Analyst Offers Thoughts on iPhone Success, Multi-Carrier Business Models, iTunes Video Content

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/08/31/analyst-offers-thoughts-on-iphone-success-multi-carrier-business-models-itunes-video-content/)

Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster today issued a note to clients this morning offering his team's thoughts on 14 "unanswered questions" about Apple. Several of his more revealing comments relate to the iPhone, which Munster feels will see its reach broadened to multiple carriers in the U.S. sometime within the next year.

Munster points to data from France, where Apple was forced by the courts (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2008/12/17/orange-loses-iphone-exclusivity-in-france/) to adopt a multi-carrier model, as an indication that Apple will rapidly transition its distribution model to multi-carrier agreements wherever possible, suggesting that such a change may occur in the U.S. next summer during the next probable iPhone refresh.By way of example, for various reasons the company moved from an exclusive relationship with French wireless carrier Orange to a multi-carrier model. In France, the company now enjoys dramatically higher market share (in the 40 percent range vs. about 15 percent in ROW) than in countries with exclusive carrier agreements (such as AT&T in the U.S. where the iPhone has market share in the mid-teens). We believe Apple is seeing the increased unit sell-through more than offset the slightly (~10 percent) deteriorated economics per unit involved in non-exclusive agreements.The report also suggests that Apple is unlikely to ever offer a low-cost phone model to compete with "rudimentary $10 models", citing the App Store as a key component to Apple's success in the mobile phone market and the near certainty that Apple would not be able to create a profitable low-cost phone still capable of running those applications.

Munster also sees the success of the iPhone 3GS, beyond that of Apple's expectations, as being due to two primary factors: 1) The success of the App Store, both in its applications themselves and in the cross-promotional "free advertising" the iPhone has received from high-profile companies promoting their iPhone applications, and 2) The fact that the smartphone industry has positioned the iPhone as the "gold standard", whereby competitors trying to emulate the iPhone experience are actually promoting the iPhone platform instead of their own products.

On the topic of iTunes Store video content, Munster sees Apple looking to modernize its offerings within the next year, entering likely lengthy negotiations to revamp arrangements currently limiting the amount of content and the allowed periods of availability. Apple would be looking to offer a monthly package of video content designed to replace a customer's cable bill, and may launch the service alongside upgraded Apple TV software and/or hardware.We continue to believe that Apple will eventually offer a monthly subscription for iTunes TV shows accessible on Apple TV, iPods, iPhones, and Macs/PCs. Apple could leverage its deep library of content with many network and cable channel content owners to provide unlimited access to a sub-library of its TV shows for a standard monthly fee ($30 to $40 per month). Such a product would effectively replace a consumer's monthly cable bill (~$85/month) and offer access to current and older episodes of select shows on select channels. While timing on the launch of such a product is very uncertain given the negotiations that would need to take place, Apple may work to launch it simultaneously with a new version of Apple TV, or updated Apple TV software within the next year.

Article Link: Analyst Offers Thoughts on iPhone Success, Multi-Carrier Business Models, iTunes Video Content (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/08/31/analyst-offers-thoughts-on-iphone-success-multi-carrier-business-models-itunes-video-content/)

[MacFly123]

FREE THE US iPHONE!!! :D

And I would LOVE an Apple TV update! I have been waiting for a while now! :cool:

[jaw04005]

I wouldn't get too excited. This is Munster after all. He's proven time and again he doesn't know anything that we don't know.

[spazzcat]

I been watch a lot of Hulu on my TV thought PlayOn. And until banthwidth improves in the US. I can't see people replacing their cable service with download service.

[Big Jelly]

Not sure this would be a very viable price. I mean there is alot of competition out there already. Huly, Netflix, and others offering Movies, and New TV Shows for free or cheaper 8.99 for Netlfix.

Also I dont pay $85.00 like they stated hell I pay 30.00 for Satelitte TV and I get instant access to thousands of shows in HD.

