hey news flash, if i want an LG chocolate... i go to vzn, LG doesnt sell it to att or sprint or tmobile.. if i want a T-mobile Dash (HTC Dash), i go to tmobile, because HTC didnt want to sell to anyone else... If i wanted an iPhone, which i did and purchased, then i go to At&t for my carrier. This is nothing new, its just that many people fail to realize this is standard practice. The Razr was a cingular only device for 1.5 years, so lets not all get our panties in a bunch here... (I'm a guy, so i guess we say boxers in a bunch)
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's Demands of Vodafone
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
hey news flash, if i want an LG chocolate... i go to vzn, LG doesnt sell it to att or sprint or tmobile.. if i want a T-mobile Dash (HTC Dash), i go to tmobile, because HTC didnt want to sell to anyone else... If i wanted an iPhone, which i did and purchased, then i go to At&t for my carrier. This is nothing new, its just that many people fail to realize this is standard practice. The Razr was a cingular only device for 1.5 years, so lets not all get our panties in a bunch here... (I'm a guy, so i guess we say boxers in a bunch)
What exactly is this comment meant to mean? Are you suggesting that Vodafone is going to be filing for insolvency any time soon because of their decision to not pursue selling it?
I think the iPhone will be big, and it deserves to be. But anyone who thinks that the financial future of companies the size of Vodaphone rest in the balance of it really do need to come back down to Planet Earth.
Well, at least until they implant a wireless chip in your optic nerve that will make all screens obsolete.
I am just disappointed there isn't any news on the Macs and it seems like the iPhone is taking over Apple as much as all the news sites focused on it. I just hope that Apple doesn't forget it's computer hardware over time because to be honest the PC building business is not a growing business. The fact now is that Apple could outsource all of it's computer engineering to any PC builder out there...just keep a small design staff on hand to make sure Apple products look like Apple products and then could focus on new growing markets. It would not suprise me at all if this happens someday. Contract a company like Dell to build special Apple branded hardware that runs the Mac OS.
You can't even buy an iPhone where I live so I guess I would like to hear about some of the other products as well. Oh I suppose I could move to a more populated metro area, but I love wide open spaces and nature. I guess I wouldn't trade clean fresh air and the beauty of open grass fields and trees for a man made techology device anyhow.
So far in this contract AT&T has failed as far as I'm concerned. The iPhone needs AT&T more than AT&T needs the iPhone. EDGE (at least from the news i've seen)has gone out once already.
AT&T is the iPhones weakest link. If AT&T fails..... apple is screwed because they don't have another provider to bail out to. They should have gone with more than one company. Then at least if one screws up, only a portion of your buyers get hosed...not all of them.
i'll give you that..... but 5 years?!?!?! Thats crazy, something this high profile should have had more than one carrier to fall on.
If it's just a business decision, why do you "hate" it? You just weight the gains and lose.
I don't see why they must adjust their "entire" business model. AT&T is still selling its other phones under whatever business model it was before. It only requires them to branch out a new avenue and I don't see why it's bad except for some initial investment.
Wrong again. It won't happen tomorrow. Apple and AT&T signed an exclusive deal. Meaning it's a binding contract for a certain period of time. Maybe Apple will do so five years later, but by that time AT&T might decide not to partner with Apple as well.
O2 is rumoured, so where does the authority to say "no contract has been signed yet" come from? Surely the only time we will know is when the release details are revealed.
This is big news.
If true, this would further confirm that AT&T is indeed sharing revenue from subscribers with Apple.
So lets do a little math. If Apple get $5 a month from upgrade subscribers and $10 a month from new subscribers, we could see some serious profits for Apple.
At an average of $7.50 a month from each iPhone user Apple is making 100% profit on top of the iPhone profit.
If in 3 year apple can sell up to 30 million phones that would add to $225,000,000 in new monthly revenue just from the iPhone.
That would equate to $2.7 Billion every year and growing depending on terms of the contract.
I predicted how hot the iPhone will be when the stock was trading at $90 a share back in December.
Apple stock is still cheap today at 132 given this revenue sharing agreement which I was not aware of back in Dec.
If true, this would further confirm that AT&T is indeed sharing revenue from subscribers with Apple.
So lets do a little math. If Apple get $5 a month from upgrade subscribers and $10 a month from new subscribers, we could see some serious profits for Apple.
At an average of $7.50 a month from each iPhone user Apple is making 100% profit on top of the iPhone profit.
If in 3 year apple can sell up to 30 million phones that would add to $225,000,000 in new monthly revenue just from the iPhone.
That would equate to $2.7 Billion every year and growing depending on terms of the contract.
I predicted how hot the iPhone will be when the stock was trading at $90 a share back in December.
when this puppy comes out look for AAPL to go past $150.
These things will sell like hot cakes. I know plenty of people who would dump their blackberries for a phone like this.
Apple stock is still cheap today at 132 given this revenue sharing agreement which I was not aware of back in Dec.
