Art of the negotiation.. sprint comes to Apple and says we need the iphone; Apple probable said... 'go pound sand'. ... 'errr... unless'.
Sprint was losing marketshare... what to do, what to do.
So as you point out, Apple alreadys knows they have the sales to Verizon and ATT, now or six months from now... so leverage Sprint to the hilt. Masterful... if true.
What? How is this good for Apple? Why give Sprint exclusive rights? To guarantee 30 mill IP5 sales over 4YEARS? They will sell that many anyway. Why piss off your current business partners? The only one that this deal benefits is Sprint. Apple will meet those IP5 numbers sooner with 3 carriers vs one exclusivlely for 6 months. The numbers just don't add up....... it is win win for Sprint but thats about all...there has to be more to it than just numbers if this is true.
This doesn't make sense. Apple sold twenty million iPhones last quarter.
Giving one carrier exclusivity for four years to sell thirty million handsets doesn't add up. The math doesn't work; they would be leaving dollars on the table.
As a matter of fact, it's a ludicrously bad deal. That's a paltry 1.9 million iPhones and $1.25 billion revenue per quarter.
If Apple cut a deal like this, their shareholders would revolt. Half a dozen fund managers would look at plummeting revenue estimates and call up the board and tell them they are fired.
Hold on quick draw... keep in mind this is NOT an either or story, but a first to market (by about 6 months)story. Lets see, GUARANTEED sale of 30.5million phones from Sprint AND 6 months later NEAR GUARANTEED sales from ATT/Verizon .. in exchang I (apple) spend ~ 500 million on the inerds for sprint... VS just do LTE inerds and maybe later... on my own dime do Sprint. Seems pretty smart business decision by Apple, if true.
It makes zero sense. It would immediately alienate millions of Apple consumers, and it would also alienate both Verizon and AT&T, plus it would artificially limit the sales of the device for six months. Apple is not desperate - they don't need to make the carrier tied for dead last in the market share war happy by guaranteeing them exclusivity in exchange for some arbitrary order volume.
If anything, your logic (and that driving this whole rumor) has the story backwards; it is based on the idea that Apple somehow needs lots of orders and would therefore agree to an exclusivity deal in order to get them. But this is the actual situation: Apple does not need Sprint, Sprint needs Apple.
There is simply no way Apple would agree to an exclusivity agreement with Sprint simply predicated on a certain volume of orders, even if for a short term; Sprint doesn't bring that sort of negotiation power to the table. What is more likely is that Sprint had to agree to a specific order volume just to get the device at all.
What? How is this good for Apple? Why give Sprint exclusive rights? To guarantee 30 mill IP5 sales over 4YEARS? They will sell that many anyway. Why piss off your current business partners? The only one that this deal benefits is Sprint. Apple will meet those IP5 numbers sooner with 3 carriers vs one exclusivlely for 6 months. The numbers just don't add up....... it is win win for Sprint but thats about all...there has to be more to it than just numbers if this is true.
Your assuming that Apple had plans for a unique sprint phone anyways. What if they didn't?
What if Sprint came to you(apple) and said develop me an iphone... if you where apple had LTE in the works for verizon and ATT... and no plans for Sprint, what would you do?
Say.. 'sure why not and Ill do it for free'? This is what was negotiated... IMO it makes sense as a 'deal'.
It makes zero sense. It would immediately alienate millions of Apple consumers, and it would also alienate both Verizon and AT&T, plus it would artificially limit the sales of the device for six months. Apple is not desperate - they don't need to make the carrier tied for dead last in the market share war happy by guaranteeing them exclusivity in exchange for some arbitrary order volume.
If anything, your logic (and that driving this whole rumor) has the story backwards; it is based on the idea that Apple somehow needs lots of orders and would therefore agree to an exclusivity deal in order to get them. But this is the actual situation: Apple does not need Sprint, Sprint needs Apple.
There is simply no way Apple would agree to an exclusivity agreement with Sprint simply predicated on a certain volume of orders, even if for a short term; Sprint doesn't bring that sort of negotiation power to the table. What is more likely is that Sprint had to agree to a specific order volume just to get the device at all.
Thats very possible. But again, Sprint WIMAX is different than Verizon/ATT LTE... so thats the out for 6 months. I have no proof one way or another, but can see the wimax coming out different timeframe than the LTE.
Not a single reason that you needed to quote the whole thing. Or any of it, for that matter.