I know I have stopped buying tv shows from iTunes because I personally feel 1.99 is to much for a 1 episode in SD. I feel Tv shows and Music should be .99 an episode maybe 1.99 for HD. In fact I think it would be a much better value to buy a show at .99 and a Song at 1.99 seeing as I will watch the show once and listen to music probably for a few years at least.

I think apple is not taking the e-media serious. Apple TV gets almost no support and maybe yearly basic upgrades. there is a TON of things they could do to make the apple TV a staple of the household, but they havent.

Although I think we will see a new apple TV is the future here that does movies, music, and games sooner than we think.. 2010..

[SwiftLives]

The Cable replacement thing would be awesome. But I still have trouble believing that these analysts are talking out of their mouths instead of their posteriors.

[OllyW]

It's just common sense really, if you have availability from multiple carriers you are bound to sell more.

I doubt if anyone has bought an iPhone just because it is exclusive to AT&T or O2, but there are a lot of people who haven't purchased because they can't get it on their carrier of choice.

[Steve Jobs=God]

So his reasoning behind why he thinks the iPhone will go multi carrier in the US is because they do it in other countries?

Even for Munster thats stupid

[kurosov]

Once again an 'analyst' points out a few obvious things then fills the rest with any old crap he can think of at the time.

[iOrlando]

only way i watch movies is renting HD from apple tv. and i must say..it kind of stinks waiting 2-3 hours for a download to play. I always have to think before hand which movie I want to see at night. any improvement to this...i would like.

also some movies not offered in itunes (like transformers) stinks.

[chrisrlzz]

Apple already has multi-carrier agreements in other countries, like Australia, where all 5 major national carriers have the iPhone 3Gs available, and all offer it on pre-paid and even apple sell it out-right from their own website and in Apple retail stores, without a contract or locked to a certain carrier when buying outright... The iPhone 3G was only with 3 major carriers before, but loosened its belt with the 3Gs so I don't know why this particular case in Orange would change Apple's mind all of a sudden...

[BeyondtheTech]

They have further indicated that there is a 50% chance of being accurate with their analysis. ;)

Seriously though, I am hoping for multi-carrier distribution in the US, but that would mean either two things: T-Mobile gets an official iPhone, or Apple creates a iPhone with LTE/3GPP/4G technology for Sprint and maybe Verizon to take a crack at it. What are the chances of either?

On the flipside, I would love to rid myself of my cable TV. It's been cluttered with infomercials and pointless channels that I'll never watch - what ever happened to "a la carte" programming they were talking about a while ago? I'm sure I'm not the only person in the world who doesn't watch any of the sports channels, and I'm quite sure that takes up a chunk of service costs. Give me internet, and I'll use my iPhone and a MagicJack or Ooma for telephone, and TV will be all internet-based, even PPV is acceptable if the costs were low enough.

[mozmac]

Funny that this should come up this morning. I just wrote a post on Friday about how the cable companies were going to have a run-in with Apple and other tech companies pretty soon.

The post is here, for anyone who cares to read it: http://www.blurtdaily.com/2009/08/28/apparently-im-forced-to-pay-for-child-abuse-jokes/

I would love to be able to build my own tv subscription package and watch it on my Apple TV. We don't even have cable at our house anymore and are doing pretty good without it.

[GQB]

only way i watch movies is renting HD from apple tv. and i must say..it kind of stinks waiting 2-3 hours for a download to play. I always have to think before hand which movie I want to see at night. any improvement to this...i would like.

also some movies not offered in itunes (like transformers) stinks.

You obviously don't own an AppleTV.
You can begin playing any downloaded movies within a minute of purchasing.

I have my own problems with ATV. There's been a known bug since day one wherein a newly downloaded movie shows up as silent whitescreen with just a progress bar, and the only work-around is to pull the plug on the box and restart. Absolutely stupid. The inability of Apple to fix this is mind-numbing.
(aside... if anyone has any more recent info on a fix to this bug, please let me know.)

But its a sign of how much I love ATV that I ignore this stupidity and just work the bounce into my process. Life goes on.

[DipDog3]

Still love the iPhone no matter what they say!

