 |
 | 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 / Cingular / February 2006"Cingular Wireless Announces Fourth-Quarter 2005 Results"
<http://cingular.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=press_releases&item=1435> Best-ever overall churn of 2.1 percent, postpaid churn at 1.9 percent ATLANTA, Jan. 24 /PRNewswire/ -- Cingular Wireless LLC, which is a joint venture between AT&T Inc., formerly SBC Communications Inc. (NYSE: T), and BellSouth Corporation (NYSE: BLS), today reported solid fourth-quarter results driven by its best-ever overall churn, record net customer additions, strong gross additions, progress on merger initiatives, growth of data ARPU, and strength in enterprise services. For the quarter, the nation's largest wireless provider reported monthly subscriber churn of 2.1 percent -- its lowest ever. This represents an improvement of 30 basis points* over the year-ago fourth quarter and a sequential improvement of 20 basis points. Postpaid churn improved sequentially by 10 basis points to 1.9 percent. Driven in part by its churn results, Cingular also reported a record 1.8 million net customer additions, which is more than double the number reported in the third quarter of 2005 and compares to 1.7 million pro forma net additions in the fourth quarter of 2004. ... Gross additions were 5.1 million, which is a sequential improvement of 750 thousand customers and less than 100 thousand on a comparable basis from pro forma gross additions in the fourth quarter of 2004*. The sequential improvement in gross adds was primarily driven by holiday buying activity of prepaid and reseller customers. Cingular ended 2005 with 54.1 million cellular/PCS subscribers, an increase of 5 million over 2004. Cingular's data ARPU was $4.71, up 63 percent over the year-ago fourth quarter and a sequential improvement of 9 percent. ... ... During the fourth quarter of 2005, 95 percent of minutes were carried on Cingular's GSM network and 86 percent of the company's subscriber base was GSM-equipped. Approximately 7 percent of Cingular's customer base upgraded handsets during the fourth quarter. Cingular has now converted nearly 7 million former AT&T Wireless subscribers to new Cingular plans ... [MORE]  SignatureBest regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> > <http://cingular.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=press_releases&item=1435> > [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > Cingular has now converted nearly 7 million former AT&T Wireless > subscribers to new Cingular plans ... <yawn> Another subpar report from Cingular. When they lead with the numbers they used, it only means that revenue and profit will fall far short of the rest. > Another subpar report from Cingular. When they lead with the numbers they > used, it only means that revenue and profit will fall far short of the rest. Terrible results, with ARPU falling 2.2%, while Verizon's ARPU was up 3%, and with Verizon having 50% more total additions during 2005. Ouch. The funniest part of Cingular's news release was where they quoted data ARPU but forgot to mention voice ARPU in the text, leaving it for the section on financial results. However with the Cingular getting distribution through Radio Shack, and Verizon losing it, I think Cingular will do better in net additions in 2006. I wonder how much they had to pay Radio Shack to drop Verizon. >> Another subpar report from Cingular. When they lead with the numbers >> they used, it only means that revenue and profit will fall far short of >> the rest. > > Terrible results, with ARPU falling 2.2%, while Verizon's ARPU was up 3%, > and with Verizon having 50% more total additions during 2005. Ouch. I believe Sprint will also show more net adds for the year as well. > The funniest part of Cingular's news release was where they quoted data > ARPU but forgot to mention voice ARPU in the text, leaving it for the > section on financial results. The press release looks as if it were written for a high school newspaper. It certainly wasn't written with even the most basic investor in mind. Leading with churn, using gross adds instead of net adds for the year and only mentioning a $4.71 ARPU figure as a big accomplishment is a pretty pathetic course to take. This is just a classic example of a company using secondary metrics to hide poor performance in the areas that count. > However with the Cingular getting distribution through Radio Shack, and > Verizon losing it, I think Cingular will do better in net additions in > 2006. I wonder how much they had to pay Radio Shack to drop Verizon. I don't see that as any kind of real edge. Every Radio Shack I've been by in the last couple of months has Sprint much more prominently displayed. >>> Another subpar report from Cingular. When they lead with the numbers >>> they used, it only means that revenue and profit will fall far short of [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > I don't see that