It is inaccurate to say that AT&T was unaffected by the Verizon iPhone launch. Sure growth at AT&T was 33%, but the real question is what would it have been if Verizon hadn't launched the iPhone? 40%? 50%? Thats the impact, the difference between 33% and what it would have been.
Also, retention offers at AT&T were greatly enhanced in order to achieve the stable iPhone churn, so indeed there was an impact.
It is inaccurate to say that AT&T was unaffected by the Verizon iPhone launch. Sure growth at AT&T was 33%, but the real question is what would it have been if Verizon hadn't launched the iPhone? 40%? 50%? Thats the impact, the difference between 33% and what it would have been.
Also, retention offers at AT&T were greatly enhanced in order to achieve the stable iPhone churn, so indeed there was an impact.
Of course, no way of knowing. Would surely have been higher, but I think they are happy with 33% growth. Many thought they would take a huge hit.
This definitely means less than 2 million iPads sold for the quarter. Bad news for the stock. Although it sounds like iPhone sales might help as they seem to be doing well.
Not necessarily. People get a 3g connection for when they aren't in a wifi spot. Don't assume because someone bough a 3g ipad that they intend to use the 3g on the ipad when the wireless works just fine with tethering to your iphone wirelessly.
A lot of 3G iPad2s also left the U.S. without being activated. *cough* *cough*
My thinking exactly. I would expect activations to go way up next quarter. The gray market is the reason that whenever stores get the iPad 2 in stock, the Verison iPad is the only version that is left after the first hour.
iPads with Wi-Fi seem far more cost effective especially with tethering abilities now available. I don't see iPads as a becoming major revenue stream for AT&T or Verizon other than via an iPhone's connection.
And ^^^that^^^ is why Ad-Droid can't seem to get it's foot into the door with tablets. They have to compete on price this time. Bogo's 'verboten".
ATT is not seeing many activations, but all GSM iPads had certainly sold out. Meaning that many GSM versions had left the country. Nobody cares about CDMA outside of US.
And ^^^that^^^ is why Ad-Droid can't seem to get it's foot into the door with tablets. They have to compete on price this time. Bogo's 'verboten".
Price will be less of an issue within a month. Announced wi-fi models are already price-matched or lower than entry iPad2's sell for. The problem for a while longer will be the OS. Honeycomb was released only because a couple of vendors were demanding it even tho it wasn't yet complete. Suppose it was devil if you do and devil if you don't. Perhaps IceCream will go a bit smoother later in the summer.
I've put off buying a 3G iPad2 because I want to find out which network I should get it on... this increased choice is causing me some heartburn:
1) AT&T 3G
HSPA+ so the iPad2 is usable and resellable overseas.
Lower pricing tier ($15) but lower data cap (250MB)
Faster data
OK coverage
2) Verizon 3G
Higher monthly pricing
Better (1GB) lower tier
slower data
Better coverage
3) Wifi only
Cheaper
Already have a wifi only ipad
Will hotspots become more prevalent?
As you can see, I'm in a bit of analysis paralysis here with the 18 different iPad2 options (including size and color)!
And I thought they were crazy to debut with 6 options last year for iPad1!
Choice 4 is .... move out of the USA to almost any other country where tethering is free with any decent data contract.
Seriously, it's only a matter of time before the whole "pay me extra to use the same data again," thing is gone for good. I'm amazed that no one in the USA seems upset about it. Anyone who's been abroad knows that this is a raw deal.
Heads up to anyone in the UK - T-Mobile are currently giving away 12 months of data (500MB per month) with every pre-pay SIM. The SIM is free but there is a minimum top-up of £10.
So that's £10 for a year's data. Not a bad deal at all.
Price will be less of an issue within a month. Announced wi-fi models are already price-matched or lower than entry iPad2's sell for. The problem for a while longer will be the OS. Honeycomb was released only because a couple of vendors were demanding it even tho it wasn't yet complete. Suppose it was devil if you do and devil if you don't. Perhaps IceCream will go a bit smoother later in the summer.
"IceCream", FrozenYogurt, or with Oreo crumbs on top will not make a difference. Ad-Droid tablets of any flavour, nor Playbooks will stop the iPad. HP's WebOS has a very good chance, and as I've said before, when Microsoft get's it's act together.
This year is the year of the iPad. All of the rest put together will not add up to even 1 quarter's sell-thru of the iPad. "Smoothy" sales also don't count. I specifically wrote "sell-thru" as in to real customers using the devices.
Tethering has killed the 3G requirement for eReaders, tablets, etc.