[BeyondtheTech]

...I feel Tv shows and Music should be .99 an episode maybe 1.99 for HD...

TV shows at 99¢ each could get pricey quickly. I can see my wife quickly running up the iTunes bill with watching One Life to Live, Days of Our Lives, Young and the Restless, The Doctors, and Dr. Phil every day. That's $125 for one month!

[Tilpots]

All of Munster's comments would be nice if they actually happened. Too bad he has no inside info...

[MarlboroLite]

It is obvious to me that the iPhone will lose the ATT exclusivity at the end of the contract in 2010 or maybe 2011 after a one year extension at most. But that's it.

To the idiots claiming it would just be too much hassle to add a CDMA chip to the phone should ask why every other manufacturer has multiple phone versions with different chips and Blackberry manages to have a world phone for verizon that works with GSM too, yet this is just too burdensome for Apple?

That's like saying that Apple could only build one version of a computer without any customization at all--sure it would be great for Apple to have a single model to sell but that doesn't work in the real world, people want options and ultimately the company is better off because nobody would buy a MacBook if you could only get 1 model with no choice on anything else.

It would cost apple probably pennies per device to include a CDMA chip for a particular batch of phones. Ultimately LTE will come to Verizon but it won't cover everyone at launch, it's gonna take probably 5 years to cover everyone. Is Apple going to not sell the iPhone to the other largest carrier until 2016? Yeah right. They'll add the extra chip, and make money.

Oh and they have proven they are willing to modify the phone for a particular market:the China phone with no wifi.

[Evangelion]

So his reasoning behind why he thinks the iPhone will go multi carrier in the US is because they do it in other countries?

Even for Munster thats stupid

Um, his argument is that Apple will go multi-carrier because doing so has given them higher market-share in other countries...

[Cougarcat]

I propose that if a news headline has "analyst" in the title, it should automatically go to page 2.

[SwiftLives]

To the idiots claiming it would just be too much hassle to add a CDMA chip to the phone should ask why every other manufacturer has multiple phone versions with different chips and Blackberry manages to have a world phone for verizon that works with GSM too, yet this is just too burdensome for Apple?

CDMA is pretty much on its way out. Apple has absolutely no incentive to spend R&D (which I am reasonably certain would cost a bit more than "pennies") to implement a CDMA-enabled iPhone - especially since the only place it would be supported is in the US.

Removing wifi and implementing a different technology are two rather different beasts.

[reallynotnick]

Basically this has been my pipe dream for awhile, have the iPhone on other carries like T-Mobile (well mine is unlocked :D) and offer me a better cable plan.

I don't consider myself watching a lot of TV or movies but the prices on iTunes are just way too high.

[Michael73]

Last November I finally caved in and replaced my 1984 25" Mitsubishi tube TV with a Samsung 52" LCD from Best Buy along with all the other goodies (receiver, 5.1 speakers, etc.).

The one thing I didn't get that I wanted...an AppleTV. My Plan was to buy something like this for myself as a holiday present this December hoping they'd do a product refresh by then. What's the possibility?

[twoodcc]

i would love to replace comcast with apple, but what about live sports?

[BongoBanger]

I wouldn't get too excited. This is Munster after all. He's proven time and again he doesn't know anything that we don't know.

And often actually less.

[zedsdead]

Last November I finally caved in and replaced my 1984 25" Mitsubishi tube TV with a Samsung 52" LCD from Best Buy along with all the other goodies (receiver, 5.1 speakers, etc.).

The one thing I didn't get that I wanted...an AppleTV. My Plan was to buy something like this for myself as a holiday present this December hoping they'd do a product refresh by then. What's the possibility?

Wait until the rumored iPod Keynote on 9/9/09. This is the 1st time that the Apple TV really may get an update. We shall see.

[scheppa]

You obviously don't own an AppleTV.
You can begin playing any downloaded movies within a minute of purchasing.

I have my own problems with ATV. There's been a known bug since day one wherein a newly downloaded movie shows up as silent whitescreen with just a progress bar, and the only work-around is to pull the plug on the box and restart. Absolutely stupid. The inability of Apple to fix this is mind-numbing.
(aside... if anyone has any more recent info on a fix to this bug, please let me know.)

