new subscribers quarter over quarter from last year, while ATT was up. ATT had 4.3% higher service revenue growth.
Again, unfortunately, a lot of ATT's growth was due to low-ARPU, high-churn prepaid customers. In postpaid/contract customers, VZW routinely out net-adds ATT... yup, even post-iPhone. Hopefully the 3G iPhone can help ATT here.
Yes people are willing to pay the additional cost. But don't treat it like some mystery why Verizon has a higher ARPU. They charge more.
Not in voice... ATT and VZW's voice pricing is actually very similar. But elsewhere, yes, VZW does charge more... because they can. Because with their quality, coverage, and customer service, they can get away with it.
They can charge more than ATT in some areas and still come away with superior customer retention/lower churn.
As prices continue to decline and other mobile companies improve services and phones. The tide could turn for Verizons pricing.
People have been saying this for years. If it is happening, it's happening extremely slowly. Basically, you can't say that the king is eventually going to fall off the hill... you have to push him. No one's really done that yet, though we are starting to see some dents in the armor. T-Mobile is consistently rated #1 in customer service, quarter after quarter, and ATT's prepay ops (and yes, the iPhone) have made them a force in overall net adds (though they still lag VZW in postpaid/contract).
.
Looking at Sprint's ARPU this is next to meaningless.
ARPU is never meaningless... wireless execs would back over their grandmothers to get ARPU up.
It's just that a high ARPU doesn't automagically make your network flawlessly reliable or your customer service a paragon of excellence. And some of Sprint's high ARPU was 'bought'... Nextel had a very high ARPU, which is part of what made them an attractive acquisition for Sprint.
Though, ironically, the merger has ended up being a disaster for Sprint.
.
This is like Bill Gates laughing that he receives millions of spam everyday --- mostly on how to make a quick buck.
The value that the iphone is adding to AT&T --- is directly related to how competent AT&T is. If you know what you are doing (like Bill Gates and Verizon), then the iphone's value is dramatically reduced.
I have no idea what you're trying to say here.
Who says that Gates is competent? Wiley, not quite honest, sure.
The numbers show that the iPhone is adding high value. The numbers have been posted here several times. I you simply want to avoid them, go ahead.
At any rate, it makes no sense. Why do you say that the more competent AT&T is, the less value the iPhone has to them?
Tracfone's 9+ million subcribers is included in AT&T's SEC filings. AT&T doesn't exclude Tracfone's numbers from their ARPU calculation.
Verizon Wireless does separate the numbers --- by giving out RETAIL numbers. They would state we have so many RETAIL subscribers, so many RETAIL postpaid subscribers and that their RETAIL postpaid subscribers have xxx amount in ARPU. Verizon has a bunch of OnStar MVNO subscribers --- which is under the WHOLESALE column.
It's listed under leased lines, etc. an entirely different business. It's not listed under ARPU from phones.
I think his idea is that the iPhone is somehow a substitute for being really special, like Verizon, and that, therefore, while the iPhone may somewhat drive ATT subscription rates, it doesn't really count because it's cheating.
Which is the most convoluted rationale for "the iPhone ain't shit" I've seen yet, and that's saying something.
I assume he likes to pay more.
The values fluctuate by what Apple is charging the carriers in their business model.
You people think like geeks --- the iphone is valued as "X" as a hardware/software combination. I say that the iphone is valued as "Y" as hardware/software/revenue sharing combo.
The same iphone would value a lot more without the revenue sharing.
You're describing its value to Apple, not AT&T. AT&T's value from the iPhone is the ARPU, which has been establised as being almost twice that of other phones from any company, AT&T, Verison, Sprint, etc.
Why do you ignore that over and again?
Because with their quality, coverage, and customer service, they can get away with it.
While the quality of their network is pretty good, the quality of their service is not. Every Verison customer I know complains about the service. That's true from what I read in forums as well. I've not seen a reliable survey saying that their service was superior.
The value that the iphone is adding to AT&T --- is directly related to how competent AT&T is. If you know what you are doing (like Bill Gates and Verizon), then the iphone's value is dramatically reduced.
