Length of AT&T's exclusive contract revealed

[Digital Skunk]

Well, now, even if the sold the phone as unlocked, you still wouldn't be able to get it on Verizon; you'd get to choose between AT&T, T-mobile, and whatever random small carrier you happen to live near.

Nothing wrong with that if there are T-Mobile users wanting to switch, or if people just want to use a pay-as-you-go plan from one of the random cells. I particularly don't care, but Apple could have done a better job, especially when looking at the fiasco that happened on launch day with AT&T.

If you're one of those unhappy CDMA providers, it's not all Apple's fault. You have Verizon and Sprint to blame, too.

Sprint is probably the only CDMA company not locking people in to anything. Since they are loosing customers by the droves. They actually do a much better job than Verizon when it comes to features and services. Not many people are unhappy with their CDMA company either, and they aren't blaming Apple for not giving us the heroine addiction that is the iPhone. But everything could have been better.

 

[kdarling]

Well, now, even if the sold the phone as unlocked, you still wouldn't be able to get it on Verizon; you'd get to choose between AT&T, T-mobile, and whatever random small carrier you happen to live near.

That would still be nice. A large part of the USA doesn't have ATT non-roaming service, which means lots of people can't buy an iPhone "legally". (And is why rural GSM carriers are asking the FCC to overrule exclusives in their case.)

Click here for ATT coverage map

It defaults to showing where they have coverage, including roaming.

Now click "GoPhone" above the map under "Coverage Type", and you'll see native ATT coverage, where you CAN own an iPhone.

All the pink areas are where you CANNOT own an iPhone.

 

[Geckotek]

Ah. Thought you might be confused. It's late and easy to do. Deleting my response as well...

Cheers

I was basing my response on written articles I felt were reliable....but then I found others stating the opposite. The truth is most of this stuff is speculation since Apple and AT&T haven't made the contract agreement public. But there seems to be speculation that there is still a subsidy agreement per phone....so I retracted my statements. I hate it when people make uninformed statements.....the only thing I hate more is when I do it.

 

[wreckshop]

I was basing my response on written articles I felt were reliable....but then I found others stating the opposite. The truth is most of this stuff is speculation since Apple and AT&T haven't made the contract agreement public. But there seems to be speculation that there is still a subsidy agreement per phone....so I retracted my statements. I hate it when people make uninformed statements.....the only thing I hate more is when I do it.

There is no speculation that iphone is subsidized, it's a fact.

 

[andyblila]

ATT pays apple a subsidy of $300 for each iphone sold. The standard carrier handset subsidy is $200. Apple can increase sales 2x if iphone was on VZW and ATT.

example:

iphone sales ATT exclusive = 1M x $300 = $300M

iphone sales ATT + VZW = 2M x $200 = $400M

$400m > $300m. not to mention additional revenue from 2x increase from app store sales, accessory sales, etc..

I thought you were good at math

The same math could be applied if Apple let the iPhone go to the other GSM carriers in the US, and they wouldn't have to make a different version of the phone. You are obviously either a VZW user or fan. Quit trying to convince me. If you love VZW that much....convince Apple! It's not going to VZW...at least not until it goes to all of the other GSM carriers. However, i refuse to argue with an obvious VZW "fanboy" any longer. It's like wiping before you take a dump....makes no sense at all.

 

[Geckotek]

There is no speculation that iphone is subsidized, it's a fact.

Because someone of high reputation and position at AT&T or Apple told you directly? You've seen the contract?

The subsidies to the customer are a fact. At the very least it can be inferred in the price difference for a new contract.

Subsidies paid to Apple by AT&T are not proven in any way that I'm aware of. In fact, it seems nuts to me that AT&T would a) give me a $200 subsidy, b) pay Apple for the cost of the hardware, c) AND give Apple a $300 subsidy?!? Wow, how much is AT&T paying out for all of this?!