Vodafone live? Pft... have you guys seen it?
EVERYTHING costs extra. You pay for the connection and anything on it costs extra. Wallpapers? £2. Ringtones £2. Games? £5. Its slow, delivers nothing and you may as well hire your own reporter to get news items for you, it would be cheaper.
Moving to Vodafone was the biggest mistake I ever made. I was on T-Mobile before and it was great. They called me every year to to ask if I wanted a new phone because my contract was up and also to offer me cheaper alternatives on my contract.
EVERYTHING costs extra. You pay for the connection and anything on it costs extra. Wallpapers? £2. Ringtones £2. Games? £5. Its slow, delivers nothing and you may as well hire your own reporter to get news items for you, it would be cheaper.
Moving to Vodafone was the biggest mistake I ever made. I was on T-Mobile before and it was great. They called me every year to to ask if I wanted a new phone because my contract was up and also to offer me cheaper alternatives on my contract.
I agree with this as well. Every other phone maker supplies phones for every cell phone provider. I know the whole deal about Apple's 5 year contract, but honestly Apple will get hurt by this limitation. If Apple supplied both AT&T and T Mobile and later built a CDMA version to supply Verizon, Sprint and Alltel Apple really would take over the market. Being locked to one company is not the best situation. There is no reason why there can't be a GSM version and a CDMA version of this phone. The only thing preventing this from being the next iPod is the carrier that is tied to it. 5 years is a long time!
Verizon made a huge mistake!, and you know they are worried, the CEO put out a FUD memo titled "iWhatever" prior to the iPhone launch
Bet he is gone by October 15th, right about when the quarter numbers out
Bet he is gone by October 15th, right about when the quarter numbers out
I can understand your disappointment with not much Mac news lately. But it's not like there IS Mac news out there, and Macrumors is just deciding to not talk about it, and publishes just iPhone news instead. MR posts whatever Apple-related news is available at the time. Only a week ago, Apple released a much-hyped device that even people griping about it will admit is "game-changing" in its field. Remember: IT'S JUST A WEEK OLD. So of COURSE there are a lot of stories about it right now. Eventually it will die down. Eventually there will be other Mac news. Just be patient.
Apple hasn't given up on it's other products, simply because the iPhone was released last week. But there are also not going to make any major announcements of other stuff for at least a few weeks, in order to keep the spotlight on the iPhone for now. That's just plain and simple common sense.
For now, just don't read any iPhone news -- it's just going to continue to frustrate you.
While it is ridiculous to suggest that the company would go bankrupt, there is no denying that if the iphone is a success, and causes subscribers to change carriers, Vodafone's shareholders are gonna be pretty mad that they turned it down. I can assure you that if the iphone lives up to its potential, at least a few heads will roll at Vodaphone.
That doesn't sound like the kind of info we're likely to hear--reliably--from insider negotiations.
But we CAN surmise that Apple demands quite a LOT from iPhone carriers:
* Altering their system to accommodate online activation
* Collaborating to make visual voicemail happen
* Allowing the iPhone's WiFi and BT features to go uncrippled
* Abandoning the subsidy model
* Creating new service plans just for iPhone - plans on the cheap end
* Giving up a lot of their usual control over the whole process, from marketing to customer service
* Giving Apple a cut of the service revenue (if that rumor is true) - however large or small
* Risking a relationship that gives a new player a lot of power in their industry (iTunes all over again?)
Given all that, it's easy to imagine a provider being reluctant--and demanding a lot in return (like an exclusive deal).
But we CAN surmise that Apple demands quite a LOT from iPhone carriers:
* Altering their system to accommodate online activation
* Collaborating to make visual voicemail happen
* Allowing the iPhone's WiFi and BT features to go uncrippled
* Abandoning the subsidy model
* Creating new service plans just for iPhone - plans on the cheap end
* Giving up a lot of their usual control over the whole process, from marketing to customer service
* Giving Apple a cut of the service revenue (if that rumor is true) - however large or small
* Risking a relationship that gives a new player a lot of power in their industry (iTunes all over again?)
Given all that, it's easy to imagine a provider being reluctant--and demanding a lot in return (like an exclusive deal).
Lets do a little more math.
The Halo affect from the iPod took about 4 years to kick into high gear. Today Apple is selling 60% of their computers in their stores to new customers. The iPod was partially responsible for this huge number.
Not everyone listens to music but everyone is on the phone and the net. Once the mass public sees how incredible the iPhone really is, they will have no problem switching to AT&T just to get the iPhone. In three years it might come down in price which will open it up to more conservative budgets. Rumor has it that it will start selling in Best Buy stores soon. Once the Windows Mail program is support watch for hundreds of thousands of Blackberries switchers.
After 3 years and sells of 30 million + iPhones watch for a tidal wave of Windows switchers who just got a big dose of the Mac OS via their iPhones.