as any kind of real edge. Every Radio Shack I've been by > in the last couple of months has Sprint much more prominently displayed. It's been only four weeks since Cingular went into Radio Shack, and Radio Shack has been advertising Cingular a lot. The Radio Shack dealers in the San Francisco Bay Area are extremely unhappy over the change from Verizon to Cingular. >It's been only four weeks since Cingular went into Radio Shack, and >Radio Shack has been advertising Cingular a lot. The Radio Shack dealers >in the San Francisco Bay Area are extremely unhappy over the change from >Verizon to Cingular. And pigs have wings. SignatureBest regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> > [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE] > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > And pigs have wings. Wow, John- that really contributed to the discussion. Moron. I've talked to a few of the salesmen in the stores here- they say their phone commissions are about half of what they were with Verizon- not because the actual commission is less, but because sales volume has plummeted. Now John- care to comment on two factual posts that contradict your uneducated view of the situation? Or shall you go silent in this thread, avoiding the conversation altogether? I know which is the obvious choice. >> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE] >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > phone commissions are about half of what they were with Verizon- not because > the actual commission is less, but because sales volume has plummeted. The incredible part of this is that it's a _ten year agreement_ between Cingular and Radio Shack. I wonder if the terms of the agreement are such that franchisees are forbidden from selling T-Mobile or Verizon. Another source for the Radio Shack/Cingular story is at "http://www.cbc.ca/cp/business/060112/b011262.html" But the best source of the impact is to talk to a Radio Shack franchise owner (rather than the manager of a company owned store), outside the store where they can be honest about the situation. They are extremely unhappy right now, as are the sales people. Commissions from the carriers are a major source of revenue for Radio Shack franchisee's. Circuit City really got it right, with Verizon for quality service, and T-Mobile for low-cost service. > Now John- care to comment on two factual posts that contradict your > uneducated view of the situation? Or shall you go silent in this thread, > avoiding the conversation altogether? I know which is the obvious choice. Facts are facts and will not disappear on account of your likes. Jawaharlal Nehru >But the best source of the impact is to talk to a Radio Shack franchise >owner (rather than the manager of a company owned store), outside the >store where they can be honest about the situation. They are extremely >unhappy right now, as are the sales people. Commissions from the >carriers are a major source of revenue for Radio Shack franchisee's. Proof by repetition (of unsupported claims)? >Circuit City really got it right, with Verizon for quality service, and >T-Mobile for low-cost service. Because that agrees with your anti-Cingular agenda. >> Now John- care to comment on two factual posts that contradict your >> uneducated view of the situation? Or shall you go silent in this thread, >> avoiding the conversation altogether? I know which is the obvious choice. > >Facts are facts and will not disappear on account of your likes. >Jawaharlal Nehru All we have from you thus far are unsupported claims. The facts (as documented in the financial press) are that the business at Radio Shack was in trouble, and that the switch to Cingular is part of the effort to turn that around. <http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/060112/radioshack_outlook.html?.v=6> RadioShack Confirms 2005 Profit Shortfall RadioShack Confirms 2005 Earnings Will Miss Goal, 4Q Total Sales Rose 5 Percent RadioShack Corp. says revenue rose in the fourth quarter, but sales of wireless phones and highly profitable accessories were disappointing, and the electronics retailer still expects to miss earnings targets for all of 2005. The company said Thursday that total sales rose 5 percent in the fourth quarter, to $1.67 billion, and sales at stores open at least one year -- a key measurement for retailers -- increased 4 percent. But much of the gains came in low-profit gadgets such as MP3 music players and digital cameras, and they weren't enough to salvage the full-year results. RadioShack said it would miss its goal of earning $2.14 to $2.24 per share -- around $300 million -- for all of last year. ... Chief Executive David J. Edmondson said the transition from Verizon to Cingular was "more painful than we expected" but will pay dividends because RadioShack won the right to open stores under the Sprint and Cingular brands. ... <http://biz.yahoo.com/fool/060112/113708679513.html?.v=1> Motley Fool RadioShack