BTW, the $300 subsidy you are referring to is supposedly only for NEW CUSTOMERS.

 

[Digital Skunk]

Because someone of high reputation and position at AT&T or Apple told you directly? You've seen the contract?

No, but you can go to the Apple Store and have an employee ring one up and see that the price increases $200. By the time you finish it will be lowered to the said price.

Or, you can have someone that is NOT eligible for the upgrade price buy one and see that the 8GB costs $399 and the 16GB $499. It's really not speculation at all.

At Kdarling, Yes indeed. AT&T and Apple employees love lying to many people about AT&T having the largest 3G network in the US. It's nice propaganda, but when you take into account the far faster EVDO on Sprint and Verizon's networks then AT&T is a paltry third in terms of overall speed and size of network.

 

[kdarling]

Subsidies paid to Apple by AT&T are not proven in any way that I'm aware of. In fact, it seems nuts to me that AT&T would a) give me a $200 subsidy, b) pay Apple for the cost of the hardware, c) AND give Apple a $300 subsidy?!?

Yep, that would be nuts, which is why that's not what happens. ATT pays Apple the full price of the phone, and loans (subsidizes) money to the customer to buy the phone cheaper upfront... in return for a two year contract.

There was one analyst who suggested that ATT is also giving Apple a $100 bonus for new customers, on top of the full price... but no one knows if that's true or not. Wouldn't be surprising if they did.

What is known is that ATT told their stockholders that the subsidy would result in a half billion dollars in upfront costs over the next two years. So analysts divide that by the number of phones they expect to sell in 2008-9 to get the subsidy amount.

Note: all figures off the top of my head. Please research yourself for more details.

 

[diamond.g]

No.

LTE for 4G is totally different technology for both the GSM and CDMA camps. From the transmission standard, to the totally IP based protocol, it's new for everyone.

The bigger switch was when GSM used CDMA for 3G.

I would like to thank you for your post. Everyone here seems to be missing the fact that UTMS runs on top of CDMA technology (WCDMA for those keeping score). The CDMA that Verizon, Sprint and Alltel use is really called CDMA2000.

LTE can be deployed overtop of the existing infrastructure (sorta) as it is wholly IP based transmission. So the underlying architecture supposedly shouldn't matter.

Co-existence with legacy standards (users can transparently start a call or transfer of data in an area using an LTE standard, and, should coverage be unavailable, continue the operation without any action on their part using GSM/GPRS or W-CDMA-based UMTS or even 3GPP2 networks such as CDMA or EV-DO)

So when everyone crows about Verizon going GSM they should realize that Verizon doesn't have to change much (well assuming the 5Mhz slices are okay) to use LTE. Which would also imply that they can stay CDMA2000 based.

 

[Geckotek]

No, but you can go to the Apple Store and have an employee ring one up and see that the price increases $200. By the time you finish it will be lowered to the said price.

Or, you can have someone that is NOT eligible for the upgrade price buy one and see that the 8GB costs $399 and the 16GB $499. It's really not speculation at all.

At Kdarling, Yes indeed. AT&T and Apple employees love lying to many people about AT&T having the largest 3G network in the US. It's nice propaganda, but when you take into account the far faster EVDO on Sprint and Verizon's networks then AT&T is a paltry third in terms of overall speed and size of network.

Yeah, but using Wreckshops argument, the subsidies are being paid to Apple, not the customer.

There is a lot of confusion in this thread.

 

[Geckotek]

No, but you can go to the Apple Store and have an employee ring one up and see that the price increases $200. By the time you finish it will be lowered to the said price.

Or, you can have someone that is NOT eligible for the upgrade price buy one and see that the 8GB costs $399 and the 16GB $499. It's really not speculation at all.

I'm not arguing the subsidy to the customer, I'm arguing the subsidy to Apple which is what some people seem to be talking about here.

