 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General General TopicsGSMBluetoothProviders AlltelATT WirelessCingularFidoNextelSprint PCST-MobileVerizonManufacturers EricssonNokiaMotorolaCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupRelated Topics PocketPCPalmMore Topics ... |
Cellular Phone Forum / Providers / ATT Wireless / September 2008Verizon takes a larger share of the wireless market
Dow Jones Newswires reports today that "Verizon didn't need the iPhone after all." Verizon added 1.5 million new customers in the second quarter, surpassing Wall Street expectations and apparently taking a larger share of the USA wireless market at the cost of AT&T and other rivals. AT&T won't release its second quarter results until Wednesday, but is expected to add 1.3 million. Unlike AT&T, the vast majority of new Verizon customers sign long term contracts. Verizon also routinely reports the industry's lowest churn. Verizon's pending acquisition of Alltel will add 13 million to Verizon's current 68.7 million customers, restoring its position as the USA's leading carrier with 81.7 million customers. AT&T had 71.4 customers milion at the end of the first quarter. -- Mark -- http://panda.com/mrc Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote. > Verizon's pending acquisition of Alltel will add 13 million to Verizon's > current 68.7 million customers, restoring its position as the USA's > leading carrier with 81.7 million customers. I doubt it. When the Verizon bastards take over Alltel, they won't be able to help themselves screwing it up with hobbleware phones and ultra-limited data service. Most Alltel customers were former Verizon customers, here. They fled Cellular One when GTE Wireless (now called Verizon) took over the plant and tried to screw everyone with double rates for half the minutes. I hung around GTE until Vodaphone came on the scene and Verizon Wireless took over. The regional plans disappeared and we were forced to buy into nationwide service at low minutes we didn't want and didn't need. Mass churning was the results to Alltel whos system here is much better, especially in the country on 800B cellular. The very instant Verizon tries to shove their shitty service down my throat at god awful prices, I'll flee again, even if I have to abandon sellphones. God I can't stand it when someone stands right in front of you and lies his a.s off....and KNOWS IT!. > > Verizon's pending acquisition of Alltel will add 13 million to Verizon's > > current 68.7 million customers, restoring its position as the USA's [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > God I can't stand it when someone stands right in front of you and lies his > a.s off....and KNOWS IT!. I suspect that many Alltel customers are not "refugees" from Verizon. Also, there is a lot of Alltel territory where ATT coverage is marginal or based on roaming anyway. There are a lot of the west where if I lived I would probably go with Verizon. I could do it here in Oklahoma, but ATT is farily good here so I stay with SIM based phones where I can tether if occasionally necessary. > Dow Jones Newswires reports today that "Verizon didn't need the iPhone > after all." [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > -- Mark -- so Verizon has flat lined... thanks for pointing out how much of a serious affect the iPhone is having to the poorly managed Verizon business. as they say, Verizon is doomed without access to the iPhone... this is further proof. >> Dow Jones Newswires reports today that "Verizon didn't need the >> iPhone after all." [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > as they say, Verizon is doomed without access to the iPhone... this is > further proof. Pray tell, little imbecile- how is adding 1.5 million new customers in a quarter "flat lining"? >>> Dow Jones Newswires reports today that "Verizon didn't need the >>> iPhone after all." [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > Pray tell, little imbecile- how is adding 1.5 million new customers in a > quarter "flat lining"? Because they added 1.5 million new customers last quarter too? I wouldn't call that "flat lining", but I guess on some planet it is. Note that it shouldn't surprise anyone (or be interpreted as an "iPhone effect") if AT&T adds significantly more than 1.3 million total customers in the most recent quarter. I don't know why 1.3 million would be "expected". AT&T did add only 1.3 million net customers in the previous quarter, but that included a one-time not-to-be-repeated loss of 600,000 TDMA customers when they shut that network down in February. A "normal" quarter for AT&T sees closer to 2 million customers added, if they do significantly less than that this time around then something is really screwed up. Dennis Ferguson > >> so Verizon has flat lined... thanks for pointing out how much of a > >> serious affect the iPhone is having to the poorly managed Verizon [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Because they added 1.5 million new customers last quarter too? I > wouldn't call that "flat lining", but I guess on some planet it is. they can add all the customers they want, but if they can't increase revenue, they have flatlined. see DeLL for the perfect example of this same failed approach. > Note that it shouldn't surprise anyone (or be interpreted as an > "iPhone effect") if AT&T adds significantly more than 1.3 million [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > 2 million customers added, if they do significantly less than that > this time around then something is really screwed up. yes, and iphone customers are the cream of the entire cell market since they have real money and are smarter about products than verizon users. > Note that it shouldn't surprise anyone (or be interpreted as an > "iPhone effect") if AT&T adds significantly more than 1.3 million [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > not-to-be-repeated loss of 600,000 TDMA customers when they shut that > network down in February. Did a larger percentage of those 600K customers go elsewhere? A "normal" quarter for AT&T sees closer to > 2 million customers added, if they do significantly less than that > this time around then something is really screwed up. 4Q2007 they added 2.7 million (though unlike Verizon, a large number of these were prepaid and MVNO). 