That's because Verizon is a well-run company. I wonder how much worse AT&T would have done without the iPhone?
The problem is that AT&T let the wolf in --- now every iphone carrier is crying out the iphone is the trojan horse that is killing my business. AT&T would have done better financially without the iphone.
That number is voice subscribers (retail + MVNO). Verizon Wireless also had 7 million+ ereaders/connected devices. When you combine the two numbers --- you get 99.7 million subscribers in Q2.
AT&T has about 85 million voice subscribers (retail + MVNO) and 8 million ereaders/connected devices/ipads --- with a combine total of 93 million subscribers in Q3 (page 9).
That number is voice subscribers (retail + MVNO). Verizon Wireless also had 7 million+ ereaders/connected devices. When you combine the two numbers --- you get 99.9 million subscribers in Q2.
AT&T has about 86 million voice subscribers (retail + MVNO) and 7 million ereaders/connected devices/ipads --- with a combine total of 93 million subscribers in Q3.
Either you didn?t read or count what I posted, or simply chose to ignore everything I wrote, because I clearly left you a link from Verizon and quoted their words from their site stating 92.1 million. You?re grasping at straws again trying to include a category that Verizon themselves don?t include in their regular wireless customers. Seriously, Samab, I think you are better than that.
Either you didn?t read or count what I posted, or simply chose to ignore everything I wrote, because I clearly left you a link from Verizon and quoted their words from their site stating 92.1 million. You?re grasping at straws again trying to include a category that Verizon themselves don?t include in their regular wireless customers. Seriously, Samab, I think you are better than that.
When you argue with me, you look like a fool (page 8).
Tell us again how Verizon’s own press release is wrong and you are right?
edit: And from the link you supplied: 86.2 million retail customers; 92.1 million total customers, after divestitures and conforming adjustments related to the Alltel acquisition.
Funny how Verizon’s numbers match up with the numbers I posted from Verizon’s site.
Tell us again how Verizon’s own press release is wrong and you are right?
Which one is more official --- the wall street earnings report or press release.
When there are differences between 2 VZ documents --- the one that is going to the SEC is the official one.
What is your point anyway?
If you just count voice subscribers only, VZ is about 7 million subscribers larger. If you count also ereaders/connected devices, VZ is also about 7 million subscribers larger.
Actually Verizon's share price has done BETTER than AT&T's share price since June 2007 when the iphone was launched.
The iPhone has done NOTHING to AT&T's bottomline.
Here's a tip for you ... share price has little or no bearing on the bottom line ... a.k.a. ... PROFIT .... don't believe me? .. check out MSFT ...today it closed at 25.42 and in Aug/06 it was at 25.79. Do you honestly think MSFT hasn't been making money all these years. Get real.
Here's a tip for you ... share price has little or no bearing on the bottom line ... a.k.a. ... PROFIT .... don't believe me? .. check out MSFT ...today it closed at 25.42 and in Aug/06 it was at 25.79. Do you honestly think MSFT hasn't been making money all these years. Get real.
Here's a tip for you? You are comparing high-tech stocks which wall street only cares about growth vs. Ma Bell companies which give steady dividend.
And what's the point of having a fast network if you can't get a good signal?
Record sales, record low return rates, record low churn, record growth. AT&T must be doing something right. With over 90 million customers, you will always have a few, vocal, unhappy ones. It's too bad that you can't get a good signal.
As far as the Apple Insider forum is concerned, Verizon is a crap company. Like adobe and consumer reports.
At least until they get the Steve Jobs seal of approval next year.
No. Not really. Don't presume to think that you speak for all of us.
I've had Verizon for eight years. I've had my current phone for five of those. In November when my local store starts being passed out SIMs, I'll see if I can cut a deal with them that allows me to upgrade to my 1st gen iPhone in exchange for them being allowed to locally advertise iPhone compatibility.