Overall, a solid quarter for AT&T despite the Verizon iPhone.
I can see how some will want it but as an iPhone owner the option to tether has made anything but the base model iPad pointless for my needs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin
Definitely not "definitely"!
It could simply mean, many iPad users did not sign up for service yet. The iPad does not require a service plan, therefor carrier numbers are not indicative of actual sales numbers.
That?s reasonable. I bought the iPad 3G last year and had no need to activate the 3G until I shipped it off to someone else when I bought an iPad 2. It was fun following it via MobileMe through the mail. For my iPad 2 I just went with WiFi.
Last year I bought the 3g 32gb. This year I got the wifi only...and less storage space. I use the ipad to improve my browsing experience. I don't surf using 3g, period. 3g is great on my iphone because I can use gps, look up a restaurant, or leisurely check my favorite sites when waiting for a train...I'm not going to use my ipad to do any of these because it isn't hiding in my pocket. Nor am I going to waste my time surfing over a 3g connection when I could be reading. I'm a touch typist, so when I surf I am used to looking things up at the speed of whim. It's one thing to surf in the ipad over a strong wifi connection...it's something much, much different to surf over 3g. Easy call...never used it, never miss it. Maybe I'll bother with that technology in ten years. For now, I simply can't go from surfing at the speed of my own whim to watching a page load for up to thirty seconds at a time. Thirty times longer is exactly that. Don't get me wrong, I think it's great for some uses. My girlfriend loves having 3g...but she isn't using it to surf...she might browse "a" website on the train, and will respond to a few emails. I think most users of the iPad are not "power users." I think they are browsers, tinkerers, and game players. Browsers outnumber power users...and browsing is better on wifi, period.
Honestly, people amaze me. Everyone wanted a Verizon iPhone, and now that it's out, people are suddenly backpedaling? It's bizarre.
Do people actually believe the FUD about slower speeds with verizon? (AT&T faster speeds are only in very specific parts of the country) Or is not being able to surf the net while on a call really that big a deal? Um, no. Not in the face of 2-3 dropped calls a day, which is typical for me and my AT&T iPhone.
Maybe we've had to suffer with AT&T so long that we've actually been blinded by them?
"IceCream", FrozenYogurt, or with Oreo crumbs on top will not make a difference. Ad-Droid tablets of any flavour, nor Playbooks will stop the iPad. HP's WebOS has a very good chance, and as I've said before, when Microsoft get's it's act together.
This year is the year of the iPad. All of the rest put together will not add up to even 1 quarter's sell-thru of the iPad. "Smoothy" sales also don't count. I specifically wrote "sell-thru" as in to real customers using the devices.
Then we actually agree! Imagine that!
Price won't be the issue. But the OS might.
EDIT: By the way, the cute name-calling makes replies seem a little juvenile. You make good points. No need to resort to mockery of competition.
I believe that most who complained about AT&T switched to Verizon before it got the iPhone, hence the lack of impact to AT&T's numbers. I don't know that for a fact, but I know people who did just that, rather than put up with AT&T to get the iPhone: it depends on where you live.
EDIT: By the way, the cute name-calling makes replies seem a little juvenile. You make good points. No need to resort to mockery of competition.
Yes. You're right. Juvenile. Although it does get "their" attention, which I'm trying to point out when stating "Ad-Droid".
It is my firm belief that is why, and the only reason why, Google has decided to develop the platform in the first place: deliver more ads.
It's Google's fans that are constantly and consistently trying to point to some other motivation, like being an open-source good buddy, that I'm trying to warn about.
No I'm not a Google-hater by any means, but I do believe that, due to Google's true and ulterior motives, as well as their bottom-line success re: ads, that they are being evil and dastardly in setting up a lot of decent tech people for a big fall... or should I say... big FAIL.
I truly think Google is gonna get tired of it, as they have shown in the past, and bale on the project. They also truly are not as good in their labs, as they think are, since a good chunk of their projects are still "in the lab" to begin with....
...and... the Microsoft elephant has not quite entered the playground yet. Not a fan of theirs either... but they will need to be reckoned with sooner rather than later I suppose. Is Google up to it to battle Apple, Microsoft, & HP? I really don't think so... but that's my opinion.
