Android dominates in activation number because of Asia and Latin America where most phones are android 2.3 that never get upgraded. Also this phones don't get apps at the rate of the iPhone. That's why iOS dominates so big on mobile revenue although it does not activate the most.
The free 3GS now being sold for $200 without contract is big because it starts to take sales from cheap android phones in 3rd world countries.
Also people bashing on the lumia 900 for not being able to upgrade to win8 phone OS need to realize that the majority of android phones being sold 65% is 2.3 so in 3rd world countries a lumia 900 7.8 will be a better buy because of quality of the phone compare to cheap android phones...
This is bad news for the legions of tech pundit shills who tout anything but Apple. I can just imagine Leo Laporte throwing his Galaxy S III against the wall in frustration and trying to figure out how he can tout it even more on his MacBreak Weekly, iPad Today, and other podcasts, err 'netcasts'.
AT&T has been desperately trying to create and prop up other hero devices in the form of the Storm, Pre 2, and many others. Will someone please tell me again why they are trying so hard to bite the hand that feeds them>
AT&T want more control over their revenue stream. They want to do away with subsidies, introduce more predatory pricing, remove customer (that's us) flexibility. The main obstacle in their way was Steve Jobs - personally. He was a champion for end-user comfort and usability. Not all altruistic but he moved a lot of revenue from the cell phone companies into the hands of the manufacturer (Apple). The growing (explosive) iPhone market share made AT&T a bundle of money and a boost to their percentage of users relative to the other service providers *and* made customers happy. Now AT&T want to reverse the revenue trend, take it away from the manufacturers and put it in their own coffers (be sure, they will *never* give any back to the customers).
So they fly kites and see who complains. Removal-of-subsidies kite made all the service providers go *oooooh*, we should get on that bandwagon. Hopefully customers (us) are wise to them as all that would do is make our initial costs higher and our steady-state costs stay the same (at best). Then there is Tethering (i.e. pay twice for the same bandwidth). Then there is account-sharing (i.e. pay more for the same bandwidth - except for some very small percentage of customers). Don't get me started on Micro Cells - pay your ISP to host AT&T's cell traffic in AT&T dead-spots, and also pay AT&T for the minutes you use, oh, and also pay AT&T for the equipment to do it.
Only Apple has the clout to reign AT&T in, so Apple must be countered and brought low by them. Except for one small detail. At the moment Apple is still a major player and a large part of AT&T's revenue stream. AT&T (and Verizon for that matter) actively push the competition smartphones in the hope that iPhone sales can be made to be a smaller percentage and new and more onerous "features" can be put in place.
Steve, you are sorely missed.
Mr Cook, I hope you are quietly screwing the service providers to the wall ('cos it sure aint happening loudly).
We've always been behind Europe in terms of mobile phone services, and pricing has always been higher.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac Voyer
AT&T has been desperately trying to create and prop up other hero devices in the form of the Storm, Pre 2, and many others. Will someone please tell me again why they are trying so hard to bite the hand that feeds them>
It's a bad idea to be tied so much to a single company and model. Your analogy of bite the hand that feeds them here isn't very accurate. Apple has been known to diversify suppliers. Anyway the other problem for AT&T would be if the subsidy rates are higher on the iphone. This would drive their margins down if users upgrade constantly. Personally I wish to plans were priced in a way that did not account for subsidized phones. I'd rather buy the phone outright and pay less for the plan, but that's not how it works in the US.
AT&T want more control over their revenue stream. They want to do away with subsidies, introduce more predatory pricing, remove customer (that's us) flexibility. The main obstacle in their way was Steve Jobs - personally. He was a champion for end-user comfort and usability. Not all altruistic but he moved a lot of revenue from the cell phone companies into the hands of the manufacturer (Apple). The growing (explosive) iPhone market share made AT&T a bundle of money and a boost to their percentage of users relative to the other service providers *and* made customers happy. Now AT&T want to reverse the revenue trend, take it away from the manufacturers and put it in their own coffers (be sure, they will *never* give any back to the customers).
So they fly kites and see who complains. Removal-of-subsidies kite made all the service providers go *oooooh*, we should get on that bandwagon. Hopefully customers (us) are wise to them as all that would do is make our initial costs higher and our steady-state costs stay the same (at best). Then there is Tethering (i.e. pay twice for the same bandwidth). Then there is account-sharing (i.e. pay more for the same bandwidth - except for some very small percentage of customers). Don't get me started on Micro Cells - pay your ISP to host AT&T's cell traffic in AT&T dead-spots, and also pay AT&T for the minutes you use, oh, and also pay AT&T for the equipment to do it.