AT&T now has 92.8 million subs, which is more than Verizon had on it’s last results for the June quarter with 92.1 million. It’s possible that AT&T might be top dog tomorrow, just squeaking by Verizon in net adds.
There's honestly very little chance of that happening. As you know, Verizon reports Friday morning, and they're all but assured of posting more than 700k net adds.
So AT&T will remain number two (no pun intended).
Why we Apple fans would still care at all, what with AT&T's iPhone exclusivity having become a boat anchor on Apple's US iPhone sales (even as good as they are), and helping open the door for Android here, is beyond me.
Multi-carrier in the US can't come soon enough. But I was saying that two years ago, and ppl were saying I was crazy. Nope, guess not.
There was never a iphone honeymoon at AT&T. Verizon's share price has done better than AT&T's share price since June 2007.
This.
VZW, while evil, is well run and knows how to milk their customers.
ATT is inefficient, bloated and bungles things repeatedly but has semi-decent customer service.
ATT without the iPhone would have probably slipped massively and might even be in 3rd place. Remember, ATT only got where they were because of acquisitions not because they had the strongest value proposition (with the exception of the iPhone).
Why we Apple fans would still care at all, what with AT&T's iPhone exclusivity having become a boat anchor on Apple's US iPhone sales (even as good as they are), and helping open the door for Android here, is beyond me.
Multi-carrier in the US can't come soon enough. But I was saying that two years ago, and ppl were saying I was crazy. Nope, guess not.
I care the way we care about outcomes without having a vest interest in the players themselves. Competition is conflict is entertainment.
I?m not only expecting a Verizon phone next year (or other carriers), I?m looking forward to it. The sales will be through the roof the stock will on growing. I?ll still use AT&T as I have no issues and their data speeds are tops in my area and I?ve have better service with them than any other carrier I?ve used, and I?m on an Unlimited plan.
As for the exclusivity, there are many factors involved. Like the cost of breaking the contract compared to the benefit they?d receive for doing it. A potential lack of ability to produce GSM/3GSM and CDMA/EV-DO handsets in quantity needed when they can?t produce enough of the one as it is (that new factory should online soon), and/or an inability to get Verizon to ink a deal Apple is comfortable with and vice versa. Verizon and Apple are similar in being Alpha in their areas of business and have histories of controlling their ?partners? to an extreme with little to no compromise.
(PS: Dont bother with this samab guy; he'll change the subject when loses the argument. Then goes into cold storage until the next Verizon story appears. Probably works in IR or PR for Verizon).
Last year I had no reception problems with ATT. Within the last three months the calls are dropping like flies. With all the new ATT signups in LA, no wonder ATT has suspended its advertising highlighting best reception. NO BARS is getting too common.
Let's GO VERIZON. My contract with ATT is up...let's connect.
I care the way we care about outcomes without having a vest interest in the players themselves. Competition is conflict is entertainment.
That may be true for you, but I think many Apple fans, at least here, have internalized some sort of "AT&T is good, all other wireless carriers suck" -mentality, based solely on the fact of who currently is offering the iPhone in the US.
It's a very simplistic POV, I'm sure you'll agree.
Quote:
I’m not only expecting a Verizon phone next year (or other carriers), I’m looking forward to it.
Me too. AT&T is pretty terrible where I live, VZ is much better.
Quote:
As for the exclusivity, there are many factors involved. Like the cost of breaking the contract compared to the benefit they’d receive for doing it. A potential lack of ability to produce GSM/3GSM and CDMA/EV-DO handsets in quantity needed when they can’t produce enough of the one as it is (that new factory should online soon), and/or an inability to get Verizon to ink a deal Apple is comfortable with and vice versa. Verizon and Apple are similar in being Alpha in their areas of business and have histories of controlling their “partners” to an extreme with little to no compromise.
Well, I think you know capacity wouldn't be that huge of a barrier to going multi-carrier in the US... you just contract out more Chinese or Taiwanese capacity, though of course there is ramp-up time and teething problems..... the big worry though is correctly PREDICTING demand, as much as anything else. But, if they can do it next year (as seems likely), they could've done it in '08 or '09.