But its a sign of how much I love ATV that I ignore this stupidity and just work the bounce into my process. Life goes on.

I can't say I have ever had that issue with my ATV with the white screen, although it loves to freak out when I switch from HDMI source to HDMI source. I'm guessing it may be an issue with HDMI and how you have your system setup perhaps. Either way their is room for improvement in the overall operation of the TV, but that said each update has been an improvement.

[PeterQVenkman]

I would gladly pay for the shows I want from premium networks (HBO, showtime, etc) rather than wait for netflix.

I would probably cancel cable.

[NoExpectations]

As soon as all the US Wireless Carriers are ready to adequately support 4G, the iPhone will be supported on all of them. Good news for consumers....good news for the carriers (yes even AT&T....it will now share the network capacity burden with all the other carriers....and all of them are equally slow and overpriced) and good news for Apple (if they can sell more iPhones to make up for the reduced "kickback" rate from AT&T).

[SFStateStudent]

Maybe we can offer Munster a lifetime membership with MR; adding some credibility to his claims....:p

[Michael CM1]

Not sure this would be a very viable price. I mean there is alot of competition out there already. Huly, Netflix, and others offering Movies, and New TV Shows for free or cheaper 8.99 for Netlfix.

Also I dont pay $85.00 like they stated hell I pay 30.00 for Satelitte TV and I get instant access to thousands of shows in HD.

I know I have stopped buying tv shows from iTunes because I personally feel 1.99 is to much for a 1 episode in SD. I feel Tv shows and Music should be .99 an episode maybe 1.99 for HD. In fact I think it would be a much better value to buy a show at .99 and a Song at 1.99 seeing as I will watch the show once and listen to music probably for a few years at least.

I think apple is not taking the e-media serious. Apple TV gets almost no support and maybe yearly basic upgrades. there is a TON of things they could do to make the apple TV a staple of the household, but they havent.

Although I think we will see a new apple TV is the future here that does movies, music, and games sooner than we think.. 2010..

I don't know where that $85 comes from unless you get EVERYTHING. My dad does, but he's retired. I'm in the same boat with you, looking at Dish Network deals around $30 to start with, maybe going up to $40 for HD.

I'm all with you on the show prices. I used to use iTunes when I missed a TV show before everybody started streaming them. Now, I rarely buy TV shows, and they're only heavily discounted or very cheap to begin with. Comparing iTunes HD shows to Blu-ray Disc versions of them on Amazon, iTunes rarely wins by a lot. Amazon actually wins the price war most of the time, and sometimes by a long shot because they do this thing called a sale. iTunes sales are weak compared to those of other retailers. However, I'm betting a lot of this has to do with the studios and not just Apple.

If Apple wants ATV to be a worthwhile product, it needs a Blu-ray and DVD option. Most people aren't going to add another box that kinda sorta does a few things. I didn't buy a Roku Netflix streamer, I waited and got a Blu-ray player that had it built in. Also, this new ATV needs some sort of app store for Netflix, Hulu, etc. to provide players for people to use on their TVs. Add a non-sucky remote and you might have me on a new ATV.

[aristotle]

It is obvious to me that the iPhone will lose the ATT exclusivity at the end of the contract in 2010 or maybe 2011 after a one year extension at most. But that's it.

To the idiots claiming it would just be too much hassle to add a CDMA chip to the phone should ask why every other manufacturer has multiple phone versions with different chips and Blackberry manages to have a world phone for verizon that works with GSM too, yet this is just too burdensome for Apple?

Careful who you call an idiot. As we "idiots" have mentioned countless times, the only major CDMA provider that will be left in North America by 2011 will be Sprint. Verizon, and Metro PCS in the US and Telus, Bell and Virgin Mobile in Canada are all migrating to LTE (4G GSM Standard) along with all of the GSM carriers around 2011. Telus and Virgin (which use Bell and Telus towers) will offer 3G GSM roaming later this month with according to rumours.