 

[wreckshop]

The same math could be applied if Apple let the iPhone go to the other GSM carriers in the US, and they wouldn't have to make a different version of the phone. You are obviously either a VZW user or fan. Quit trying to convince me. If you love VZW that much....convince Apple! It's not going to VZW...at least not until it goes to all of the other GSM carriers. However, i refuse to argue with an obvious VZW "fanboy" any longer. It's like wiping before you take a dump....makes no sense at all.

Who's saying that Apple won't make an iphone for Tmo? I fully expect it, just like there will be one for VZW. And fyi, I'm not a VZW "fanboy" as you suggest since I've do not currently, nor ever had VZW service.

Why don't you actually form a valid counter argument instead of throwing out childish names or accusations. Or trying to make yourself look smarter about bragging how you have master's degree in math? If you have a logical argument as to why apple will stay exclusive to ATT in the US forever, I'd like to hear it. It makes no sense, especially considering the app store.

 

[impact_blue]

I am really happy regarding the news! I love the fact that since AT&T is the exclusive carrier in the U.S., less people will have the chance of acquiring the phone. Maybe I am being a little selfish, but I would rather another "Razr" episode did not occur; people who can afford a product paying $800 when it first comes out (because of exclusivity), and then it becoming available for free with a two-year contract. Talk about unfair...

The iphone is the next RAZR. Moto sold about 50mil of the RAZR and Apple is probably gonna sell close to 20mil of the iphone by the end of the year.

So stop feeling special that you have an iphone. And it's not unfair, it's just called the "Early Adopter's Fee". Just as everyone who bought the EDGE Iphone out the gate.

 

[Digital Skunk]

I'm not arguing the subsidy to the customer, I'm arguing the subsidy to Apple which is what some people seem to be talking about here.

Oh!

The iphone is the next RAZR. Moto sold about 50mil of the RAZR and Apple is probably gonna sell close to 20mil of the iphone by the end of the year.

So stop feeling special that you have an iphone. And it's not unfair, it's just called the "Early Adopter's Fee". Just as everyone who bought the EDGE Iphone out the gate.

Yes, and if someone can't see this happening then they need to wipe the crust out of their eyes. The iPhone will be as ho-hum as the iPod sooner than later, and I can see many people from AT&T's ranks pulling out and going with carriers that offer that one option or two that AT&T doesn't have, like insurance, or unlimited plans for less than your first born.

 

[bousozoku]

The iphone is the next RAZR. Moto sold about 50mil of the RAZR and Apple is probably gonna sell close to 20mil of the iphone by the end of the year.

So stop feeling special that you have an iphone. And it's not unfair, it's just called the "Early Adopter's Fee". Just as everyone who bought the EDGE Iphone out the gate.

They've at least slowed down and don't push the thing in my face anymore.

It may be less exclusive, but outside the Apple store, I don't see any of them.

My contract with Sprint was up in July and I looked at the facts, including the pathetic AT&T 3G network, and passed on the iPhone. It's a great device, if you happen to live in another country, where you get reasonable service.

If AT&T had the network they tout, they wouldn't put "global coverage" on their advertising. They've already had to drop the "fewest dropped calls" because it wasn't true. I expect that "more bars in more places" has to do with their alcohol consumption.

I'd love to have the phone but I'll have to change countries to enjoy it.

 

[wreckshop]

Yeah, but using Wreckshops argument, the subsidies are being paid to Apple, not the customer.

There is a lot of confusion in this thread.

ahh...misunderstanding. of course apple gets paid only full price. misunderstanding of context.

 

[Digital Skunk]

They've at least slowed down and don't push the thing in my face anymore.

It may be less exclusive, but outside the Apple store, I don't see any of them.

My contract with Sprint was up in July and I looked at the facts, including the pathetic AT&T 3G network, and passed on the iPhone. It's a great device, if you happen to live in another country, where you get reasonable service.