At least we best hope so, or else we will have iPhone shortages the likes of which have NEVER been seen before.
But it's all kind of just smoke compared to the real reasons why it didn't happen before, which you allude to... both VZ and Apple thought the other company needed the deal more than they did. So they weren't willing to budge.
Now, with Android on the rise, Apple has finally been proven wrong in this. Verizon would still LOVE to have the iPhone, no doubt, but they don't HAVE to have it. They can be Android Central, along with some RIM and WM7. But if Apple wants to stop Android in its tracks (and I believe they really REALLY do) then it's HUGE for them if they can invade Android's US stronghold, which is Verizon.
It'll be interesting to see where the compromises end up, and who got what out of the deal... which we won't know 'til a Verizon iPhone ships.
Now, with Android on the rise, Apple has finally been proven wrong in this. Verizon would still LOVE to have the iPhone, no doubt, but they don't HAVE to have it. They can be Android Central, along with some RIM and WM7. But if Apple wants to stop Android in its tracks (and I believe they really REALLY do) then it's HUGE for them if they can invade Android's US stronghold, which is Verizon.
I don?t think Android can be stopped in terms of marketshare. It?s the "soup kitchen" mobile OS for the downtrodden and impoverished handset vendors. Completely free and they can do what they want with it. I don?t see how Apple put a stop to that when they will continue to be the only vendor using iOS on an handset.
I do think that Apple will continue to pull more and more revenue and profits from the industry, but I don?t see iOS for the iPhone ever topping Andorid OS for handsets again.
Comments
Verizon has something like 99.9 million subscribers.
Counting eReaders? Um? no!
That's because Verizon is a well-run company. I wonder how much worse AT&T would have done without the iPhone?
The problem is that AT&T let the wolf in --- now every iphone carrier is crying out the iphone is the trojan horse that is killing my business. AT&T would have done better financially without the iphone.
Counting eReaders? Um… no!
That number is voice subscribers (retail + MVNO). Verizon Wireless also had 7 million+ ereaders/connected devices. When you combine the two numbers --- you get 99.7 million subscribers in Q2.
http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/...nks/2010-07-23
AT&T has about 85 million voice subscribers (retail + MVNO) and 8 million ereaders/connected devices/ipads --- with a combine total of 93 million subscribers in Q3 (page 9).
http://www.att.com/Investor/Growth_P...ster_Q3_10.pdf
That number is voice subscribers (retail + MVNO). Verizon Wireless also had 7 million+ ereaders/connected devices. When you combine the two numbers --- you get 99.9 million subscribers in Q2.
AT&T has about 86 million voice subscribers (retail + MVNO) and 7 million ereaders/connected devices/ipads --- with a combine total of 93 million subscribers in Q3.
Either you didn?t read or count what I posted, or simply chose to ignore everything I wrote, because I clearly left you a link from Verizon and quoted their words from their site stating 92.1 million. You?re grasping at straws again trying to include a category that Verizon themselves don?t include in their regular wireless customers. Seriously, Samab, I think you are better than that.
Either you didn?t read or count what I posted, or simply chose to ignore everything I wrote, because I clearly left you a link from Verizon and quoted their words from their site stating 92.1 million. You?re grasping at straws again trying to include a category that Verizon themselves don?t include in their regular wireless customers. Seriously, Samab, I think you are better than that.
When you argue with me, you look like a fool (page 8).
http://investor.verizon.com/news/201...32803994706908
(Page 5)
http://investor.verizon.com/financia...32803994706908
When you argue with me, you look like a fool (page 8).
http://investor.verizon.com/news/201...32803994706908
(Page 5)
http://investor.verizon.com/financia...32803994706908
And again you miss theTell us again how Verizon’s own press release is wrong and you are right?
edit: And from the link you supplied: 86.2 million retail customers; 92.1 million total customers, after divestitures and conforming adjustments related to the Alltel acquisition.