[Pigumon]

”By way of example, for various reasons the company moved from an exclusive relationship with French wireless carrier Orange to a multi-carrier model. In France, the company now enjoys dramatically higher market share (in the 40 percent range vs. about 15 percent in ROW) than in countries with exclusive carrier agreements (such as AT&T in the U.S. where the iPhone has market share in the mid-teens).”


DUH!!!???

[dontmatter]

First, a vote casting - if I could get an iphone with verizon, I'd absolutely have one.

Second, I think the phenomanon they named, of imitators to the iphone establishing iphoneness as the ultimate, to be imitated phone, works towards multiple carriers. Imitators say (implicitly) that the iphone is the best, but also that it is now a category of phones, with second and third bests that you can settle for. When the iphone first came out, this wasn't the case - it was a category unto itself.

As it's own category, the single carrier model makes sense. If you buy into the new category, then it holds enormous power for you, because there is no substitute. Switching carriers, then, is clearly worthwhile. For ATT, the value of new customers, who will likely not switch long term for another phone, is immense, so apple can get more money out of them, and get nearly the market share.

But now, that isn't quite the same. There are imitators - sure, the iphone is the penultimate non-business smart phone, but there are other options. Now you must decide between compromising on phone or on carrier, and who knows how that will end up. It used to be that you had to compromise on the carrier (if ATT wasn't what you wanted), but that was dwarfed by the phone decision, between having it all with an iphone, or having a normal phone, AKA nothing.

So I say, multiple carriers! Plus, I want an iphone but live where I would never get a signal for it, anyway. So for me it is actually the inverse choice of the origional iphone - I must compromise on the phone, because otherwise I don't have the experience of having a functional cell phone.

[kdarling]

Careful who you call an idiot. As we "idiots" have mentioned countless times, the only major CDMA provider that will be left in North America by 2011 will be Sprint. Verizon, and Metro PCS in the US and Telus, Bell and Virgin Mobile in Canada are all migrating to LTE (4G GSM Standard) along with all of the GSM carriers around 2011.

Not sure where you get those dates. They're way off.

Verizon has said they won't be fully rolled out with LTE until late 2013 or early 2014. And even then, that's mostly for data only.

The first Verizon LTE smartphones won't go on sale until 2011, and CDMA phones will continue to be sold through the end of the next decade.

As for ATT and LTE, that's a long way down the line. They're fine with just building out their current 3G structure and increasing its speed.

So no, CDMA's not going away soon. Why should it? Why build millions of LTE voice dumbphones that cost more and clog up the lucrative LTE high speed lines for no reason whatsoever.

[Bubba Satori]

Anything about computers ? :mad:

[Number 41]

It's just common sense really, if you have availability from multiple carriers you are bound to sell more.

I doubt if anyone has bought an iPhone just because it is exclusive to AT&T or O2, but there are a lot of people who haven't purchased because they can't get it on their carrier of choice.

The issue becomes whether or not you can sell enough units to offset the money being paid as part of the exclusivity agreements.

I imagine the carriers will bid HEAVILY for the next generation of iPhone -- such that it might remain more lucrative for Apple to remain a single-carrier operation.

I'm also somewhat curious how an Apple-Verizon marriage would work, given Verizon's desire to control all media on their handsets via the V-Cast network.

[JAT]

Why do so many, the news report included, say 'Apple will move to multiple carriers'? This isn't solely about Apple, the USA wireless market demands these exclusive contracts, and Apple has to cope with that. It's not like "if you build it, they will come".

The iPhone is not the only cell phone that is exclusive to one carrier, not by a long shot. It's about wireless company greed as much as anything else.

[samab]

”By way of example, for various reasons the company moved from an exclusive relationship with French wireless carrier Orange to a multi-carrier model. In France, the company now enjoys dramatically higher market share (in the 40 percent range vs. about 15 percent in ROW) than in countries with exclusive carrier agreements (such as AT&T in the U.S. where the iPhone has market share in the mid-teens).”


Munster is talking out of his ass.