Actually, for some reason I'm getting twice as much article text from his quote than I am from the original article. I can only guess AI editors cropped the article down but due to his quote I get to see the whole thing. So I, for one, am glad for the quote.
Actually, for some reason I'm getting twice as much article text from his quote than I am from the original article. I can only guess AI editors cropped the article down but due to his quote I get to see the whole thing. So I, for one, am glad for the quote.
Perhaps they cropped it since you can read it a few posts down. Going green by saving The World Wide Web a few bits at a time.
Actually, for some reason I'm getting twice as much article text from his quote than I am from the original article. I can only guess AI editors cropped the article down but due to his quote I get to see the whole thing. So I, for one, am glad for the quote.
All of the thread articles are available on their own pages directly from AppleInsider's website.
Some have links to said page in the first post, others don't. Why not all of them do mystifies me.
Your assuming that Apple had plans for a unique sprint phone anyways. What if they didn't?
What if Sprint came to you(apple) and said develop me an iphone... if you where apple had LTE in the works for verizon and ATT... and no plans for Sprint, what would you do?
Say.. 'sure why not and Ill do it for free'? This is what was negotiated... IMO it makes sense as a 'deal'.
So there is all this hype about a new phone for Apple and customers are lining up. It is projected to be the fastest biggest selling phone Apple has had. There is an unmatched buzz about the new phone. Now a carrier comes to Apple and say hold on... we want exclusive rights to sell the new phone for 6 months and we guarantee 30 mill units being sold. So whats in it for Apple? They will sell more than 30 mill units in that 6 momths time frame anyway without even releasing to Sprint. So wheres the deal? Why would Apple agree to something like that? They can get those numbers without Sprint. Just because Sprint came to Apple and asked for the IP5 doesn't mean Apple has to make the deal. I imagine Sprint has been coming to Apple asking for the IP for quite some time now...... The number just don't add up for a business deal that would benefit both aprties. It works for Sprint but whats in it for Apple? Something they already have or would get anyway.....
This doesn't make sense. Apple sold twenty million iPhones last quarter.
Giving one carrier exclusivity for four years to sell thirty million handsets doesn't add up. The math doesn't work; they would be leaving dollars on the table.
As a matter of fact, it's a ludicrously bad deal. That's a paltry 1.9 million iPhones and $1.25 billion revenue per quarter.
If Apple cut a deal like this, their shareholders would revolt. Half a dozen fund managers would look at plummeting revenue estimates and call up the board and tell them they are fired.
The article mentions that AT&T and verizon together sold 12 million in the first half of 2011. That's 3 million a quarter each. Don't they have something like 100million customers each vs 52million for sprint. Almost 2 million a quarter seems reasonable.
The article mentions that AT&T and verizon together sold 12 million in the first half of 2011. That's 3 million a quarter each. Don't they have something like 100million customers each vs 52million for sprint. Almost 2 million a quarter seems reasonable.
I can believe a purchase commitment of 1.9 million per quarter.
I just think this exclusivity thing is baloney. Let's face it, for Sprint to lock exclusivity of the handset, they would basically need to guarantee any potential revenue loss from other carrier sales.
They don't have the resources. How much revenue is Apple recording from handset sales each quarter? $13 billion? $15 billion? A number which is destined to climb?
According to his own words, Obama is totally clueless on technology.
In a commencement speech to students of Hampton University last May, Obama admitted to not knowing how to work Apple's iPod or iPad, or Microsoft's Xbox and Sony's PlayStation game consoles. Obama had also referred to the devices as turning information into a "distraction, a diversion," and "a form of entertainment" that kept people from empowering themselves.
I can believe a purchase commitment of 1.9 million per quarter.
I just think this exclusivity thing is baloney. Let's face it, for Sprint to lock exclusivity of the handset, they would basically need to guarantee any potential revenue loss from other carrier sales.
They don't have the resources. How much revenue is Apple recording from handset sales each quarter? $13 billion? $15 billion? A number which is destined to climb?
This exclusivity thing is a joke.
1) Even less to start if you want to average the average increase in iPhone sales per carrier with each revision.
2) They'd lose money with an exclusivity so it really doesn't make sense the way it's stated.
Comments
Because its the deal.
Art of the negotiation.. sprint comes to Apple and says we need the iphone; Apple probable said... 'go pound sand'. ... 'errr... unless'.
Sprint was losing marketshare... what to do, what to do.