Basically true. I mean yes, it is true that Verizon is executing better overall than ATT... you see it in the churn numbers, data ARPU, 3G rollout, JD Power surveys, Consumer Reports, etc. etc. Verizon does the day-to-day stuff better than ATT ('cept for prepaid, of course. VZW's offering in that segment is quite weak).
But that doesn't mean that the iPhone is near-useless to Verizon. While they certainly don't need it the way ATT does, there are definitely aspects of it VZW finds very attractive, particularly now (or rather, come June).
For example, Verizon has a pretty nicely built-out 3G network, and more data customers than any US carrier... do you think they're not drooling over the possibility of having the 3G iPhone on it? Data ARPU, uber alles. And how about the 'cool phone gap'... as a CDMA carrier, VZW doesn't get as good a selection of phones as GSM carriers do, particularly at the high end. Sure, they're trying to fight back there (the touchscreen Blackberry Thunder is a VZW exclusive, for example), but nothing would convert the 'phone snob' segment of the market as much as a VZW 3G iPhone. And those tend to be the data-using, high-ARPU customers so prized by all the carriers.
So having the iPhone would be a very significant plus for VZW... they just don't need it the way ATT did/does. So I guess I'm basically agreeing with you, while expanding on the point.
.
While the quality of their network is pretty good, the quality of their service is not. Every Verison customer I know complains about the service. That's true from what I read in forums as well. I've not seen a reliable survey saying that their service was superior.
I assume you're talking customer service? All I can say is, my anecdotal evidence contradicts your anecdotal evidence... VZW CS has been pretty good to me. I've only met one true bonehead there, and he did call back to apologize to me once he figured out he was wrong and I was right.
Anyways, ancedotal evidence, both yours and mine, is limited. The national wireless CS surveys (JD Power) show a pretty consistent pattern of T-Mobile coming in first in CS, Verizon second, ATT third, and Sprint dead last (and Sprint's CS truly is a chamber of horrors).
Then there is Consumer Reports (which VZW routinely wins) and churn rates (again, routine VZW wins).
Not saying you haven't met your share of boneheads, but either CS standards/expectations in wireless are pretty low, or your experiences are somewhat atypical. Probably its a little of both.
.
J.D. Power and Associates Reports:
T-Mobile Ranks Highest in Wireless Customer Care Performance for a
Seventh Consecutive Time
When Customer Care Issues Are Handled by an Automated Response System,
Wireless Provider Performance Drops Dramatically
WESTLAKE VILLAGE, Calif: 31 January 2008 — For a seventh consecutive reporting period, T-Mobile ranks highest among the five largest wireless carriers in customer service performance, according to the J.D. Power and Associates 2008 Wireless Customer Care Performance StudySM—Volume 1 released today.
Now in its sixth year, the semi-annual study provides a detailed report card on how well wireless providers service their customers in three point-of-contact methods: telephone calls with a service representative and/or automated response system (ARS); visits to a retail wireless store; and online Internet connection. Within each contact method, processing issues such as problem resolution efficiency and hold-time duration are also measured.
With an index score of 105, T-Mobile ranks highest in wireless customer care performance, followed by Verizon Wireless (101), Alltel, (99) and AT&T (99). In particular, customers report that T-Mobile displays strong performance in resolving problems in one contact and in its ARS point-of-contact method.
http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/new...spx?ID=2008018
.
Now, iF Apple does come up with a line of phones, say a low cost, mid priced, and deluxe range, with a couple of storage options for each, THEN we may see a stampede!
Absolutely. But, we don't expect a stampede for the 3G iPhone in June?!?
.
I assume you're talking customer service? All I can say is, my anecdotal evidence contradicts your anecdotal evidence... VZW CS has been pretty good to me. I've only met one true bonehead there, and he did call back to apologize to me once he figured out he was wrong and I was right.
Anyways, ancedotal evidence, both yours and mine, is limited. The national wireless CS surveys (JD Power) show a pretty consistent pattern of T-Mobile coming in first in CS, Verizon second, ATT third, and Sprint dead last (and Sprint's CS truly is a chamber of horrors).
Then there is Consumer Reports (which VZW routinely wins) and churn rates (again, routine VZW wins).