There are other countries where the iphone is basically sold by every carrier in the country --- like Australia and Italy. For sure, if the iphone was capturing 40% of the Australian smartphone market --- we would have heard and read about it (especially because Australians are English speaking).

Secondly, in every single news report about the iphone sales in France --- they are on par with UK and Germany sales (since they have about the same population size). Even if Munster is right that the iphone is capturing 40% in France's smartphone market --- it only means ONE thing, the French smartphone market is vastly smaller than every single industrial country in the world.

It is very simple math --- for example, if both UK and France both sell 2 million iphones and they both have the approx the same population size ---- and the iphone has only a 15% market share in smartphone in UK but 40% market share in smartphone in France. Then there is only ONE math solution --- the French smartphone market is much smaller than UK and the rest of the industrial world.

[Bjohnson33]

FREE THE US iPHONE!!! :D

And I would LOVE an Apple TV update! I have been waiting for a while now! :cool:

I agree - I think the Apple TV has a lot of potential, but just hasn't hit its stride yet. The subscription model described would be very tempting for a lot of people! It would definitely be a way to move a lot of Apple TV units, and put a good fright into the cable companies too. I just hope they can roll something like that out in more than just a select few countries.

[kdarling]

I'm also somewhat curious how an Apple-Verizon marriage would work, given Verizon's desire to control all media on their handsets via the V-Cast network.

Verizon doesn't control anything on their smartphones.

You can use any theme, music, video, app, whatever.

They might put their own stores on there as a default, but you're not limited to them.

[*LTD*]

Thanks, Gene. We had no idea.

Interesting info about the other side:

http://larvalabs.com/blog/iphone/android-market-sales/

[csmitty]

I would probably get a Verizon iphone depending on the price and the amount of crap they put on it. I already only get 7.2GB out of my 8GB 3G. Also it better not have a Verzon logo across the top or bottom either. Either way I'd probably still JB and remove all the stuff they install. Better have Wifi too. Unlike the BB's

A ATV update would be welcome, i've been wanting to get one but after the hulu boxee fiasco havn't had much of a reason.

[CQd44]

Thanks, Gene. We had no idea.

Interesting info about the other side:

http://larvalabs.com/blog/iphone/android-market-sales/

I'm disappointed to see the Android platform floundering :[

[adammull]

I always find it humorous that only on Apple forums do I find people who either: A) pay less than $50 a month for cable already or B) don't watch tv at all and could care less if Apple brought out this service.

I pay $110 a month for Directv and that is without HBO or any other tier. How many channels do I watch? Maybe 10. I don't know anyone else who is paying less than $100 no matter what service they use. Sure I could buy an HD antenna and get the majors, but my wife always wants that one cooking channel or whatever, and I have to have ESPN and that is the sucky thing about tv providers. You can never pick and choose, you have to buy whatever package has that one channel you need and it always in the top tier. I would gladly buy Apple's model if it was up to date, meaning the shows were available the same time they came on on the networks. As it is now, I just finished watching Flight of the Conchords Season 2 from Netflix about 6 months after it was on HBO. I have Directv because Time Warner sucks and because I like the NFL package during season, but basically, if I could have the 4 major networks, and ESPN, I would be sold.

[aristotle]

Not sure where you get those dates. They're way off.

Verizon has said they won't be fully rolled out with LTE until late 2013 or early 2014. And even then, that's mostly for data only.

The first Verizon LTE smartphones won't go on sale until 2011, and CDMA phones will continue to be sold through the end of the next decade.

As for ATT and LTE, that's a long way down the line. They're fine with just building out their current 3G structure and increasing its speed.

So no, CDMA's not going away soon. Why should it? Why build millions of LTE voice dumbphones that cost more and clog up the lucrative LTE high speed lines for no reason whatsoever.
I really could not care less about Verizon. I don't care. The dates are from wikipedia. Those other carriers have made announcements concerning a 2011 launch and the CDMA carriers in Canada have announced that they will have 3G GSM service available by 2010 (October 2009 for Telus) in preparation.