So as you point out, Apple alreadys knows they have the sales to Verizon and ATT, now or six months from now... so leverage Sprint to the hilt. Masterful... if true.
What? How is this good for Apple? Why give Sprint exclusive rights? To guarantee 30 mill IP5 sales over 4YEARS? They will sell that many anyway. Why piss off your current business partners? The only one that this deal benefits is Sprint. Apple will meet those IP5 numbers sooner with 3 carriers vs one exclusivlely for 6 months. The numbers just don't add up....... it is win win for Sprint but thats about all...there has to be more to it than just numbers if this is true.
Giving one carrier exclusivity for four years to sell thirty million handsets doesn't add up. The math doesn't work; they would be leaving dollars on the table.
As a matter of fact, it's a ludicrously bad deal. That's a paltry 1.9 million iPhones and $1.25 billion revenue per quarter.
If Apple cut a deal like this, their shareholders would revolt. Half a dozen fund managers would look at plummeting revenue estimates and call up the board and tell them they are fired.
Hold on quick draw... keep in mind this is NOT an either or story, but a first to market (by about 6 months)story. Lets see, GUARANTEED sale of 30.5million phones from Sprint AND 6 months later NEAR GUARANTEED sales from ATT/Verizon .. in exchang I (apple) spend ~ 500 million on the inerds for sprint... VS just do LTE inerds and maybe later... on my own dime do Sprint. Seems pretty smart business decision by Apple, if true.
It makes zero sense. It would immediately alienate millions of Apple consumers, and it would also alienate both Verizon and AT&T, plus it would artificially limit the sales of the device for six months. Apple is not desperate - they don't need to make the carrier tied for dead last in the market share war happy by guaranteeing them exclusivity in exchange for some arbitrary order volume.
If anything, your logic (and that driving this whole rumor) has the story backwards; it is based on the idea that Apple somehow needs lots of orders and would therefore agree to an exclusivity deal in order to get them. But this is the actual situation: Apple does not need Sprint, Sprint needs Apple.
There is simply no way Apple would agree to an exclusivity agreement with Sprint simply predicated on a certain volume of orders, even if for a short term; Sprint doesn't bring that sort of negotiation power to the table. What is more likely is that Sprint had to agree to a specific order volume just to get the device at all.
What? How is this good for Apple? Why give Sprint exclusive rights? To guarantee 30 mill IP5 sales over 4YEARS? They will sell that many anyway. Why piss off your current business partners? The only one that this deal benefits is Sprint. Apple will meet those IP5 numbers sooner with 3 carriers vs one exclusivlely for 6 months. The numbers just don't add up....... it is win win for Sprint but thats about all...there has to be more to it than just numbers if this is true.
Your assuming that Apple had plans for a unique sprint phone anyways. What if they didn't?
What if Sprint came to you(apple) and said develop me an iphone... if you where apple had LTE in the works for verizon and ATT... and no plans for Sprint, what would you do?
Say.. 'sure why not and Ill do it for free'? This is what was negotiated... IMO it makes sense as a 'deal'.
It makes zero sense. It would immediately alienate millions of Apple consumers, and it would also alienate both Verizon and AT&T, plus it would artificially limit the sales of the device for six months. Apple is not desperate - they don't need to make the carrier tied for dead last in the market share war happy by guaranteeing them exclusivity in exchange for some arbitrary order volume.
If anything, your logic (and that driving this whole rumor) has the story backwards; it is based on the idea that Apple somehow needs lots of orders and would therefore agree to an exclusivity deal in order to get them. But this is the actual situation: Apple does not need Sprint, Sprint needs Apple.
There is simply no way Apple would agree to an exclusivity agreement with Sprint simply predicated on a certain volume of orders, even if for a short term; Sprint doesn't bring that sort of negotiation power to the table. What is more likely is that Sprint had to agree to a specific order volume just to get the device at all.
Thats very possible. But again, Sprint WIMAX is different than Verizon/ATT LTE... so thats the out for 6 months. I have no proof one way or another, but can see the wimax coming out different timeframe than the LTE.
Tomorrow will tell the tale!
Not a single reason that you needed to quote the whole thing. Or any of it, for that matter.
Actually, for some reason I'm getting twice as much article text from his quote than I am from the original article. I can only guess AI editors cropped the article down but due to his quote I get to see the whole thing. So I, for one, am glad for the quote.
Actually, for some reason I'm getting twice as much article text from his quote than I am from the original article. I can only guess AI editors cropped the article down but due to his quote I get to see the whole thing. So I, for one, am glad for the quote.