Losing Power It's been a tough year for the Shack. Almost a year ago to the day, the company said it was confident that it would see 20% earnings growth over 2004's results, but the euphoria was short-lived. Just two months later, the company's sales fell; it realized that it would miss its first-quarter forecasts, and possibly its full-year predictions. It's been dialing down expectations all year long. <http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/060113/radioshack_stock.html?.v=2> RadioShack Stock Up on Analyst Upgrade RadioShack Stock Rises; Prudential Upgrade to 'Overweight' Cites 'Groove' Return RadioShack Corp. stock rose Friday after Prudential analyst Mark Rowen upgraded his rating on the stock to "overweight" from "neutral, " saying that 2006 could be the year when the consumer electronics retailer "gets its groove back." Shares of Fort Worth, Texas-based RadioShack rose $1.38, or 6.4 percent, to $22.87 in midday trading on the New York Stock Exchange. Rowen points to three reasons why he's upbeat about the stock. First, the initial phase of the transition to selling Cingular Wireless products instead of Verizon Wireless products is complete. That "significantly" lowers the retailer's operational risk, Rowen said. Second, the addition of Cingular nearly doubles RadioShack's wireless market opportunity to 15.5 million subscribers from 8 million, Rowen said. Although it's not clear whether RadioShack will be able to capitalize on the opportunity, Prudential is optimistic the retailer will, he said. SignatureBest regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> >>>It's been only four weeks since Cingular went into Radio Shack, and >>>Radio Shack has been advertising Cingular a lot. The Radio Shack dealers [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Wow, John- that really contributed to the discussion. It does just what I intended, which is to poke a bit of fun at his wild and unsupported claim. He almost certainly has no way of really knowing what the majority of Radio Shack dealers actually think, and is making this up in "support" of his own anti-Cingular agenda, as reflected in all the time and energy he invests here even though he's a Verizon subscriber. >Moron. All that does is make you look immature and devoid of any real substance. >I've talked to a few of the salesmen in the stores here- they say their >phone commissions are about half of what they were with Verizon- not because >the actual commission is less, but because sales volume has plummeted. That's supposed to be validation of "SMS"? >Now John- care to comment on two factual posts that contradict your >uneducated view of the situation? Or shall you go silent in this thread, >avoiding the conversation altogether? I know which is the obvious choice. No real facts have been presented, just anecdotal claims. Problems at Radio Shack are well known and unrelated to Cingular. Cellular sales make up a big part of the business and were in trouble long before the Cingular deal, which is probably part of why the company switched to Cingular. That kind of cold turkey change inevitably results and did result in short term issues (e.g., inventory, training, momentum, promotions), which are likewise well known. All that said, it's way too early to judge the success of the switch. Let's see how things look at the end of at least a quarter or two. SignatureBest regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> > [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE] > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > and > energy he invests here even though he's a Verizon subscriber. So, you are calling Steve a liar? Pretty bold statement from somebody frequently proven wrong in this forum. >>Moron. > > All that does is make you look immature and devoid of any real substance. Or it shows that I'm an excellent judge of character. >>I've talked to a few of the salesmen in the stores here- they say their >>phone commissions are about half of what they were with Verizon- not >>because >>the actual commission is less, but because sales volume has plummeted. > > That's supposed to be validation of "SMS"? Well, two of us have the same story and you seem to be alone in your glowing view of the situation. >>Now John- care to comment on two factual posts that contradict your >>uneducated view of the situation? Or shall you go silent in this thread, >>avoiding the conversation altogether? I know which is the obvious choice. > > No real facts have been presented, just anecdotal claims. No- facts have been presented, unless you are calling us both liars. > Problems at Radio Shack are well known and unrelated to Cingular. > Cellular > sales make up a big part of the business and were in trouble long before > the > Cingular deal, which is probably part of why the company switched to > Cingular. So you are guessing again and have no facts to support your claim. That is anecdotal. > That kind of cold turkey change