Verizon means nothing to me as a Canadian. As for problems with CDMA, do a google search. There are a lot of people who hate Bell service.

[*LTD*]

I always find it humorous that only on Apple forums do I find people who either: A) pay less than $50 a month for cable already or B) don't watch tv at all and could care less if Apple brought out this service.

I pay $110 a month for Directv and that is without HBO or any other tier. How many channels do I watch? Maybe 10. I don't know anyone else who is paying less than $100 no matter what service they use. Sure I could buy an HD antenna and get the majors, but my wife always wants that one cooking channel or whatever, and I have to have ESPN and that is the sucky thing about tv providers. You can never pick and choose, you have to buy whatever package has that one channel you need and it always in the top tier. I would gladly buy Apple's model if it was up to date, meaning the shows were available the same time they came on on the networks. As it is now, I just finished watching Flight of the Conchords Season 2 from Netflix about 6 months after it was on HBO. I have Directv because Time Warner sucks and because I like the NFL package during season, but basically, if I could have the 4 major networks, and ESPN, I would be sold.

Only a matter of time . . .

http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/22254/

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/08/31/apple_expected_to_offer_iphone_on_new_u_s_carriers_within_a_year.html

[JAT]

I pay $110 a month for Directv and that is without HBO or any other tier. How many channels do I watch? Maybe 10. I don't know anyone else who is paying less than $100 no matter what service they use.
I pay under $90 for DirecTV without any extra tier, a full package otherwise, 3 DVRs, and HD, with no discounts currently running, not even the $5 one I could get if I paid them through Qwest. I guess HD is now a tier, actually. What are you paying for? 12 receivers?

[tuhoops]

i would love to replace comcast with apple, but what about live sports?

That's why it is really quite silly to see Apple tv or any download service (netflix, etc.) as a REPLACEMENT for satellite or cable tv (or antenna tv for that matter). A sport is really only compelling when it's watched live, and channels like ESPN, Fox Sports Net, and the major broadcast networks have them covered. Meanwhile, the satellite and cable companies are using the iPhone to sell more subs themselves.

I just saw a commercial tonight with Dennis Leary pitching Directv's NFL Sunday Ticket package. The main selling point? This season you can now watch LIVE GAMES anywhere on your iPhone (he never says you can watch the on the iPhone, he just holds an iPhone up to the screen and says you can watch games live on "one of these", so now you can go to a baby shower and not miss the game...

[GregA]

A sport is really only compelling when it's watched live, and channels like ESPN, Fox Sports Net, and the major broadcast networks have them covered.

How "live" is live? Is 1 minute delay live enough?
The new standards for streaming allow for some good quality streaming with a slight delay.

only way i watch movies is renting HD from apple tv. and i must say..it kind of stinks waiting 2-3 hours for a download to play. I always have to think before hand which movie I want to see at night. any improvement to this...i would like.

2-3 hour wait, for a 5Mbps film... you must be on about 2Mbps download speed? My parents are on 4Mbps, so 30mins wait. I'm on just under 5Mbps depending on the weather...

What I'd like to see is the option to start watching in SD (which is about 1.6Mbps), then switch to HD when the box works out it's far enough ahead to show you the last half in HD. I wouldn't use it often, but it'd be good for those times we didn't want to wait.

Not sure this would be a very viable price. I mean there is alot of competition out there already. Huly, Netflix, and others offering Movies, and New TV Shows for free or cheaper 8.99 for Netlfix.

Hulu is ad supported. Why can't iTunes do that too?
ie: NBC shows Battlestar on iTunes, with NBC ads inserted
(or Apple could run their own ad network)
Have ads customised just for us. No tampon ads for me, for example. This allows fewer ads but higher returns per ad.

True innovation would be for Apple to merge what it has with what Interactive TV promised 10 years ago.

[entropys]

Munster is talking out of his ass.

There are other countries where the iphone is basically sold by every carrier in the country --- like Australia and Italy. For sure, if the iphone was capturing 40% of the Australian smartphone market --- we would have heard and read about it (especially because Australians are English speaking).