Funny how Verizon’s numbers match up with the numbers I posted from Verizon’s site.
And again you miss theTell us again how Verizon’s own press release is wrong and you are right?
Which one is more official --- the wall street earnings report or press release.
When there are differences between 2 VZ documents --- the one that is going to the SEC is the official one.
What is your point anyway?
If you just count voice subscribers only, VZ is about 7 million subscribers larger. If you count also ereaders/connected devices, VZ is also about 7 million subscribers larger.
Actually Verizon's share price has done BETTER than AT&T's share price since June 2007 when the iphone was launched.
The iPhone has done NOTHING to AT&T's bottomline.
Here's a tip for you ... share price has little or no bearing on the bottom line ... a.k.a. ... PROFIT .... don't believe me? .. check out MSFT ...today it closed at 25.42 and in Aug/06 it was at 25.79. Do you honestly think MSFT hasn't been making money all these years. Get real.
Here's a tip for you ... share price has little or no bearing on the bottom line ... a.k.a. ... PROFIT .... don't believe me? .. check out MSFT ...today it closed at 25.42 and in Aug/06 it was at 25.79. Do you honestly think MSFT hasn't been making money all these years. Get real.
Here's a tip for you? You are comparing high-tech stocks which wall street only cares about growth vs. Ma Bell companies which give steady dividend.
And what's the point of having a fast network if you can't get a good signal?
Record sales, record low return rates, record low churn, record growth. AT&T must be doing something right. With over 90 million customers, you will always have a few, vocal, unhappy ones. It's too bad that you can't get a good signal.
At least until they get the Steve Jobs seal of approval next year.
As far as the Apple Insider forum is concerned, Verizon is a crap company. Like adobe and consumer reports.
At least until they get the Steve Jobs seal of approval next year.
No. Not really. Don't presume to think that you speak for all of us.
I've had Verizon for eight years. I've had my current phone for five of those. In November when my local store starts being passed out SIMs, I'll see if I can cut a deal with them that allows me to upgrade to my 1st gen iPhone in exchange for them being allowed to locally advertise iPhone compatibility.
AT&T now has 92.8 million subs, which is more than Verizon had on it’s last results for the June quarter with 92.1 million. It’s possible that AT&T might be top dog tomorrow, just squeaking by Verizon in net adds.
There's honestly very little chance of that happening. As you know, Verizon reports Friday morning, and they're all but assured of posting more than 700k net adds.
So AT&T will remain number two (no pun intended).
Why we Apple fans would still care at all, what with AT&T's iPhone exclusivity having become a boat anchor on Apple's US iPhone sales (even as good as they are), and helping open the door for Android here, is beyond me.
Multi-carrier in the US can't come soon enough. But I was saying that two years ago, and ppl were saying I was crazy. Nope, guess not.
...
There was never a iphone honeymoon at AT&T. Verizon's share price has done better than AT&T's share price since June 2007.
This.
VZW, while evil, is well run and knows how to milk their customers.
ATT is inefficient, bloated and bungles things repeatedly but has semi-decent customer service.
ATT without the iPhone would have probably slipped massively and might even be in 3rd place. Remember, ATT only got where they were because of acquisitions not because they had the strongest value proposition (with the exception of the iPhone).
As far as the Apple Insider forum is concerned, Verizon is a crap company. Like Adobe and Consumer Reports.
At least until they get the Steve Jobs seal of approval next year.
That does seem to be the way it works around here.
...
Why we Apple fans would still care at all, what with AT&T's iPhone exclusivity having become a boat anchor on Apple's US iPhone sales (even as good as they are), and helping open the door for Android here, is beyond me.
Multi-carrier in the US can't come soon enough. But I was saying that two years ago, and ppl were saying I was crazy. Nope, guess not.
I care the way we care about outcomes without having a vest interest in the players themselves. Competition is conflict is entertainment.