Not saying you haven't met your share of boneheads, but either CS standards/expectations in wireless are pretty low, or your experiences are somewhat atypical. Probably its a little of both.
.
I don't ever recall CU saying that Verison's cust service was better. I haven't seen the others, care to share?
What you don't seem to get is that we're talking simply enormous numbers of subscribers here.
For carriers the size of Verizon and ATT, 73 cents more APRU amounts to around $150 million more in revenue, per quarter, and $600 million more per year. Now consider that Verizon has beaten ATT in APRU by something like double that in some quarters, and the difference comes to more than a $1 billion/year pace. So... a billion a year doesn't mean anything? Wha?
Oh, and churn... you gotta remember, those percentages are monthly, not quarterly.
For ATT, having a .5% higher churn than VZW's means that they lose a bit north of 1 million more customers per quarter to churn than if they had VZW's churn rate. Or, about 4.4 million more customers lost per year. That's the entire population of South Carolina... PER YEAR.
Again, far from chicken feed.
At the end of the story in all of this both are about equal in revenues. They both are making money hand over fist. Verizon is able to make as much money as ATT with around a million and a half less customers.
Peoplebeen saying this for years. If it is happening, it's happening extremely slowly. Basically, you can't say that the king is eventually going to fall off the hill... you have to push him. No one's really done that yet, though we are starting to see some dents in the armor. T-Mobile is consistently rated #1 in customer service, quarter after quarter, and ATT's prepay ops (and yes, the iPhone) have made them a force in overall net adds (though they still lag VZW in postpaid/contract)..
I think this your perspective on the situation. I've never heard anyone call Verizon the king especially since ATT has the larger customer base. If anything Verizon is better at sqeezing more money from its customers.
PS- Latest JD Power wireless customer care survey I've read:
J.D. Power and Associates Reports:
T-Mobile Ranks Highest in Wireless Customer Care Performance for a
Seventh Consecutive Time
When Customer Care Issues Are Handled by an Automated Response System,
Wireless Provider Performance Drops Dramatically
WESTLAKE VILLAGE, Calif: 31 January 2008 ? For a seventh consecutive reporting period, T-Mobile ranks highest among the five largest wireless carriers in customer service performance, according to the J.D. Power and Associates 2008 Wireless Customer Care Performance StudySM?Volume 1 released today.
Now in its sixth year, the semi-annual study provides a detailed report card on how well wireless providers service their customers in three point-of-contact methods: telephone calls with a service representative and/or automated response system (ARS); visits to a retail wireless store; and online Internet connection. Within each contact method, processing issues such as problem resolution efficiency and hold-time duration are also measured.
With an index score of 105, T-Mobile ranks highest in wireless customer care performance, followed by Verizon Wireless (101), Alltel, (99) and AT&T (99). In particular, customers report that T-Mobile displays strong performance in resolving problems in one contact and in its ARS point-of-contact method.
http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/new...spx?ID=2008018
.
Ok, but it's a statistical tie. Meaningless. Even T-Mobile barely squeaks past, statistically.
It's listed under leased lines, etc. an entirely different business. It's not listed under ARPU from phones.
No such entry existing in their quarterly reports.
http://www.att.com/Investor/Growth_P...oad/master.pdf
It's $10.645 billion in service revenue (i.e. excluding handset revenue) for Q1 divided by 71.367 million subscribers (which specifically mentioned to be including resellers) divided by 3 (each quarter has 3 months) --- which is $49.72 (which is close enough to the actual ARPU number of $50.18).
If I use your method and divide by 62 million subscribers (Tracfone has about 9+ million subscribers) --- AT&T would have $57 ARPU.
You're describing its value to Apple, not AT&T. AT&T's value from the iPhone is the ARPU, which has been establised as being almost twice that of other phones from any company, AT&T, Verison, Sprint, etc.
Why do you ignore that over and again?
It's called supply AND demand --- value is determined by a 2 way street.
I don't ever recall CU saying that Verison's cust service was better. I haven't seen the others, care to share?
What was post #154, then? Ya got your JD Power customer care survey right there, with link.
Far as CU goes, yes, CU gives carriers an overall score in each metro area, based on several factors, customer service/care being one of them.
.