inevitably results and did result in short > term issues (e.g., inventory, training, momentum, promotions), which are [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > or > two. Its always easy to take the wait-and-see approach when the facts don't support your claims. <snip> > So, you are calling Steve a liar? Pretty bold statement from somebody > frequently proven wrong in this forum. Like many business-people that own the same type of franchise, Radio Shack owners know what is going on in terms of sales volumes of key products at other franchise locations in the area, often down to the volumes that other stores sell. I did not claim that all Radio Shack stores across the country are unhappy with Cingular, I have no way of knowing that. It's a fact that in the SF Bay area, wireless sales volumes are way down since January 1. Cingular has a very poor reputation in this area, due to what happened originally with Pacific Bell Wireless around 2000-2002. The news story I quoted simply confirmed what the franchisees are saying. > <snip> > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > The news story I quoted simply confirmed what the franchisees are saying. But John claims otherwise and guesses at why this will work. How dare you use facts when the great John Novice says otherwise!! > But John claims otherwise and guesses at why this will work. How dare you > use facts when the great John Novice says otherwise!! Karl Rove has competition. Just my 2 cents, on this whole thing, I work PT for Home Depot and we have Verizon Keosk's in all of the stores, there on a 6 month trial basis, and there sales plan is really up there. So far there NOT looking good and if they dont pick it up , there all done in another 3 months, I dont know about other area's I live in the Albany NY area. As far as Radio Shack and Cingular, I dont know of anyone that has bought through them. > Just my 2 cents, on this whole thing, I work PT for Home Depot and we > have Verizon Keosk's in all of the stores, there on a 6 month trial [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > As far as Radio Shack and Cingular, I dont know of anyone that has > bought through them. I can't imagine anyone buying their cell phones at Home Depot, it doesn't seem to fit, but who knows. Costco is doing well in cellular phone sales, but they offer better deals than Sprint or Verizon stores or online. > Just my 2 cents, on this whole thing, I work PT for Home Depot and we > have Verizon Keosk's in all of the stores, there on a 6 month trial [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > As far as Radio Shack and Cingular, I dont know of anyone that has > bought through them. It's a big difference between what's happening at Home Depot and Radio Shack. With Radio Shack, you had a good baseline of what to expect in terms of new subscribers. Also, wireless sales generate a large portion of the revenue generated in each store, unlike Home Depot. While most Radio Shack stores are company-owned (about 1/3 are franchises), there are enough franchises for anyone who is interested to get the real story from the front line, though the news reports have also explicitly stated that "it's suffering from lower-than-anticipated sales and profits in its wireless division." Can't get much clearer than that! Home Depot does get the biggest discount for its employees from Verizon, a whopping 25% off! >> But John claims otherwise and guesses at why this will work. How dare you >> use facts when the great John Novice says otherwise!! > >Karl Rove has competition. Bucking for his job? Bottom fallen out of self-proclaimed cellular expertise? ;) SignatureBest regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> Bottom fallen out of self-proclaimed cellular expertise? Apparently not- you're still here. > But John claims otherwise and guesses at why this will work. How dare you > use facts when the great John Novice says otherwise!! I was in Costco in Mountain View today and was looking at the Verizon phones that they offered since I'm up for my $100 off a new handset next month. They had a poor selection of handsets, but they were promoting the fact that they have an extra $50 rebate, as well as they include a warranty for as long as you own the phone, AND that you can change phones at any time, with no contract extension, by returning your old phone for FULL refund. Pretty bizarre, but they insisted that this was true. Anyway, the Verizon store, in the same shopping center with Costco, didn't have the Motorola V325 I wanted on display. I asked about it, and they said that they had it, but they didn't put it out. I wonder why they don't want to encourage sales of this model? It's the only phone that Verizon offers that meets my criteria. The Verizon store was mobbed, and I couldn't get a salesperson after waiting about 15 minutes. I asked at the repair area in the back about the V325, and to find out the exact date that I can get a new phone, and I