Cricket agrees to sell $900 million in iPhones in 3 years, assuming it costs them $200/phone, that's 4.5 million iPhones. They only have about 6.5 million customers. So they want 70% of their customers to buy an iPhone???
Last edited:
Exactly! I'm so sick of people complaining that Apple isn't innovating but they point to Samsung as someone who is!? What a joke. Spec bumps are not innovation. You could argue that NFC is, but that was most likely a push by Google that Samsung played along with. Either way, it hasn't been very successful.
Anyway. With Google doing all their R&D in the public eye, people know they are working on cool stuff. Apple works behind the scenes, so people look to rumors to figure out what they are working on. If there are no decent rumors, Apple must not be working on anything.
Or perhaps Tim wasn't joking when he said they were doubling-down on security
No, the issue is that Apple isn't subsidizing the pricing with Cricket because it's a no contract commitment.
What would you rather do, pay $600 for an iPhone 5 followed by $55 a month for unlimited text, minutes and data on a CDMA 3G network (1.5Mb/s if you're LUCKY) or $650 for an iPhone 5 and pop in a Walmart based T-Mobile SIM card and get 100 minutes, unlimited text messages and 5GB of 4G data at HSPA+ speeds mostly throughout the nation?
It's an easy choice to make. It's the same reason Verizon needed LTE on the iPhone 5 and they're Big Red, leaders of marketshare for users in the United States.
Cricket agrees to sell $900 million in iPhones in 3 years, assuming it costs them $200/phone, that's 4.5 million iPhones. They only have about 6.5 million customers. So they want 70% of their customers to buy an iPhone???
Why would'nt you walk into a walmart and get strait talk for your iPhone. $45 a month unlimited talk,text, internet. It runs on at&t so you dont even need an unlocked iPhone.
----------
$200 a phone? more like 450-600. apple does not give subsidies to the carriers.
1. Apple is not in this to make money? (i.e., Greed)
A gross oversimplification. I could say it's driven by demand. As I understand it most economists say that too...2. This happens in every industry, all the time, with any disrupting technology. Company A comes out with Product A that takes the market by storm. Company B-Z jumps in on the fun and the competition begins. Of course it's driven by money, what else would it be?
And the lot they offer isn't enough for many.3. Many people disagree with you now about iPhones being the clearly superior product. This may have been true in the past, but the competition has a lot to offer now. Open your eyes and don't be blinded.
Does their service suck?