Only Apple has the clout to reign AT&T in, so Apple must be countered and brought low by them. Except for one small detail. At the moment Apple is still a major player and a large part of AT&T's revenue stream. AT&T (and Verizon for that matter) actively push the competition smartphones in the hope that iPhone sales can be made to be a smaller percentage and new and more onerous "features" can be put in place.
Steve, you are sorely missed.
Mr Cook, I hope you are quietly screwing the service providers to the wall ('cos it sure aint happening loudly).
Is Apple the only one allowed to make money? When has Apple given money back to consumers? Except for the Micro Cells you made little sense.
This doesn't really surprise me with AT&T. Do you know I'd the numbers are similar for Verizon? I'm guessing not.
Big reason AT&T's sales are higher is the 3GS. Once Verizon starts selling the 4 for free with contract I'm sure the sales will be more comparable. I wondering if Apple will begin selling the 3GS on prepaid networks that are currently dominated by Androids.
We've always been behind Europe in terms of mobile phone services, and pricing has always been higher.
It's a bad idea to be tied so much to a single company and model. Your analogy of bite the hand that feeds them here isn't very accurate. Apple has been known to diversify suppliers. Anyway the other problem for AT&T would be if the subsidy rates are higher on the iphone. This would drive their margins down if users upgrade constantly. Personally I wish to plans were priced in a way that did not account for subsidized phones. I'd rather buy the phone outright and pay less for the plan, but that's not how it works in the US.
Tmobile has cheaper "bring your own phone plans" and straight talk as well so that's a change that'll hopefully become more widespread.
AT&T has been desperately trying to create and prop up other hero devices in the form of the Storm, Pre 2, and many others. Will someone please tell me again why they are trying so hard to bite the hand that feeds them>
I remember when they were talking about their multi million dollar hero campaign for the Nokia Lumia. What a joke and waste of money that was, Windows Phone barely shows up in the stats. Fortunately a good deal of that money came from Microsoft.
I agree that if they diverted most of the money they spent advertising other phones into the iPhone and improving their network, they would achieve better overall results. The only thing is that from a business perspective, in general, you never want to be dependent on just one supplier, especially since they are no longer exclusive with the iPhone.
Is Apple the only one allowed to make money? When has Apple given money back to consumers? Except for the Micro Cells you made little sense.
The money that Apple makes goes towards making more stuff for us, the customer. That makes me happy. I've no problem with Apple making a bundle at the same time that they give me technology that makes my life simpler. The money that AT&T makes does nothing for me. They too slowly ramp their infrastructure, they charge way too much for the services they provide and all they do is look for more ways to squeeze money out of us customers while they complain about how much we load their network. Look at SMS charges. Charge both ends of the communication for bandwidth that is already being consumed by the cell-tower service stream.
America is a backwater in consumer comms (compare to Europe, Singapore, South Korea). Largely because the service providers are leeches.
"We executed well across the business and posted another strong quarter with growing revenues, expanding margins and double-digit earnings growth," said Randall Stephenson, AT&T chairman and chief executive officer. "Our mobile Internet leadership continues, with solid gains in smartphones and tablets, plus our wireless margins have never been better.
"And most impressive, with this growth, we also achieved our best-ever postpaid wireless churn, which points to the premier experience customers receive on our network. All of these things add to our confidence and enthusiasm looking ahead."
Now HOLD ON Randall. Hold on there!
Isn't the iPhone supposed to be COSTING you money? And arms and legs?
When AT&T's effectively giving away the iPhone 3GS for a penny, and deliberately cripples phones for other carriers... No Wonder they can post such numbers.
"... On the customer side of things, Verizon says that it added 1.2 million retail net customers in the second quarter, 888,000 of which were postpaid. The helped Verizon see a 4.9 percent year over year increase in customers, finishing Q2 with 94.4 million retail customers. ..."
"... AT&T announced on Tuesday that it added 1.3 million total wireless net additional customers, and that it saw gains in every customer category. Sales of tablets and tethering plans saw 496,000 net additions, reaching a total of 6.3 million — up more than 50 percent from a year ago. ...105.2 million customers"
Not sure Apples to Apples comparison, but AT&T seems to be on a net higher growth path and had a greater sales and per cent share of iPhones. Of course, AT&T is beneficiary of $0 iPhone 3GS as well as 4 and 4S. This advantage should evaporate in Sept.