2Q2007 they were at 1.5 million additions. Since 4Q includes Xmas and the numbers are higher than in 2Q. [Removing alt.cellular.cingular, Cingular no longer exists] > [Removing alt.cellular.cingular, Cingular no longer exists] Neither does AT&T Wireless, the group you are currently using. Quit trying to be a Navas by forcing people to do things your way because you know what's best for all of us. >> Note that it shouldn't surprise anyone (or be interpreted as an >> "iPhone effect") if AT&T adds significantly more than 1.3 million [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Did a larger percentage of those 600K customers go elsewhere? Larger than what? I do think that TDMA customers who thought they would have been served as well with the GSM service might have switched already, and that a quarter where you don't cancel service for 600,000 customers has just got to be better than one where you do. > A "normal" quarter for AT&T sees closer to >> 2 million customers added, if they do significantly less than that >> this time around then something is really screwed up. > > 4Q2007 they added 2.7 million (though unlike Verizon, a large number of > these were prepaid and MVNO). And Verizon added 2 million in that same quarter, if I remember correctly. If Verizon is off 25% from that high then I think it would not be a good sign if AT&T were off a whole lot more than that. If AT&T adds less than 1.7 or 1.8 million this time around then they've maybe got a problem. > 2Q2007 they were at 1.5 million additions. Since 4Q includes Xmas and > the numbers are higher than in 2Q. Is the Christmas quarter really that much better in general? My guess was that this quarter was particularly good for everyone else since it was particularly bad for Sprint, though I really have no idea. Dennis Ferguson >> Note that it shouldn't surprise anyone (or be interpreted as an >> "iPhone effect") if AT&T adds significantly more than 1.3 million [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > [Removing alt.cellular.cingular, Cingular no longer exists] Pretty poor results for AT&T today, 1.33 million net additions, worse than 2Q 2007, worse than 4Q 2007, and much poorer than Verizon. But the numbers are misleading. Of the 1.33 million customers AT&T added, 894,000 were postpaid, 439,000 were prepaid or MVNO. Of the 1.5 million net additions for Verizon, only about 300,000 were postpaid, and about 1.2 million were postpaid. Of course the original iPhone was out of stock for much of the second quarter, and the 3G iPhone hadn't yet been released. 3Q should be much better. > > so Verizon has flat lined... thanks for pointing out how much of a > > serious affect the iPhone is having to the poorly managed Verizon [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Pray tell, little imbecile- how is adding 1.5 million new customers in a > quarter "flat lining"? because they can't make any money with their current approach. apple is wiping them out at every turn, and there is nothing they can do unless they win the iphone contract. they are a company without a heartbeat... they have flatlined... i've seen apple crush entire industries over the last few decades, and verizon, being a small company with no quality offerings just isn't strong enough to compete long term. you'll see what i'm saying in about 4 years. > verizon, being a small company with no quality offerings just isn't > strong enough to compete long term. You are a goddam idiot. Vodaphone / Verizon is a "small company"?? It is amazing the crap you pull out of your a.s... > so Verizon has flat lined... thanks for pointing out how much of a > serious affect the iPhone is having to the poorly managed Verizon > business. > > as they say, Verizon is doomed without access to the iPhone... this is > further proof. Are you actually SERIOUS?? And delusional - as always. Making something out of absolutely NOTHING!! The only thing the above proves is that you don't have a clue. > > so Verizon has flat lined... thanks for pointing out how much of a > > serious affect the iPhone is having to the poorly managed Verizon [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > The only thing the above proves is that you don't have a clue. no, you are forgetting i only use facts... Verizon has "flatlined" against Apple. Here is absolute proof: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=VZ&t=5y&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=aapl Please learn about the facts next time... >> > so Verizon has flat lined... thanks for pointing out how much of a >> > serious affect the iPhone is having to the poorly managed Verizon [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Please learn about the facts next time... As always - ZERO "proof"..... (and zero "fact")... Just some figures taken totally out of context. Mainly because you are comparing oranges to bowling balls... A hardware and software company being compared to a telecom Totally different sectors - and totally different market influences. You remain - an idiot! And, BTW, Apple took a big hit today, if you hadn't noticed... I'm not sure the financials of VZ translate all that well to the financials of VZ Wireless. VZ has been losing landline business for the past few years and is not doing all that well (neither is ATT landline). VOIP and cell service is taking business away from traditional phone companies. Comparing the aging part of Verizon to Apple is not a fair comparison. Comparing growth in VZ Wireless is more appropriate, which you have not done. BTW, they are related but seperate companies (as is VZ Online). I'm glad you like your iPhone. I've known others who do, too. Frankly, my Verizon XV6800 can do more than your iPhone, and a lot faster. It lacks your great browser and music player, but for business use my phone is much more capable, has a MUCH faster and broader data network, has many more useful applications and a much cheaper data plan. Also, it tends to be able to make and recieve calls in a much broader geographic area and the calling parties can actually hear each other. Not that this is as important as an Apple logo on the back, though. >> > so Verizon has flat lined... thanks for pointing out how much of a >> > serious affect the iPhone is having to the poorly managed Verizon [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Please learn about the facts next time... > I'm not sure the financials of VZ translate all that well to the > financials of VZ Wireless. VZ has been losing landline business for [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Apple is not a fair comparison. Comparing growth in VZ Wireless is > more appropriate, which you have not done. BTW, Of course he hasn't done the comparison with VZW. As much as I just HATE VZW, the most dispicable sellphone company on the planet from personal experience, I have to admit they're the BIG GUN in the USA, about to swallow whole my beloved Alltel, which to me is akin to Russia swallowing Georgia. VZ isn't VZW at all.....but, of course, that truth wouldn't look so good in his troll....