Secondly, in every single news report about the iphone sales in France --- they are on par with UK and Germany sales (since they have about the same population size). Even if Munster is right that the iphone is capturing 40% in France's smartphone market --- it only means ONE thing, the French smartphone market is vastly smaller than every single industrial country in the world.

It is very simple math --- for example, if both UK and France both sell 2 million iphones and they both have the approx the same population size ---- and the iphone has only a 15% market share in smartphone in UK but 40% market share in smartphone in France. Then there is only ONE math solution --- the French smartphone market is much smaller than UK and the rest of the industrial world.

According to this article (http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0,24897,25972470-15306,00.html), Australia has sold 750,000 iphones in a bit over twelve months. quote:
Warren Chaisatien, managing director of telecommunication analyst group Telsyte, estimated that about 750,000 iPhone handsets had been sold in the Australian market since its launch mid-last year.

That is an awful lot of iphones, considering that the entire population of OZ is only a smidgeon over 20 million. On my bus, full of middle managers, the ratio of blackberries to iphones is about even, with the odd loser with a WinMo HTC, and gasp, even one or two people with an ordinary GSM phone!

That said, I am not sure how many of those 750,000 are unlocked iphones heading off to Asian countries though......

[aristotle]

Just a comment regarding LTE being data only. UTMS 3GGSM used in some European countries and it provides voice over a dedicated VOIP data channel with built-in compression and less overhead than traditional VOIP from third-parties.

LTE is in fact an extension or evolution of UTMS as you can see in this article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Mobile_Telecommunications_System

So LTE can in fact support voice no problem it is just that Verizon does not want customer to know that for fear of causing a panic or for people to hold off on upgrading their phones.

Verizon could implement UTMS for "dumb" phones and current smartphone models like what Telus is doing in Canada as a stepping stone to LTE.

Implementing UTMS would not only give them accept to the iPhone and other 3G GSM phones but it could be used as a fallback mode for LTE devices when the 4G network became congested much like what happens with 3G and Edge today.

[samab]

Just a comment regarding LTE being data only. UTMS 3GGSM used in some European countries and it provides voice over a dedicated VOIP data channel with built-in compression and less overhead than traditional VOIP from third-parties.

LTE is in fact an extension or evolution of UTMS as you can see in this article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Mobile_Telecommunications_System

So LTE can in fact support voice no problem it is just that Verizon does not want customer to know that for fear of causing a panic or for people to hold off on upgrading their phones.

That's completely BS.

There is no standard for the voice component in the LTE standard yet.

http://www.commsdesign.com/design_center/g3wireless/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=218401050

Verizon is not doing the voice part yet because they are waiting for the standard to be finalized.

[diamond.g]

That's completely BS.

There is no standard for the voice component in the LTE standard yet.

http://www.commsdesign.com/design_center/g3wireless/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=218401050

Verizon is not doing the voice part yet because they are waiting for the standard to be finalized.
I seem to remember a wireless company just showing off the ability to handoff a call between LTE and CDMA (which I guess hadn't been done before).

[pmjoe]

Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster today issued a note to clients [...]
ROTFLMAO! :p Why does MacRumors feel obligated to post stuff from these so-called "analyists"??? Please post the credentials (or lack thereof) for these individuals, as to why their analysis holds any value.

In other news, pmjoe today issued a note to clients [...]

Apple would be looking to offer a monthly package of video content designed to replace a customer's cable bill, and may launch the service alongside upgraded Apple TV software and/or hardware.
Let's see, if I drop my cable service, my cable company will drop the discount I get for having both broadband and cable - the value of the discount ... approximately what I currently pay for cable. And as a bonus, I'd get to buy expensive Apple hardware to watch barely 720p video, wait for it to download to some reasonable buffer size, and probably get no live sporting events. Maybe Piper Jaffray can analyze that for a while.

[samab]

I seem to remember a wireless company just showing off the ability to handoff a call between LTE and CDMA (which I guess hadn't been done before).

That was a demo from Nortel and LG --- they are trying to sell stuff to the carriers, doesn't mean that the carriers want to buy them.