Folks this product is huge. Its impacts on AT & T and Apple will truly be felt in 5 years from now.
Just how much are they getting?
Just how much money is Apple getting from each monthly contract? The ATT rateplan on my iPhone is pretty much what it was before I switched. How much of their monthly profit was ATT willing (or arm twisted into) to "share" with Apple each month?
Let's see Apple makes $300 on each phone AND they get a cut each month from now on? Cool
Just how much money is Apple getting from each monthly contract? The ATT rateplan on my iPhone is pretty much what it was before I switched. How much of their monthly profit was ATT willing (or arm twisted into) to "share" with Apple each month?
Let's see Apple makes $300 on each phone AND they get a cut each month from now on? Cool
That may be so in the US, but in Europe it certainly is not, it's even illegal in certain countries. You either get a phone with a contract (usually at discount); whatever phone you want with whatever provider you'd like, or you buy the phone yourself and get a SIM-only plan from whatever provider you'd like (which usually is cheaper)
People will not accept otherwise.
Oh come on, it's a planted article!
Come on, folks, can we be a little more skeptical? Mere days after reports appears in prominent financial publications that Vodafone has lost the opportunity to distribution the iPhone either across Europe or in Britain, an article pops up in the Guardian saying that Vodafone didn't lose the iPhone, it rejected it! Why? Because Apple was making onerous financial terms plus it was demanding VODAFONE RESTRICT THE FREEDOM OF ITS USERS! Restrict its users! Quelle horreur! Vodafone wouldn't abide by such an affront!
Can't you guys see this article is an obvious plant job from people inside Vodafone to cover for losing the iPhone? "No, we didn't lose it, we turned it down. And we turned it down because we care about our customers!" I'm sure Apple is making many unusual, maybe even unprecedented demands from the carriers and maybe they don't in fact work for the business model of the phone companies. If so, they are free to turn it down and if I were one of their shareholders, I'd expect them to. However, this particular article in the Guardian is an laughably amateurish attempt to turn lemons into lemonade on the part of anonymous Vodafone insiders. It's too bad the Guardian played the stooge, I respect the paper.
Come on, folks, can we be a little more skeptical? Mere days after reports appears in prominent financial publications that Vodafone has lost the opportunity to distribution the iPhone either across Europe or in Britain, an article pops up in the Guardian saying that Vodafone didn't lose the iPhone, it rejected it! Why? Because Apple was making onerous financial terms plus it was demanding VODAFONE RESTRICT THE FREEDOM OF ITS USERS! Restrict its users! Quelle horreur! Vodafone wouldn't abide by such an affront!
Can't you guys see this article is an obvious plant job from people inside Vodafone to cover for losing the iPhone? "No, we didn't lose it, we turned it down. And we turned it down because we care about our customers!" I'm sure Apple is making many unusual, maybe even unprecedented demands from the carriers and maybe they don't in fact work for the business model of the phone companies. If so, they are free to turn it down and if I were one of their shareholders, I'd expect them to. However, this particular article in the Guardian is an laughably amateurish attempt to turn lemons into lemonade on the part of anonymous Vodafone insiders. It's too bad the Guardian played the stooge, I respect the paper.
Haven't had time to read this thread properly BUT I did read this Guardian article earlier today and, don't know if anyone has already mentioned this but, although I like their politics, the Guardian is notoriously sloppy when it comes to getting the facts right.
As such, when they talk about Vodafone complaining that Apple want to restrict the information they provide, what this actually means is that the reporter didn't bother to question the Vodafone PR properly. What Vodafone are, of course, finding hard to stomach is Apple's insistence that they can no longer restrict their customers' access to the Web at large in order to force inferior, expensive Vodafone offerings on them.
Note, too, the Guardian's sloppiness in saying that the 8GB iphone is $499, something that most non-journalists would have spotted as a mistake and, yet, this "Communications Editor", his Editor and the Guardian proof-readers all failed to spot it.
As I say, sloppy.
As such, when they talk about Vodafone complaining that Apple want to restrict the information they provide, what this actually means is that the reporter didn't bother to question the Vodafone PR properly. What Vodafone are, of course, finding hard to stomach is Apple's insistence that they can no longer restrict their customers' access to the Web at large in order to force inferior, expensive Vodafone offerings on them.
Note, too, the Guardian's sloppiness in saying that the 8GB iphone is $499, something that most non-journalists would have spotted as a mistake and, yet, this "Communications Editor", his Editor and the Guardian proof-readers all failed to spot it.
As I say, sloppy.
So, you see Apple's attempt to assure the value of the iPhone (not allow it to become a disposable item like the RAZR was not even 6 months after it was released) over time and not allow the carriers to dictate how the phone is designed and developed through branding and subsidizing it to death as a bad thing?
It's OK for phone manufacturers to "cave in" to the cell phone carriers, since that's the status quo, but it's not OK for the cell phone carriers to "cave in" to the phone manufacturers, is that what you're saying?