If AT&T had the network they tout, they wouldn't put "global coverage" on their advertising. They've already had to drop the "fewest dropped calls" because it wasn't true. I expect that "more bars in more places" has to do with their alcohol consumption.

I'd love to have the phone but I'll have to change countries to enjoy it.

Why does the truth sound so good?!?!?!?

I was on the fence about the iPhone or the Instinct and passed on both. I'll keep my non-fancy-touch screen phone for a few more years and wait for either AT&T to get their act together, or for the other cell makers to try a little harder.

On another note, it's truly hard to get addicts to see that people are switching to AT&T simply for the iPhone. No one is leaving their treos behind and switching to AT&T to pick up another treo.

If Apple paired the iPhone with a far better carrier, or someone's preferred carrier they... would... sell... more... iPhones!

 

[andyblila]

Who's saying that Apple won't make an iphone for Tmo? I fully expect it, just like there will be one for VZW. And fyi, I'm not a VZW "fanboy" as you suggest since I've do not currently, nor ever had VZW service.

Why don't you actually form a valid counter argument instead of throwing out childish names or accusations. Or trying to make yourself look smarter about bragging how you have master's degree in math? If you have a logical argument as to why apple will stay exclusive to ATT in the US forever, I'd like to hear it. It makes no sense, especially considering the app store.

Goodness. I haven't said anything of the sort. Quit being such a baby and getting butt hurt over this! And FYI Get Your Facts Straight!! Apple doesn't have to make a TMobile version.....the current phone already works on TMobile as they are a GSM network also. And what does the App store have to do with the network that the iPhone is on???? Nothing! I'd like to hear your logical argument. You haven't made one yet. In fact all you seem to do is throw out random spew laced with anger. I fail to see the App Store - Network connection. I mentioned my degree once. I fail to see where that is bragging. I only mentioned it because YOU referred to my lack of intelligence. So if you want to have a discussion with logical conclusions....fine. But if you insist on attacking me personally instead of the issue, perhaps you should move on. I am a stock holder and have a vested interest in Apple selling as many iPhones as possible, so I am definitely open to Apple putting the iPhone on as many networks as possible. However it does not change my OPINION that Apple will not make a CDMA phone. I may be wrong, have been many times in the past, but that does not change myOPINION!

Finally, why do you even care what I think? I have absolutely zero influence on what Apple does and which networks they put the iPhone on. I can say that they are putting it on the Martian CDMA network....doesn't make it true....doesn't mean they will. So I am curious as to why you are getting so Butt Hurt over my OPINION? Yours is that they will put out a CDMA version, mine is that they won't. We both have a 50-50 shot of being correct.

I thought this conversation was finished, because frankly I don't give a flying **** what your opinion is. You are not going to change my mind. I don't have the slightest desire to change yours. I feel that you are entitled to your opinion. It is a shame that you don't want to extend me the same courtesy. The only reason I keep responding is that you continually harangue and insult me. So in closing....grow up and quit insulting people when you don't get your way, or they don't subscribe to your line of thinking. This is the USA and not a Dictatorship, Facist, or Communist regime. People don't have to agree with you or conform to your line of thinking. This is an opinion based thread! I respect your right to your opinion and understand your line of thought. I reserve, and have, the right to disagree with it. I ask you to extend me the same courtesy.

And before you go and accuse someone of resorting to childish name calling, you should look at yourself. Don't throw rocks when you live in a glass house.

 

[JWages]

Who's saying that Apple won't make an iphone for Tmo? I fully expect it, just like there will be one for VZW. And fyi, I'm not a VZW "fanboy" as you suggest since I've do not currently, nor ever had VZW service.

Why don't you actually form a valid counter argument instead of throwing out childish names or accusations. Or trying to make yourself look smarter about bragging how you have master's degree in math? If you have a logical argument as to why apple will stay exclusive to ATT in the US forever, I'd like to hear it. It makes no sense, especially considering the app store.