Perhaps they cropped it since you can read it a few posts down. Going green by saving The World Wide Web a few bits at a time.
Actually, for some reason I'm getting twice as much article text from his quote than I am from the original article. I can only guess AI editors cropped the article down but due to his quote I get to see the whole thing. So I, for one, am glad for the quote.
All of the thread articles are available on their own pages directly from AppleInsider's website.
Some have links to said page in the first post, others don't. Why not all of them do mystifies me.
btw LTE is CDMA
and GSM, att has LTE phones its a simcard based system, nothing like CDMA
Your assuming that Apple had plans for a unique sprint phone anyways. What if they didn't?
What if Sprint came to you(apple) and said develop me an iphone... if you where apple had LTE in the works for verizon and ATT... and no plans for Sprint, what would you do?
Say.. 'sure why not and Ill do it for free'? This is what was negotiated... IMO it makes sense as a 'deal'.
So there is all this hype about a new phone for Apple and customers are lining up. It is projected to be the fastest biggest selling phone Apple has had. There is an unmatched buzz about the new phone. Now a carrier comes to Apple and say hold on... we want exclusive rights to sell the new phone for 6 months and we guarantee 30 mill units being sold. So whats in it for Apple? They will sell more than 30 mill units in that 6 momths time frame anyway without even releasing to Sprint. So wheres the deal? Why would Apple agree to something like that? They can get those numbers without Sprint. Just because Sprint came to Apple and asked for the IP5 doesn't mean Apple has to make the deal. I imagine Sprint has been coming to Apple asking for the IP for quite some time now...... The number just don't add up for a business deal that would benefit both aprties. It works for Sprint but whats in it for Apple? Something they already have or would get anyway.....
I hope this is true because I've been camping out in front of my Sprint store for the last month.
You are indeed exclusive.
This doesn't make sense. Apple sold twenty million iPhones last quarter.
Giving one carrier exclusivity for four years to sell thirty million handsets doesn't add up. The math doesn't work; they would be leaving dollars on the table.
As a matter of fact, it's a ludicrously bad deal. That's a paltry 1.9 million iPhones and $1.25 billion revenue per quarter.
If Apple cut a deal like this, their shareholders would revolt. Half a dozen fund managers would look at plummeting revenue estimates and call up the board and tell them they are fired.
The article mentions that AT&T and verizon together sold 12 million in the first half of 2011. That's 3 million a quarter each. Don't they have something like 100million customers each vs 52million for sprint. Almost 2 million a quarter seems reasonable.
I hope this is true because I've been camping out in front of my Sprint store for the last month.
so you had advance infornmation?
The article mentions that AT&T and verizon together sold 12 million in the first half of 2011. That's 3 million a quarter each. Don't they have something like 100million customers each vs 52million for sprint. Almost 2 million a quarter seems reasonable.
I can believe a purchase commitment of 1.9 million per quarter.
I just think this exclusivity thing is baloney. Let's face it, for Sprint to lock exclusivity of the handset, they would basically need to guarantee any potential revenue loss from other carrier sales.
They don't have the resources. How much revenue is Apple recording from handset sales each quarter? $13 billion? $15 billion? A number which is destined to climb?
This exclusivity thing is a joke.
I know the iPhone is popular and all that but... holy hell, was the accounting department asleep?
Why do we assume that this is a bad deal? Why don't we assume they have done the math and see it as a reasonable risk?
According to his own words, Obama is totally clueless on technology.
In a commencement speech to students of Hampton University last May, Obama admitted to not knowing how to work Apple's iPod or iPad, or Microsoft's Xbox and Sony's PlayStation game consoles. Obama had also referred to the devices as turning information into a "distraction, a diversion," and "a form of entertainment" that kept people from empowering themselves.
Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20...#ixzz1ZklDVxmU
He's also an avowed Blackberry user.
I can believe a purchase commitment of 1.9 million per quarter.
I just think this exclusivity thing is baloney. Let's face it, for Sprint to lock exclusivity of the handset, they would basically need to guarantee any potential revenue loss from other carrier sales.
They don't have the resources. How much revenue is Apple recording from handset sales each quarter? $13 billion? $15 billion? A number which is destined to climb?
This exclusivity thing is a joke.
1) Even less to start if you want to average the average increase in iPhone sales per carrier with each revision.
2) They'd lose money with an exclusivity so it really doesn't make sense the way it's stated.