(c; > Of course he hasn't done the comparison with VZW. As much as I just HATE > VZW, the most dispicable sellphone company on the planet from personal [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > VZ isn't VZW at all.....but, of course, that truth wouldn't look so good in > his troll....(c; But VZ badly wants to be VZW, bad enough that you'll find speculation concerning them swallowing much, much, much bigger fish than Alltel to get it. See, for example http://seekingalpha.com/article/91784-why-verizon-will-take-over-vodafone Dennis Ferguson > But VZ badly wants to be VZW, bad enough that you'll find speculation > concerning them swallowing much, much, much bigger fish than Alltel to > get it. See, for example > > http://seekingalpha.com/article/91784-why-verizon-will-take-over-vodafone Interesting, but I question the supposition that Sprint will get its act together in the U.S., and I question the idea that the integration of Alltel will take 2-3 years. It's not like the absorption of AT&T Wireless where Cingular was dealing with a technology change and a lot of unhappy AT&T customers. Other than Larry, most Alltel customers will be thrilled to be moved over to Verizon with their plans grandfathered in--it's the best of both worlds for them. > Other than Larry, most Alltel customers will be thrilled to be moved > over to Verizon with their plans grandfathered in--it's the best of > both worlds for them. Arguably, since Verizon and Alltel operate in many of the same markets, many Alltel customers have already deliberately chosen NOT to be Verizon customers. The grandfathering will likely placate them for awhile, unless/until Verizon pulls an "AT&T" and forces them out of those grandfathered plans the next time they upgrade their handsets, like the "new AT&T" did to "old" AT&T blue customers... > The grandfathering will likely placate them for awhile, unless/until > Verizon pulls an "AT&T" and forces them out of those grandfathered > plans the next time they upgrade their handsets, like the "new AT&T" > did to "old" AT&T blue customers... Most Alltel customers I know fled Cellular One, here, when GTE bought up Cellular One. More customers fled GTE Wireless when Verizon sucked them up and jacked up prices while reducing actual service and features like regional plans. Most of us on Alltel are Verizon Refugees, fed up with being lied to and screwed. And, once again, most are planning to churn, once again, as soon as Verizon tries to screw us, yet again, with forced nationwide service we don't want and don't need, turning our truly unlimited tethered internet plans into mush by tripling rates while telling us we can only have 5GB per month for three to four times as much money. Notice I said WHEN, not IF. I'm hoping some kind of WiMax becomes available before it happens. With Skype and Wimax, I wouldn't need Sellphones. > >> Other than Larry, most Alltel customers will be thrilled to be moved [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > the next time they upgrade their handsets, like the "new AT&T" did to "old" > AT&T blue customers... Historically Verizon has not forced existing customers to adopt current calling plans when upgrading handsets and going back under contract. I keep worrying that they will do this, but so far they haven't. They've gone to great trouble to even keep the greater coverage of the older Americas Choice Plan available (plus they don't ever seem to charge for the off-network AMPS roaming that shows on the handset as roaming that I should be charged for). They're under no obligation to keep offering service at prices from the older plans, but they do so anyway. Part of the way Cingular forced AT&T Wireless customers to switch to higher cost plans was due to the change from TDMA to GSM. All those super-cheap TDMA plans went away with the technology change. Verizon saw the horrible churn numbers of Cingular/AT&T that resulted from the acquisition, as well as the class action lawsuits. It would be unwise for them to alienate the Alltel customers and increase churn. I think Verizon will likely stop offering new plans that only cover the Alltel native service area, but very few customers sign up for the Alltel local plan anyway because the service area is extremely limited, and it costs so much to roam. Of Alltel's approximately 13 millions subscribers, less than 2 million use the regional plans. Also, Alltel charges a lot more for additional lines on their plans than Verizon, so family plan users will see a decrease in monthly costs if they move to Verizon's plans. SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in news:4QAvk.36476$co7.33169 @nlpi066.nbdc.sbc.com: > and it costs so much to roam. Actually that's not true. 10c/min. What you do is when you want to travel outside the regional plan, you call 611 and tell them you want to buy 100 minutes of nationwide service. They charge $10 to your bill and these minutes only countdown as your roaming outside your coverage area, making occasional roaming at 10c/min quite cheap, compared to other options from other carriers. I use this service on my NC/SC $39 regional plan when I go to Florida sailing. When I get in range coming in from sea I simply dial 611 and add the minutes for $10. The system warns me when I'm down to 5 or 10 minutes that I may need a recharge and will autosell me another 100 minutes by pressing one of the keys. Works great....until Verizon takes over, I'm assuming. I roamed on Verizon in FL one time and it was like 89c/min....like roaming in some 3rd World Country run by a Despot....a complete ripoff. > SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in news:4QAvk.36476$co7.33169 > @nlpi066.nbdc.sbc.com: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > pressing one of the keys. Works great....until Verizon takes over, I'm > assuming. That's such a hassle. No wonder so few Alltel subscribers sign up for ther regional plans. > I roamed on Verizon in FL one time and it was like 89c/min....like roaming > in some 3rd World Country run by a Despot....a complete ripoff. It was Alltel charging you the 89¢ per minute, not Verizon. Alltel paid Verizon very little for the roaming, and it could have been nothing at all depending on what reciprocal agreements were in place. > The system warns me when I'm down to 5 or 10 minutes that I may > need a recharge and will autosell me another 100 minutes by pressing [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > That's such a hassle. No wonder so few Alltel subscribers sign up for > ther regional plans. Oh p ease- it's completely automated and reasonably priced. If my carrier offered that option I'd switch in a heartbeat. I'd take me a year to use 1000 minutes ($10 worth) out of market, and I'l wager Larry saves at least $10/month on his regional plan. That $100+/year savings.