I'm sorry but I dont see the iPhone going to verizon any time soon.

to other GSM carriers yes, but I don't see them making a CDMA version of the iPhone. if they do, however, i'll more than happily switch back to VZW

 

[SilentLoner]

That would still be nice. A large part of the USA doesn't have ATT non-roaming service, which means lots of people can't buy an iPhone "legally". (And is why rural GSM carriers are asking the FCC to overrule exclusives in their case.)

Click here for ATT coverage map

It defaults to showing where they have coverage, including roaming.

Now click "GoPhone" above the map under "Coverage Type", and you'll see native ATT coverage, where you CAN own an iPhone.

All the pink areas are where you CANNOT own an iPhone.

Can you not use the iphone is all of those area's what's the point in that? why would it be using gophone's coverage and not the full at&t network?

 

[diamond.g]

However it does not change my OPINION that Apple will not make a CDMA phone. I may be wrong, have been many times in the past, but that does not change myOPINION!

I'm sorry but I dont see the iPhone going to verizon any time soon.

to other GSM carriers yes, but I don't see them making a CDMA version of the iPhone. if they do, however, i'll more than happily switch back to VZW

Hate to break it to you guys but the iPhone 3G is a CDMA (in the purest sense) phone. UTMS is a WCDMA technology, which shares it roots with (you guessed it) CDMA. So like it or not if you have an iPhone 3G you are using a CDMA phone.

 

[JWages]

Hate to break it to you guys but the iPhone 3G is a CDMA (in the purest sense) phone. UTMS is a WCDMA technology, which shares it roots with (you guessed it) CDMA. So like it or not if you have an iPhone 3G you are using a CDMA phone.

but it doesn't running on a CDMA network, such as verizon

 

[diamond.g]

but it doesn't running on a CDMA network, such as verizon

That would be due to Verizon (Sprint and Alltel) using CDMA2000. Something Qualcomm (sp?) cooked up. Which is in fact different than CDMA and WCDMA. When Verizon goes to LTE they don't have to actually put up a GSM network as LTE is IP based and can ride overtop of any network (technically).

Code division multiple access (CDMA) is a channel access method utilized by various radio communication technologies. It should not be confused with the mobile phone standards called cdmaOne and CDMA2000 (which are often referred to as simply "CDMA"), that use CDMA as their underlying channel access methods.

 

[andyblila]

Hate to break it to you guys but the iPhone 3G is a CDMA (in the purest sense) phone. UTMS is a WCDMA technology, which shares it roots with (you guessed it) CDMA. So like it or not if you have an iPhone 3G you are using a CDMA phone.

I will concede that is a CDMA like phone. But it runs on a different frequency than true CDMA phones do. That is the stickler. Anyway, as I said in a previous post. I'm happy for Apple to put a iPhone on every network. Raises the value of my stock!

 

[bousozoku]

Why does the truth sound so good?!?!?!?

I was on the fence about the iPhone or the Instinct and passed on both. I'll keep my non-fancy-touch screen phone for a few more years and wait for either AT&T to get their act together, or for the other cell makers to try a little harder.

On another note, it's truly hard to get addicts to see that people are switching to AT&T simply for the iPhone. No one is leaving their treos behind and switching to AT&T to pick up another treo.

If Apple paired the iPhone with a far better carrier, or someone's preferred carrier they... would... sell... more... iPhones!

I looked at the Instinct after making a choice and thought that it was another glorified Samsung POS, like the one that had stopped working correctly for me. I now have an LG Musiq, which is a long way down from the top end, but it's an acceptable phone and I get DSL speeds when tethered. Firefox shows me up to 200 KB/sec. downloads though 175 KB/sec. is more likely. The Samsung A900, for all its problems was hitting 300 KB/sec. quite often, which was as good as my BellSouth 3 Mbps DSL.

Apple will do just fine without us buying an iPhone and I'll do just fine with my PowerBook tethered to Sprint's 3G network.