So where were we? Uh ya... Verizon vs. AT&T... no comment. I'm in Germany where we all enjoy 3g, GSM, HSDPA, HSDPA+... and very shortly full LTE coverage. Na-na-nana-na! That's "juvenile"
And that may perhaps be what really started this spat between Google and Apple. Steve Jobs wanted to use Google and yes, Android, as a bulwark against Microsoft. Guess the idea was that between the two of them they could sandwich MS with Google grabbing web revenue on one side and offering mobile services that Apple didn't want to be distracted by (yet?), with a bonus of a few free Google apps drawing attention away from MS services. Apple would of course have the hardware side covered. Eventually Google didn't walk the same line that Mr. Jobs envisioned, reportedly concerned that one or two players could lock them out of their bread and butter ad placement revenue. Android development went further than Mr. Jobs was comfortable with, eventually pushing him to issue an issue an ultimatum to Google about multi-touch. And there we go.
So now we see Apple actually being pleasant to their old nemesis Microsoft again. I'm assuming in hopes of making the same play they wanted to run with Google against MS to begin with.
This definitely means less than 2 million iPads sold for the quarter. Bad news for the stock. Although it sounds like iPhone sales might help as they seem to be doing well.
Quarterly results just in. 4.69 millions iPads, stock up $10 in after hours trading. What was that you said about bad news for the stock? Again, where did you come up with your Debbie Downer predictions? Did you pull then out of your arse?
Comments
Also, retention offers at AT&T were greatly enhanced in order to achieve the stable iPhone churn, so indeed there was an impact.
It is inaccurate to say that AT&T was unaffected by the Verizon iPhone launch. Sure growth at AT&T was 33%, but the real question is what would it have been if Verizon hadn't launched the iPhone? 40%? 50%? Thats the impact, the difference between 33% and what it would have been.
Also, retention offers at AT&T were greatly enhanced in order to achieve the stable iPhone churn, so indeed there was an impact.
Of course, no way of knowing. Would surely have been higher, but I think they are happy with 33% growth. Many thought they would take a huge hit.
This definitely means less than 2 million iPads sold for the quarter. Bad news for the stock. Although it sounds like iPhone sales might help as they seem to be doing well.
Not necessarily. People get a 3g connection for when they aren't in a wifi spot. Don't assume because someone bough a 3g ipad that they intend to use the 3g on the ipad when the wireless works just fine with tethering to your iphone wirelessly.
A lot of 3G iPad2s also left the U.S. without being activated. *cough* *cough*
My thinking exactly. I would expect activations to go way up next quarter. The gray market is the reason that whenever stores get the iPad 2 in stock, the Verison iPad is the only version that is left after the first hour.
1) AT&T 3G
HSPA+ so the iPad2 is usable and resellable overseas.
Lower pricing tier ($15) but lower data cap (250MB)
Faster data
OK coverage
2) Verizon 3G
Higher monthly pricing
Better (1GB) lower tier
slower data
Better coverage
3) Wifi only
Cheaper
Already have a wifi only ipad
Will hotspots become more prevalent?
As you can see, I'm in a bit of analysis paralysis here with the 18 different iPad2 options (including size and color)!
And I thought they were crazy to debut with 6 options last year for iPad1!
iPads with Wi-Fi seem far more cost effective especially with tethering abilities now available. I don't see iPads as a becoming major revenue stream for AT&T or Verizon other than via an iPhone's connection.
And ^^^that^^^ is why Ad-Droid can't seem to get it's foot into the door with tablets. They have to compete on price this time. Bogo's 'verboten".
And ^^^that^^^ is why Ad-Droid can't seem to get it's foot into the door with tablets. They have to compete on price this time. Bogo's 'verboten".
Price will be less of an issue within a month. Announced wi-fi models are already price-matched or lower than entry iPad2's sell for. The problem for a while longer will be the OS. Honeycomb was released only because a couple of vendors were demanding it even tho it wasn't yet complete. Suppose it was devil if you do and devil if you don't. Perhaps IceCream will go a bit smoother later in the summer.
I've put off buying a 3G iPad2 because I want to find out which network I should get it on... this increased choice is causing me some heartburn:
1) AT&T 3G
HSPA+ so the iPad2 is usable and resellable overseas.
Lower pricing tier ($15) but lower data cap (250MB)
Faster data
OK coverage
2) Verizon 3G
Higher monthly pricing
Better (1GB) lower tier
slower data
Better coverage
3) Wifi only
Cheaper
Already have a wifi only ipad
Will hotspots become more prevalent?
As you can see, I'm in a bit of analysis paralysis here with the 18 different iPad2 options (including size and color)!
And I thought they were crazy to debut with 6 options last year for iPad1!
Choice 4 is .... move out of the USA to almost any other country where tethering is free with any decent data contract.
Seriously, it's only a matter of time before the whole "pay me extra to use the same data again," thing is gone for good. I'm amazed that no one in the USA seems upset about it. Anyone who's been abroad knows that this is a raw deal.