> >> The system warns me when I'm down to 5 or 10 minutes that I may >> need a recharge and will autosell me another 100 minutes by pressing [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > use 1000 minutes ($10 worth) out of market, and I'l wager Larry saves > at least $10/month on his regional plan. That $100+/year savings.> Alltel's 2-state NC/SC plus a large area of the states that surround the 2 states from New Port News, VA to south of Brunswick, GA and up into about Knoxville, TN is $39.95 for 700 mins, plus 100 bonus minutes for being a great customer. The plan has all the bells/whistles, free LD, free M2M, 5 My Circle was a bonus a couple years back for free, voicemail, etc....$40! Add $25 for truly unlimited EVDO broadband for my Nokia N800 Bluetooth tethered to the Motorola ROKR Z6m that's NOT all hobbled up so you can't use its music and camera functions straight off the microSD card and it's a helluva deal compared to the forced nationwide nonsense and hobbling on Verizon. COPY, MOVE, make your own ringtones (an MP3 from usenet of the Star Trek bosun's whistle intercom), takes jpgs straight to the memory card, plays usenet's MP3s straight off the card, no funny business. We're sure gonna get screwed with Verizon, who I'm sure is going to force their shitty hobbled firmware on us as soon as they think they can get away with it. After all, we can't have the NEW VZW Alltel customers with much better phones than our loyal customers, can we? They might compare notes and the old guys DEMAND what the new guys are still enjoying! THAT would be very dangerous, indeed! Bend over, boys....Verizon's comin'! > Alltel's 2-state NC/SC plus a large area of the states that surround the > 2 states from New Port News, VA to south of Brunswick, GA and up into > about Knoxville, TN is $39.95 for 700 mins, plus 100 bonus minutes for > being a great customer. The plan has all the bells/whistles, free LD, > free M2M, 5 My Circle was a bonus a couple years back for free, > voicemail, etc....$40! Nice- I iss my old T-Mo regional plan: 3000 minutesand 50 text messages for $50. Back then (2001-2003) I didn't have GPRS, but could tether via dialup out of my voice minutes. The T-Mo plan didn't have LD though, so I ditched it eventually. > make your own ringtones (an MP3 from > usenet of the Star Trek bosun's whistle intercom)... I take full credit for that idea! ;) When I hear that whistle, I know it's my phone ringing and no one elses! > We're sure gonna get screwed with Verizon, who I'm sure is going to > force their shitty hobbled firmware on us as soon as they think they can > get away with it. I doubt it- they'll be content to wait until you all upgrade to ther crippled handsets- no point rocking the boat too early. Verizon is patient- they have the rest of your life you screw you! ;-) Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote in news:g9ovkb$vr2$2 @aioe.org: > I take full credit for that idea! ;) When I hear that whistle, I know > it's my phone ringing and no one elses! A whole restaurant will look my way when that thing goes off on a Z6m ROKR. It's really LOUD! I have no trouble hearing it at 70 mph on the interstate on the motorcycle even without wearing the S9. >> Alltel's 2-state NC/SC plus a large area of the states that surround the >> 2 states from New Port News, VA to south of Brunswick, GA and up into [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > out of my voice minutes. The T-Mo plan didn't have LD though, so I ditched > it eventually. I had one of those plans for two days. A buddy and I both decided it would be a way to make inexpensive calls in addition to our VZW phones. This was pre "in" network. I found that tmobile had such poor coverage that the phone was useless so I returned it the next day. tmobile tried to ding me fifty bucks for less than 10 minutes of use and I remember making a bunch of calls to make them go away. >> make your own ringtones (an MP3 from >> usenet of the Star Trek bosun's whistle intercom)... [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > crippled handsets- no point rocking the boat too early. Verizon is patient- > they have the rest of your life you screw you! ;-) SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in news:w8Jvk.18936$LG4.4088 @nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com: > It was Alltel charging you the 89½ per minute, not Verizon. Alltel paid > Verizon very little for the roaming, and it could have been nothing at > all depending on what reciprocal agreements were in place. Nope. I was a VERIZON customer. Doesn't wash. SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in news:4QAvk.36476$co7.33169 @nlpi066.nbdc.sbc.com: > Of Alltel's approximately 13 millions > subscribers, less than 2 million use the regional plans. Where's the reference for this statistic? I've never seen it anywhere. > > The grandfathering will likely placate them for awhile, unless/until > > Verizon pulls an "AT&T" and forces them out of those grandfathered plans [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Historically Verizon has not forced existing customers to adopt current > calling plans when upgrading handsets and going back under contract. True, but those are grandfathered Verizon plans. I'm not sure how many wing ut Alltel plans Verizon is going to want to support in their billing systems. > I keep worrying that they will do this, but so far they haven't. To be fair, the same could be said of Cingular- it was primarily the acquired ATTWS customers they shafted. > They've gone to great trouble to even keep the greater coverage > of the older Americas Choice Plan available (plus they don't ever > seem to charge for the off-network AMPS roaming that shows on > the handset as roaming that I should be charged for). They're under > no obligation to keep offering service at prices from the older plans, > but they do so anyway. True, but the same can be said of most if not all carriers. Last time I spoke to him (three months ago or so) my cousin was still on an old ATTWS GSM "charter plan" that offered unlimited voice calling for $99. (The recent ccrop of unlimited plans has made this less impressive, but he's had it for six years or so!) > Part of the way Cingular forced AT&T Wireless customers to switch > to higher cost plans was due to the change from TDMA to GSM. All > those super-cheap TDMA plans went away with the technology > change. It wasn't just the TDMA customers- Cingular refused to transfer grandfathered ATTWS GSM plans to Cingular/"new AT&T" SIMs and phones, forcing them to take new Cingular plans. My forementioned cousin has had to use unlocked phones to keep his plan since Cingular/new AT&T phones won't accept his "blue" SIM. He also can't add current data or text packages to his charter plan. (For that reason he was considering switching to either a new unlimited AT&T or Verizon plan now that they've "caught up" to his charter plan's value, last I heard.) >> > The grandfathering will likely placate them for awhile, unless/until >> > Verizon pulls an "AT&T" and forces them out of those grandfathered plans [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > wing ut Alltel plans Verizon is going to want to support in their billing > systems. Should get an example of what they'll be doing early on, though. Verizon's acquisition of RCC was approved by the FCC on August 1 (that's one year after the acquisition was announced), so they'll probably do whatever they are going to do to Unicel's oddball plans before they get around to Alltel. It seems plausible that the accumulated variety of all their acquisitions' plans might cause some heartburn to their billing system, though I'm not sure they have any choice other than entering them for existing customers even if they stop selling those plans. Dennis Ferguson >>>> The grandfathering will likely placate them for awhile, unless/until >>>> Verizon pulls an "AT&T" and forces them out of those grandfathered plans [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > not sure they have any choice other than entering them for existing > customers even if they stop selling those plans. Trying to keep track of which calls are roaming if they were still on Alltel regional plans would be a real pain in the butt. They may just let those customers keep the plan but no longer charge for roaming out of the region. Since so few Alltel customers choose the regional plans it wouldn't be a huge hit on revenue. SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in news:WDTvk.8520$np7.3555 @flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com: > Since so few Alltel customers choose the regional plans > it wouldn't be a huge hit on revenue. One more time.....where is this info coming from? Got a reference or is this just your opinion?? > SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in news:WDTvk.8520$np7.3555 > @flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com: [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > One more time.....where is this info coming from? Got a reference or is > this just your opinion?? I remember reading this back around 2003 or 2004 in one of the trade publications. I think it was RCR Wireless ("http://www.rcrwireless.com"). This was 2-3 years after when Alltel came out with their "Always Up2Date Guarantee," which would recommend the most cost effective rate plan to customers, as a way of reducing churn (which was a huge problem for Alltel when they didn't have a national plan that included roaming). They had initially planned this guarantee to cover only their new Total Freedom National plan, but then they expanded it to cover their regional plans because they saw that a high percentage of their regional customers were paying more in roaming charges than the cost difference between the regional rate plan and the national rate plan for comparable amounts of minutes. Very few new customers sign up for regional plans according to Alltel, and over time the customers that did opt for regional plans have been migrating to national plans. As an aside, Cellular One in the SF Bay Area was running into a similar problem. There were customers going to Sacramento to buy phones and service on AT&T Wireless because Cellular One and GTE Mobilnet didn't offer any national plans at the time. AT&T didn't like people doing this because the subscribers were doing mostly off-network roaming onto other networks. The problem was solved when AT&T took over Cellular One's Bay Area operations. >> SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in news:WDTvk.8520$np7.3555 >> @flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com: [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > networks. The problem was solved when AT&T took over Cellular One's Bay > Area operations. BTW, if you have some citation that says that a lot of Alltel customers actually do sign up for regional plans, please post that as well. I've seen you claim that this is the case, but I've never seen anything from you that backs it up. SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in news:AL0wk.20988$xZ.3585 @nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com: > BTW, if you have some citation that says that a lot of Alltel customers > actually do sign up for regional plans, please post that as well. I've > seen you claim that this is the case, but I've never seen anything from > you that backs it up. Nope. My statement was that most Alltel customers I know are all on the SC/NC regional plan as we rarely leave the region. We get lots more minutes for less money on the regional plan. We don't all live on airplanes.....any more that is. SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in news:psxvk.40204$ZE5.16866 @nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com: > Other than Larry, most Alltel customers will > be thrilled to be moved over to Verizon with their plans grandfathered > in--it's the best of both worlds for them. Maybe where you live, but certainly not where I live..... A large majority of Alltel customers in SC buy the REGIONAL plan Verizon will delete at takeover. More minutes in less