mentioned about the store being so crowded. They said that since Radio Shack dropped Verizon on January 1, the volume in the Verizon stores had gone up significantly, and that they were trying to hire additional sales people. So besides all the media reports about the impact on Radio Shack of dropping Verizon, there is an opposite, positive effect, on the Verizon stores. >The Verizon store was mobbed, and I couldn't get a salesperson after >waiting about 15 minutes. I asked at the repair area in the back about [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Shack of dropping Verizon, there is an opposite, positive effect, on the >Verizon stores. Based entirely on your one anecdotal unverifiable story. :) SignatureBest regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> >> The news story I quoted simply confirmed what the franchisees are saying. > >But John claims otherwise and guesses at why this will work. How dare you >use facts when the great John Novice says otherwise!! The story itself says otherwise. SignatureBest regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> ><snip> > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >The news story I quoted simply confirmed what the franchisees are saying. In fact it contradicted what you are saying. SignatureBest regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> >> It does just what I intended, which is to poke a bit of fun at his wild >> and [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >So, you are calling Steve a liar? What I wrote speaks for itself. >Pretty bold statement from somebody >frequently proven wrong in this forum. Wrong on both counts. >> That's supposed to be validation of "SMS"? > >Well, two of us have the same story ... Color me unimpressed. >> No real facts have been presented, just anecdotal claims. > >No- facts have been presented, unless you are calling us both liars. I stand by what I wrote. >> Problems at Radio Shack are well known and unrelated to Cingular. >> Cellular [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >So you are guessing again and have no facts to support your claim. That is >anecdotal. In fact I'm the only one that's posted any supporting evidence. >> That kind of cold turkey change inevitably results and did result in short >> term issues (e.g., inventory, training, momentum, promotions), which are [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >Its always easy to take the wait-and-see approach when the facts don't >support your claims. You're projecting. SignatureBest regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> > [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE] > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > What I wrote speaks for itself. Yes it does, but not as you would see it. >>Pretty bold statement from somebody >>frequently proven wrong in this forum. > > Wrong on both counts. Are you kidding? You were proven wrong again in this very forum last night and now have posted conflicting information to cover your tracks. >>> That's supposed to be validation of "SMS"? >> >>Well, two of us have the same story ... > > Color me unimpressed. Color you clueless. >>> No real facts have been presented, just anecdotal claims. >> >>No- facts have been presented, unless you are calling us both liars. > > I stand by what I wrote. Good thing you don't care about your credibility. >>> Problems at Radio Shack are well known and unrelated to Cingular. >>> Cellular [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > In fact I'm the only one that's posted any supporting evidence. Not true. >>> That kind of cold turkey change inevitably results and did result in >>> short [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > You're projecting. No- you were projecting. I was making an informed observation.. <snip> See: "http://www.abqtrib.com/albq/fe_columnists/article/0,2564,ALBQ_19842_4436951,00.html" if you want to understand one reason Cingular's 4Q2005 results were so poor. It's tough to increase your net additions with such high churn, but it costs money to put the customer service infrastructure in place to keep customers happy. I guess that newspaper won't be getting much advertising revenue from Cingular! ><snip> > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >if you want to understand one reason Cingular's 4Q2005 results were so poor. Actually quite good, as noted in my earlier post here. SignatureBest regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> > [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE] > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Actually quite good, as noted in my earlier post here. Good compared to which carriers? >> Actually quite good, as noted in my earlier post here. > > Good compared to which carriers? Cingular has stated that they expect to "achieve industry-leading metrics, including margins, by the end of 2007." But Cingular wasn't the only carrier that posted less than stellar