So that's £10 for a year's data. Not a bad deal at all.
Price will be less of an issue within a month. Announced wi-fi models are already price-matched or lower than entry iPad2's sell for. The problem for a while longer will be the OS. Honeycomb was released only because a couple of vendors were demanding it even tho it wasn't yet complete. Suppose it was devil if you do and devil if you don't. Perhaps IceCream will go a bit smoother later in the summer.
"IceCream", FrozenYogurt, or with Oreo crumbs on top will not make a difference. Ad-Droid tablets of any flavour, nor Playbooks will stop the iPad. HP's WebOS has a very good chance, and as I've said before, when Microsoft get's it's act together.
This year is the year of the iPad. All of the rest put together will not add up to even 1 quarter's sell-thru of the iPad. "Smoothy" sales also don't count. I specifically wrote "sell-thru" as in to real customers using the devices.
Tethering has killed the 3G requirement for eReaders, tablets, etc.
Overall, a solid quarter for AT&T despite the Verizon iPhone.
I can see how some will want it but as an iPhone owner the option to tether has made anything but the base model iPad pointless for my needs.
Definitely not "definitely"!
It could simply mean, many iPad users did not sign up for service yet. The iPad does not require a service plan, therefor carrier numbers are not indicative of actual sales numbers.
That?s reasonable. I bought the iPad 3G last year and had no need to activate the 3G until I shipped it off to someone else when I bought an iPad 2. It was fun following it via MobileMe through the mail. For my iPad 2 I just went with WiFi.
Do people actually believe the FUD about slower speeds with verizon? (AT&T faster speeds are only in very specific parts of the country) Or is not being able to surf the net while on a call really that big a deal? Um, no. Not in the face of 2-3 dropped calls a day, which is typical for me and my AT&T iPhone.
Maybe we've had to suffer with AT&T so long that we've actually been blinded by them?
"IceCream", FrozenYogurt, or with Oreo crumbs on top will not make a difference. Ad-Droid tablets of any flavour, nor Playbooks will stop the iPad. HP's WebOS has a very good chance, and as I've said before, when Microsoft get's it's act together.
This year is the year of the iPad. All of the rest put together will not add up to even 1 quarter's sell-thru of the iPad. "Smoothy" sales also don't count. I specifically wrote "sell-thru" as in to real customers using the devices.
Then we actually agree! Imagine that!
Price won't be the issue. But the OS might.
EDIT: By the way, the cute name-calling makes replies seem a little juvenile. You make good points. No need to resort to mockery of competition.
Then we actually agree! Imagine that!
Price won't be the issue. But the OS might.
EDIT: By the way, the cute name-calling makes replies seem a little juvenile. You make good points. No need to resort to mockery of competition.
Yes. You're right. Juvenile. Although it does get "their" attention, which I'm trying to point out when stating "Ad-Droid".
It is my firm belief that is why, and the only reason why, Google has decided to develop the platform in the first place: deliver more ads.
It's Google's fans that are constantly and consistently trying to point to some other motivation, like being an open-source good buddy, that I'm trying to warn about.
No I'm not a Google-hater by any means, but I do believe that, due to Google's true and ulterior motives, as well as their bottom-line success re: ads, that they are being evil and dastardly in setting up a lot of decent tech people for a big fall... or should I say... big FAIL.
I truly think Google is gonna get tired of it, as they have shown in the past, and bale on the project. They also truly are not as good in their labs, as they think are, since a good chunk of their projects are still "in the lab" to begin with....
...and... the Microsoft elephant has not quite entered the playground yet. Not a fan of theirs either... but they will need to be reckoned with sooner rather than later I suppose. Is Google up to it to battle Apple, Microsoft, & HP? I really don't think so... but that's my opinion.
So where were we? Uh ya... Verizon vs. AT&T... no comment. I'm in Germany where we all enjoy 3g, GSM, HSDPA, HSDPA+... and very shortly full LTE coverage. Na-na-nana-na! That's "juvenile"
So now we see Apple actually being pleasant to their old nemesis Microsoft again. I'm assuming in hopes of making the same play they wanted to run with Google against MS to begin with.
One big soap opera in any case.
This definitely means less than 2 million iPads sold for the quarter. Bad news for the stock. Although it sounds like iPhone sales might help as they seem to be doing well.
Quarterly results just in. 4.69 millions iPads, stock up $10 in after hours trading. What was that you said about bad news for the stock? Again, where did you come up with your Debbie Downer predictions? Did you pull then out of your arse?