My guess this won't hold with anticipate summer slump of iPhones but an explosion in fall 2012.
When AT&T's effectively giving away the iPhone 3GS for a penny, and deliberately cripples phones for other carriers... No Wonder they can post such numbers.
YEAH. Because no three month old Android phones are free on contract like the three YEAR old iPhone 3GS. That's certainly not the case.
I don't believe you people… how do you just pull a complete 180 like this?
Of course we know why you're saying this instead of an actual position.
My position is that I don't want there to be a "winner". I don't wanna live in a world of only iPhones or only Android phones. I don't get into condescending arguments with people that have iPhones. I recently recommend an iPhone over a Galaxy Nexus to a friend because I believe she'd enjoy the user experience much more over the Gnex even though I own one. So don't assume to think you know what my position is. I may speak against Apple in some of my posts but that does not mean I am anti-Apple. I for one will readily admit that Android would not be where they are today if Apple hadn't made the iPhone.
Comments
The free 3GS now being sold for $200 without contract is big because it starts to take sales from cheap android phones in 3rd world countries.
Also people bashing on the lumia 900 for not being able to upgrade to win8 phone OS need to realize that the majority of android phones being sold 65% is 2.3 so in 3rd world countries a lumia 900 7.8 will be a better buy because of quality of the phone compare to cheap android phones...
I care because of all the smoke that guys like you, gg, js, fr, ad, et al. blow.
Love calling that out.
Lol. Hope you like it there. Whatever planet you're on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac Voyer
AT&T has been desperately trying to create and prop up other hero devices in the form of the Storm, Pre 2, and many others. Will someone please tell me again why they are trying so hard to bite the hand that feeds them>
AT&T want more control over their revenue stream. They want to do away with subsidies, introduce more predatory pricing, remove customer (that's us) flexibility. The main obstacle in their way was Steve Jobs - personally. He was a champion for end-user comfort and usability. Not all altruistic but he moved a lot of revenue from the cell phone companies into the hands of the manufacturer (Apple). The growing (explosive) iPhone market share made AT&T a bundle of money and a boost to their percentage of users relative to the other service providers *and* made customers happy. Now AT&T want to reverse the revenue trend, take it away from the manufacturers and put it in their own coffers (be sure, they will *never* give any back to the customers).
So they fly kites and see who complains. Removal-of-subsidies kite made all the service providers go *oooooh*, we should get on that bandwagon. Hopefully customers (us) are wise to them as all that would do is make our initial costs higher and our steady-state costs stay the same (at best). Then there is Tethering (i.e. pay twice for the same bandwidth). Then there is account-sharing (i.e. pay more for the same bandwidth - except for some very small percentage of customers). Don't get me started on Micro Cells - pay your ISP to host AT&T's cell traffic in AT&T dead-spots, and also pay AT&T for the minutes you use, oh, and also pay AT&T for the equipment to do it.
Only Apple has the clout to reign AT&T in, so Apple must be countered and brought low by them. Except for one small detail. At the moment Apple is still a major player and a large part of AT&T's revenue stream. AT&T (and Verizon for that matter) actively push the competition smartphones in the hope that iPhone sales can be made to be a smaller percentage and new and more onerous "features" can be put in place.
Steve, you are sorely missed.
Mr Cook, I hope you are quietly screwing the service providers to the wall ('cos it sure aint happening loudly).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor
iPhone share in europe is also lower than in the US. Apple really benefits from the way carriers price things in the US.
http://www.ben-evans.com/post/25177869096/iphone-pricing-and-us-market-share
We've always been behind Europe in terms of mobile phone services, and pricing has always been higher.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac Voyer
AT&T has been desperately trying to create and prop up other hero devices in the form of the Storm, Pre 2, and many others. Will someone please tell me again why they are trying so hard to bite the hand that feeds them>
It's a bad idea to be tied so much to a single company and model. Your analogy of bite the hand that feeds them here isn't very accurate. Apple has been known to diversify suppliers. Anyway the other problem for AT&T would be if the subsidy rates are higher on the iphone. This would drive their margins down if users upgrade constantly. Personally I wish to plans were priced in a way that did not account for subsidized phones. I'd rather buy the phone outright and pay less for the plan, but that's not how it works in the US.
When have I ever blown android is bigger and/or better than iOS smoke?
Is Apple the only one allowed to make money? When has Apple given money back to consumers? Except for the Micro Cells you made little sense.