area is fine for most users who rarely, especially now as gas skyrockets in price and buying an airplane ticket is like buying a house, travel outside the state. It's stupid to buy "Nationwide Service" when you rarely leave the county you live in. >> Dow Jones Newswires reports today that "Verizon didn't need the iPhone >> after all." [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > as they say, Verizon is doomed without access to the iPhone... this is > further proof. Aren't you making the assumption that everyone does, or will, want an iPhone? Some of us couldn't care less about music, videos, or spending good money to buy the latest whiz-bang! Some of us only have a cell phone in case of emergency. I doubt if I use ten minutes a month but it's there if I should need it! > as they say, Verizon is doomed without access to the iPhone... this is > further proof. Better late than never I am kill filing trolls like Oxford/Moyer. Should have done it a while ago. Maybe these groups will be readable by ignoring idiots like Oxford/Moyer, Crispin and Larry who post nonsense. PLONK  SignatureCharles > Dow Jones Newswires reports today that "Verizon didn't need the iPhone > after all." <snip> Yeah, but just think of those numbers with another million or so iPhone customers. In any case, Verizon has had both more retail customers, and more total customers, than AT&T for a long time. The way AT&T inflates is numbers is with the large number of MVNO customers using services like Tracfone. I'm not sure how much being the largest carrier helps in marketing. People look at independent surveys of coverage and quality, where AT&T is usually third or fourth, and Verizon and Alltel are always first. >> Dow Jones Newswires reports today that "Verizon didn't need the iPhone >> after all." > Yeah, but just think of those numbers with another million or so iPhone > customers. That assumes that a company wants to have a million fanboys as customers. If each fanboy drives away an average of 5 non-fanboys, the result is a loss of 4 million. This is why the companies that go for iPhone tend to be the second-rates in their respective markets (AT&T in the US, Rogers in Canada, O2 in the UK, SoftBank in Japan, etc.). They need the surge of fanboys in order to finance a build-up of their network so they can reasonably compete with the top carrier. But once that build-up happens, they need to get rid of the fanboys in order to attract the more profitable business customers, typically by spawning a wholely-owned MVNO whose sole purpose is to be a bucket for a market segment that you want to isolate from the rest of the business. -- Mark -- http://panda.com/mrc Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote. > That assumes that a company wants to have a million fanboys as customers. > If each fanboy drives away an average of 5 non-fanboys, the result is a > loss of 4 million. Another troll who is a waste of time reading. PLONK SignatureCharles > That assumes that a company wants to have a million fanboys as > customers. If each fanboy drives away an average of 5 non-fanboys, the > result is a loss of 4 million. LOL, outside of Usenet, does anyone know that these fanboys exist? On Usenet, do they really drive away anyone from AT&T? They probably do have a negative effect on Apple, because without their posts and the replies a lot of people would be unaware of any issues with the iPhone. I.e., before I read it here, I simply assumed that the iPhone could edit Word and Excel documents, and I assumed that it had voice-dialing. > This is why the companies that go for iPhone tend to be the second-rates > in their respective markets (AT&T in the US, Rogers in Canada, O2 in the > UK, SoftBank in Japan, etc.). They need the surge of fanboys in order > to finance a build-up of their network so they can reasonably compete > with the top carrier. This is true. The iPhone doesn't exist for me, because the AT&T coverage in both my home area, and the places I travel to most often, is sub-standard compared to Verizon coverage. > But once that build-up happens, they need to get rid of the fanboys in > order to attract the more profitable business customers, The old AT&T Wireless and Cingular hemorrhaged business customers to Verizon and the new AT&T Wireless is concentrating more on the non-business user with products like the iPhone. The iPhone is virtually unusable by most businesses that need full smart phone capabilities. That's not to say that the iPhone doesn't have a market, just that it's not the business market. > LOL, outside of Usenet, does anyone know that these fanboys exist? The fanboys are in the Apple forums, which is unfortunate since Apple strongly encourages users with support questions to go to the forums rather than contacting Apple. This works when it's a relatively straightforward newbie question. It works less well when the user has a real bug ("Why isn't it loading my contacts and calendar from Outlook"?, "Why am I getting unknown error #### in upgrading my iPhone software, and what can I do to get it out of restore mode?", etc.) or wants to do something outside of the walled garden ("How do I get the modem to answer a data call; the normal UNIX method of editing /etc/ttys to start a getty doesn't seem to work?"). The most obnoxious fanboys, however, are to be found where Apple's competition lurks. These are the self-annointed prophets who go out to convert the heathen. An outstanding example is Oxford, who relentlessly posts iPhone advocacy in the Verizon, T-Mobile, etc. groups and has done an excellent job in convincing people not to touch an iPhone with a 10 foot pole. I happen to have active accounts with both Verizon and AT&T; use both Windows and Mac; use iToy, Windows Mobile, and N800; etc. I'm pretty well aware of the strengths and weaknesses of each of these platforms. Fanboys of any stripe are particularly annoying to me, because (among other damage) they tend to hamper fixes of bugs, misfeatures, and omissions on a platform. > This is true. The iPhone doesn't exist for me, because the AT&T coverage in > both my home area, and the places I travel to most often, is sub-standard > compared to Verizon coverage. Yup; both call quality and coverage is much better with Big Red. AT&T's 3G network has comparable call quality, but it's only in the big cities. Out in the boonies, you're stuck with GSM. But AT&T has its uses. A 50MB data-only AT&T SIM is quite a bit cheaper than adding tethering to