results. Verizon had its usual spectacular results in terms of churn and net additions, but had lower margins. This means less customers are buying WAOs (worthless add-ons). > The press release looks as if it were written for a high school newspaper. > It certainly wasn't written with even the most basic investor in mind. > Leading with churn, using gross adds instead of net adds for the year and > only mentioning a $4.71 ARPU figure as a big accomplishment is a pretty > pathetic course to take. No, not a $4.71 ARPU, an $4.71 ARPU for data. The real ARPU actually fell, something they disclose later in the article. ARPU is one of the key metrics that the carriers are looking at, now that the market is becoming saturated, and net additions are beginning to level off. Higher ARPU depends on celling worthless services to people with too much money, i.e. $1 ringtones, $2 audio files, and the sending of photos with low quality cameras. Many people thought that when Radio Shack added Cingular, and dropped Verizon, that it would result in a lot more net adds for Cingular, but things are not going well so far for Cingular at Radio Shack. See "http://www.fool.com/News/mft/2006/mft06011213.htm" "The drumbeat of disappointment grew as RadioShack's five-year relationship with Verizon ended. In switching to Cingular, founded as a joint venture between AT&T (NYSE: T) and BellSouth (NYSE: BLS), RadioShack was banking on its status as the largest wireless carrier in the country. That has not panned out as hoped; despite Cingular's 52 million customers, sales have been weak since the transition." Talk to a Radio Shack franchise owner sometime, at a bar. They'll give you an earful about the switch from Verizon to Cingular. It's affected their sales volumes big-time. With Verizon continuing to top all surveys for customer satisfaction in terms of quality of service, it's unclear why Radio Shack would have dumped them, unless Cingular offered them a really sweet deal. >> The press release looks as if it were written for a high school newspaper. >> It certainly wasn't written with even the most basic investor in mind. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >much money, i.e. $1 ringtones, $2 audio files, and the sending of photos >with low quality cameras. It actually comes from selling more things that many people want to buy, not just the things you personally disdain, but also things like wireless data, which is why the Data ARPU is meaningful. >Many people thought that when Radio Shack added Cingular, and dropped >Verizon, that it would result in a lot more net adds for Cingular, It may well. >but >things are not going well so far for Cingular at Radio Shack. Only 11 days of initial experience make that more than a rush to judgement. (The Motley Fool is more entertainment than serious investing.) >See "http://www.fool.com/News/mft/2006/mft06011213.htm" > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >the country. That has not panned out as hoped; despite Cingular's 52 >million customers, sales have been weak since the transition." <http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/060113/radioshack_stock.html?.v=2> RadioShack Stock Up on Analyst Upgrade RadioShack Stock Rises; Prudential Upgrade to 'Overweight' Cites 'Groove' Return RadioShack Corp. stock rose Friday after Prudential analyst Mark Rowen upgraded his rating on the stock to "overweight" from "neutral, " saying that 2006 could be the year when the consumer electronics retailer "gets its groove back." Shares of Fort Worth, Texas-based RadioShack rose $1.38, or 6.4 percent, to $22.87 in midday trading on the New York Stock Exchange. Rowen points to three reasons why he's upbeat about the stock. First, the initial phase of the transition to selling Cingular Wireless products instead of Verizon Wireless products is complete. That "significantly" lowers the retailer's operational risk, Rowen said. Second, the addition of Cingular nearly doubles RadioShack's wireless market opportunity to 15.5 million subscribers from 8 million, Rowen said. Although it's not clear whether RadioShack will be able to capitalize on the opportunity, Prudential is optimistic the retailer will, he said. >Talk to a Radio Shack franchise owner sometime, at a bar. They'll give >you an earful about the switch from Verizon to Cingular. It's affected >their sales volumes big-time. Their sales volume was in big trouble long before the Cingular deal, which is part of the effort the turn the company around after a disappointing 2005 with Verizon. >With Verizon continuing to top all surveys >for customer satisfaction in terms of quality of service, it's unclear >why Radio Shack would have dumped them, unless Cingular offered them a >really sweet deal. Because you know better -- right? :) SignatureBest regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> |
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
|
©2009 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.