I?m not only expecting a Verizon phone next year (or other carriers), I?m looking forward to it. The sales will be through the roof the stock will on growing. I?ll still use AT&T as I have no issues and their data speeds are tops in my area and I?ve have better service with them than any other carrier I?ve used, and I?m on an Unlimited plan.
As for the exclusivity, there are many factors involved. Like the cost of breaking the contract compared to the benefit they?d receive for doing it. A potential lack of ability to produce GSM/3GSM and CDMA/EV-DO handsets in quantity needed when they can?t produce enough of the one as it is (that new factory should online soon), and/or an inability to get Verizon to ink a deal Apple is comfortable with and vice versa. Verizon and Apple are similar in being Alpha in their areas of business and have histories of controlling their ?partners? to an extreme with little to no compromise.
Verizon has something like 99.9 million subscribers.
Counting eReaders? Um? no!
Ouch.
(PS: Dont bother with this samab guy; he'll change the subject when loses the argument. Then goes into cold storage until the next Verizon story appears. Probably works in IR or PR for Verizon).
Let's GO VERIZON. My contract with ATT is up...let's connect.
I care the way we care about outcomes without having a vest interest in the players themselves. Competition is conflict is entertainment.
That may be true for you, but I think many Apple fans, at least here, have internalized some sort of "AT&T is good, all other wireless carriers suck" -mentality, based solely on the fact of who currently is offering the iPhone in the US.
It's a very simplistic POV, I'm sure you'll agree.
I’m not only expecting a Verizon phone next year (or other carriers), I’m looking forward to it.
Me too. AT&T is pretty terrible where I live, VZ is much better.
As for the exclusivity, there are many factors involved. Like the cost of breaking the contract compared to the benefit they’d receive for doing it. A potential lack of ability to produce GSM/3GSM and CDMA/EV-DO handsets in quantity needed when they can’t produce enough of the one as it is (that new factory should online soon), and/or an inability to get Verizon to ink a deal Apple is comfortable with and vice versa. Verizon and Apple are similar in being Alpha in their areas of business and have histories of controlling their “partners” to an extreme with little to no compromise.
Well, I think you know capacity wouldn't be that huge of a barrier to going multi-carrier in the US... you just contract out more Chinese or Taiwanese capacity, though of course there is ramp-up time and teething problems..... the big worry though is correctly PREDICTING demand, as much as anything else. But, if they can do it next year (as seems likely), they could've done it in '08 or '09.
At least we best hope so, or else we will have iPhone shortages the likes of which have NEVER been seen before.
But it's all kind of just smoke compared to the real reasons why it didn't happen before, which you allude to... both VZ and Apple thought the other company needed the deal more than they did. So they weren't willing to budge.
Now, with Android on the rise, Apple has finally been proven wrong in this. Verizon would still LOVE to have the iPhone, no doubt, but they don't HAVE to have it. They can be Android Central, along with some RIM and WM7. But if Apple wants to stop Android in its tracks (and I believe they really REALLY do) then it's HUGE for them if they can invade Android's US stronghold, which is Verizon.
It'll be interesting to see where the compromises end up, and who got what out of the deal... which we won't know 'til a Verizon iPhone ships.
...
Now, with Android on the rise, Apple has finally been proven wrong in this. Verizon would still LOVE to have the iPhone, no doubt, but they don't HAVE to have it. They can be Android Central, along with some RIM and WM7. But if Apple wants to stop Android in its tracks (and I believe they really REALLY do) then it's HUGE for them if they can invade Android's US stronghold, which is Verizon.
I don?t think Android can be stopped in terms of marketshare. It?s the "soup kitchen" mobile OS for the downtrodden and impoverished handset vendors. Completely free and they can do what they want with it. I don?t see how Apple put a stop to that when they will continue to be the only vendor using iOS on an handset.
I do think that Apple will continue to pull more and more revenue and profits from the industry, but I don?t see iOS for the iPhone ever topping Andorid OS for handsets again.