Verizon, and I own property in ex-Dobson territory that is not covered by Verizon. Also, Verizon's world phones only have GSM, not 3G, on its world side. So either you need a second (unlocked) 3G phone and do a SIM swap (and yes, there is such a thing as a Verizon SIM) when going to 3G-only countries such as Japan, or you have to go with AT&T for a GSM/3G phone with 3G in the 2100 band. -- Mark -- http://panda.com/mrc Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote. > The most obnoxious fanboys, however, are to be found where Apple's > competition lurks. These are the self-annointed prophets who go out to > convert the heathen. An outstanding example is Oxford, who relentlessly > posts iPhone advocacy in the Verizon, T-Mobile, etc. groups and has done > an excellent job in convincing people not to touch an iPhone with a 10 > foot pole. Nah, Oxford/Moyer is more amusing than obnoxious. He posts these amazing lies trying to goad people to respond, and he's often successful. No one could be as clueless as his posts make him appear. >> This is true. The iPhone doesn't exist for me, because the AT&T >> coverage in both my home area, and the places I travel to most often, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > 3G network has comparable call quality, but it's only in the big cities. > Out in the boonies, you're stuck with GSM. No, out in the boonies there is no GSM to be stuck with (unless you're John Navas with extended range GSM, LOL). The results are in for AT&T. As expected, AT&T added 1.3 million new subscribers in Q2, for a total of 72.8 million subscribers. As with other traditional phone companies, AT&T's wireline business was hit hard, with a 2.6% decline in phone lines (60.4 million to 58.9 million). This was worse than the market expected, but the impact to AT&T's overall profit margins was not as bad as expected, and AT&T shares rose today. As noted before, Verizon added 1.5 million subscribers in Q2, for a total of 68.7 million subscribers. The pending acquisition of Alltel will add 13 million subscribers to Verizon, putting it ahead of AT&T, just as AT&T's acquisition of Dobson Cellular One last year put AT&T ahead of Verizon. -- Mark -- http://panda.com/mrc Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote. > The results are in for AT&T. > > As expected, AT&T added 1.3 million new subscribers in Q2, for a total of > 72.8 million subscribers. Whew, I don't think that's good. While they don't say it explicitly I think their ARPU might have dropped a bit from last quarter too. Dennis Ferguson > The pending acquisition of Alltel will add 13 million subscribers to > Verizon, putting it ahead of AT&T, just as AT&T's acquisition of > Dobson Cellular One last year put AT&T ahead of Verizon. Didn't Cingular's acquisition of AT&T Wireless put it ahead of Verizon a few years ago? The Dobson acquisition was only a few million customers. Although I really don't know why anyone cares about the "most subscribers" total anyway. It's not like any of these carriers grew to these numbers "naturally"- both AT&T and Verizon are amalgams of smaller regional carriers created through mergers and acquisitions, Sprint acquired Nextel, and T-Mobile was a bunch of smaller GSM carriers. We're not talking about ground-up expansions of once small mom-n-pop businesses acheiving national dominance one customer or store at a time like Starbucks, McDonald's or Wal-Mart! Any company can become "biggest" in their market via mergers and acquisitions... > Didn't Cingular's acquisition of AT&T Wireless put it ahead of Verizon a > few years ago? The Dobson acquisition was only a few million customers. Nope. The ATTWS acquisition put it close, but Dobson brought it over. > Although I really don't know why anyone cares about the "most subscribers" > total anyway. I agree. That comment was just to tweak the noses of the fanboys who think that there is something significant about AT&T currently having the "most subscribers". -- Mark -- http://panda.com/mrc Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote. > > Didn't Cingular's acquisition of AT&T Wireless put it ahead of Verizon a > > few years ago? The Dobson acquisition was only a few million customers. > > Nope. The ATTWS acquisition put it close, but Dobson brought it over. A quick Google search confirmed my failing memory: http://www.prnewswire.com/mnr/cingular/20429/ Although Verizon has come close to toppling them, (I seem to recall them roughly neck and neck at 60-65 million customers in late '06 or early '07,) I believe Cingular/AT&T has maintained it's lead ever since the late 2004 merger. > > Although I really don't know why anyone cares about the "most > > subscribers" total anyway. > > I agree. That comment was just to tweak the noses of the fanboys > who think that there is something significant about AT&T currently > having the "most subscribers". Fair enough- I wholeheartedly support tweaking the fanboys! ;-) Besides, it's all academic anyway- I have it on good Oxythority than in 5 years all cellphone companies will be out of business and we'll all be VoIPing each other for free on our iPhones over free nationwide WiFi... ...and occasionally ducking so we don't get hit in the head by all of the flying pigs... > Besides, it's all academic anyway- I have it on good Oxythority than in 5 > years all cellphone companies will be out of business and we'll all be > VoIPing each other for free on our iPhones over free nationwide WiFi... You mean you're not doing that already? > > Besides, it's all academic anyway- I have it on good Oxythority than in 5 > > years all cellphone companies will be out of business and we'll all be > > VoIPing each other for free on our iPhones over free nationwide WiFi... > > You mean you're not doing that already? Only when convenient- my Windows Mobile phone, (an unlocked AT&T Tilt) can do Skype and SIP VoIP (I use a Voicestick account for SIP.) I've configured my T-Mobile service to forward to my VoIP account when unavailable, which gives me Visual Voicemail (unanswered GSM calls roll to my VoIP provider who then instantly e-mails the .wav file to my push account.) The added benefit of this is if I'm somewhere where I have WiFi but lousy or no cell service (my hotel room in Bellevue, NE last month, for example) I leave the phone's WiFi on and VoIP client running and the incoming T-Mo calls I would've missed seamlessly ring in on the VoIP line, and I can answer them. Sort of my "roll-your-own" T-Mo Hotspot@Home service. Compared to my old 200MHz OMAP HTC Wizard, which didn't have the horsepower to do VoIP well without potentially dangerous overclocking, the 400MHz Tilt hums along fine with VoIP. >> Didn't Cingular's acquisition of AT&T Wireless put it ahead of Verizon a >> few years ago? The Dobson acquisition was only a few million customers. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > think that there is something significant about AT&T currently having > the "most subscribers". Actually they don't have the most subscribers, they have the most people using their network, when you include MVNOs. Verizon's been ahead in subscribers for a long time. Where "the most" subscribers makes a difference is in being able to have more mobile to mobile calls that don't use plan minutes. > Actually they don't have the most subscribers, they have the most > people using their network, when you include MVNOs. Verizon's > been ahead in subscribers for a long time. Ok, they have the most "customers" or "users", since MVNOs are customers as well. > Where "the most" subscribers makes a difference is in being able > to have more mobile to mobile calls that don't use plan minutes. True. Assuming, of course, you often call complete strangers at random. In reality, what matters to you most (for M2M) is what carrier most of YOUR friends, associates, and family members you call most use. If you wax poetic about the Splendor that is Verizon to those you call most even half as much as you do to us here, I'll wager everyone you know has switched to Verizon just to avoid your nagging! ;-) Given the current subscriber numbers, however, the odds that a family member or friend will have either AT&T or Verizon is just about even (except in your sphere of influence, obviously.) Of course, as a T-Mobile MyFaves customer, my phone bill isn't dependent on conning my family or friends into using the carrier of MY choice... ;-) > True. Assuming, of course, you often call complete strangers at random. Not really. The more subscribers, the more likely the people that you need to call will be on the same network. Just think, when the acquisition of Alltel is complete we'll be able to call Larry for free (at least until he goes somewhere else). > In reality, what matters to you most (for M2M) is what carrier most of YOUR > friends, associates, and family members you call most use. Actually it's those people that I don't worry about anymore. Most are in the SF Bay Area, where it's almost heresy for anyone to not be on Verizon. It's people I call only occasionally that I'll sometimes ask what carrier they're on if the call is turning into a long one. If the person is in the Bay Area then more often than not they're on Verizon. I remember some friends that moved to Lafayette, and they sent me their new address and phone numbers (Cingular cell phones) via e-mail with this gem (names and number's x'd out): Steve, here are our numbers: 925-945-xxxx (Home) 510 919-xxxx (xxxxx's cell) - no reception at home 408 568-xxxx (xxxxx's cell) - no reception at home. By the time we visited them, they were both on Verizon, the only carrier with coverage at their house. I had never discussed anything about the relative coverage quality with them, they figured it out all on their own! For some reason AT&T really has a big problem with East Bay coverage out in the Moraga/Lafayette area, Navas's protestations to the contrary notwithstanding. >As with other traditional phone companies, AT&T's wireline business was >hit hard, with a 2.6% decline in phone lines (60.4 million to 58.9 >million). This was worse than the market expected, but the impact to >AT&T's overall profit margins was not as bad as expected, and AT&T shares >rose today. OUCH! I knew that cellular and VOIP were hurting landline business, but not THAT bad. Ugh... how much longer until the amount of ILEC landline customers leaving will ease? Though I have cellular and VOIP, I consider those to be either toys or just a nice convenience. I'll still keep my landline, even if I drop most of the features on there to bring the price down. Why? For or reliability and most importantly, voice quality. Neither GSM or CDMA or any VOIP codec can sound as well as a landline. They've come close in recent years, but still don't sound as good as a traditional landline. > OUCH! I knew that cellular and VOIP were hurting landline business, > but not THAT bad. But does it really matter, since DSL represents half of broadband sales. Does, for example, Qwest really care if I pay them $40/month for dry DSL internet, (then use VoIP) instead of $30 for a landline? It's kind of like why McDonald's sells salads and grilled chicken sandwiches- it replaces the potential lost revenue of customers who don't like/want beef. > Ugh... how much longer until the amount of ILEC landline customers > leaving will ease? Though I have cellular and VOIP, I consider those > to be either toys or just a nice convenience. Agreed. > I'll still keep my landline, even if I drop most of the features on > there to bring the price down. Why? For or reliability and most > importantly, voice quality. Neither GSM or CDMA or any VOIP codec can > sound as well as a landline. They've come close in recent years, but > still don't sound as good as a traditional landline. Agreed again. But realistically it's a non-issue- the landline companies have already diversified into internet, VoIP and cellular. Verizon isn't really going to cry a river when a $30 landline customer dumps it for a $50 Verizon wireless cellular plan! > Agreed again. But realistically it's a non-issue- the landline companies > have already diversified into internet, VoIP and cellular. Verizon isn't > really going to cry a river when a $30 landline customer dumps it for a $50 > Verizon wireless cellular plan! Verizon might not cry a river, but I'll bet they'd shed a few tears. 100% of a $30 landline is better than 55% of a $50 cell plan. Dennis Ferguson > > But realistically it's a non-issue- the landline companies > > have already diversified into internet, VoIP and cellular. Verizon [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > tears. 100% of a $30 landline is better than 55% of a $50 cell > plan. Fair enough. OTOH, Verizon Wireless is a nationwide company, whereas Verizon is regional- that 55% of $50 comes from 60+ million people, the majority of whom are inaccessable to Mother Verizon's copper embrace. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.