Big reason AT&T's sales are higher is the 3GS. Once Verizon starts selling the 4 for free with contract I'm sure the sales will be more comparable. I wondering if Apple will begin selling the 3GS on prepaid networks that are currently dominated by Androids.
Tmobile has cheaper "bring your own phone plans" and straight talk as well so that's a change that'll hopefully become more widespread.
I remember when they were talking about their multi million dollar hero campaign for the Nokia Lumia. What a joke and waste of money that was, Windows Phone barely shows up in the stats. Fortunately a good deal of that money came from Microsoft.
I agree that if they diverted most of the money they spent advertising other phones into the iPhone and improving their network, they would achieve better overall results. The only thing is that from a business perspective, in general, you never want to be dependent on just one supplier, especially since they are no longer exclusive with the iPhone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Is Apple the only one allowed to make money? When has Apple given money back to consumers? Except for the Micro Cells you made little sense.
The money that Apple makes goes towards making more stuff for us, the customer. That makes me happy. I've no problem with Apple making a bundle at the same time that they give me technology that makes my life simpler. The money that AT&T makes does nothing for me. They too slowly ramp their infrastructure, they charge way too much for the services they provide and all they do is look for more ways to squeeze money out of us customers while they complain about how much we load their network. Look at SMS charges. Charge both ends of the communication for bandwidth that is already being consumed by the cell-tower service stream.
America is a backwater in consumer comms (compare to Europe, Singapore, South Korea). Largely because the service providers are leeches.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Question is, why do you even care? Does either scenario benefit or hurt you in any way?
Of course we know why you're saying this instead of an actual position.
It is slightly down from AT&T's Q1 2012 but still amazing numbers:
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/12/04/24/apples_iphone_accounted_for_78_of_att_smartphone_activations_in_q1_2012.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
"We executed well across the business and posted another strong quarter with growing revenues, expanding margins and double-digit earnings growth," said Randall Stephenson, AT&T chairman and chief executive officer. "Our mobile Internet leadership continues, with solid gains in smartphones and tablets, plus our wireless margins have never been better.
"And most impressive, with this growth, we also achieved our best-ever postpaid wireless churn, which points to the premier experience customers receive on our network. All of these things add to our confidence and enthusiasm looking ahead."
Now HOLD ON Randall. Hold on there!
Isn't the iPhone supposed to be COSTING you money? And arms and legs?
http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/08/technology/iphone_carrier_subsidy/index.htm?iid=HP_LN
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1321445
How does "growing revenues, expanding margins and double digit earnings growth" translate into a "nightmare" (as per the CNN Money article)?
I still do not have a phone. Do not need one yet.
My boss is not happy, but Hell with him.
I´ll buy myself an iPhone when i feel ready!
"... On the customer side of things, Verizon says that it added 1.2 million retail net customers in the second quarter, 888,000 of which were postpaid. The helped Verizon see a 4.9 percent year over year increase in customers, finishing Q2 with 94.4 million retail customers. ..."
"... AT&T announced on Tuesday that it added 1.3 million total wireless net additional customers, and that it saw gains in every customer category. Sales of tablets and tethering plans saw 496,000 net additions, reaching a total of 6.3 million — up more than 50 percent from a year ago. ...105.2 million customers"
Not sure Apples to Apples comparison, but AT&T seems to be on a net higher growth path and had a greater sales and per cent share of iPhones. Of course, AT&T is beneficiary of $0 iPhone 3GS as well as 4 and 4S. This advantage should evaporate in Sept.
My guess this won't hold with anticipate summer slump of iPhones but an explosion in fall 2012.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder
When AT&T's effectively giving away the iPhone 3GS for a penny, and deliberately cripples phones for other carriers... No Wonder they can post such numbers.
YEAH. Because no three month old Android phones are free on contract like the three YEAR old iPhone 3GS. That's certainly not the case.
I don't believe you people… how do you just pull a complete 180 like this?
My position is that I don't want there to be a "winner". I don't wanna live in a world of only iPhones or only Android phones. I don't get into condescending arguments with people that have iPhones. I recently recommend an iPhone over a Galaxy Nexus to a friend because I believe she'd enjoy the user experience much more over the Gnex even though I own one. So don't assume to think you know what my position is. I may speak against Apple in some of my posts but that does not mean I am anti-Apple. I for one will readily admit that Android would not be where they are today if Apple hadn't made the iPhone.