T-Mobile USA Blames Lack of iPhone for Customer Loss in 4Q 2011

[rnizlek]

I think all carriers should be at the price point T-Mobile is at. People I think you are paying too much for your phone and coverage. No wonder we in america are struggling financially.

Except that, when you expand T-Mobile's footprint to be that of AT&T's or Verizon's, the cost increases that much more.

Part of the savings in T-Mobile is a reduced coverage area. If T-Mobile with an equal competitor in terms of coverage, I'd agree that AT&T or Verizon was a waste of money. Also, I don't know if T-Mobile's rates are sustainable over the long term. We will see.

I pay $94 a month on AT&T. That includes AT&T's tethering plan, which I use to work on the go. If I excluded it, I'd be paying $78 a month, which is $1,872 every two years (keep in mind I get a discount on AT&T through my employer, but that's not uncommon and only saves me about $10 a month). Factor in that AT&T subsidizes a new iPhone to the tune of $500 every two years, and what I pay to AT&T is exactly in line with what you're paying to T-Mobile (or on slightly more, if T-Mobile includes tethering by default (not sure if they do)).

If an iPhone 3GS is good for you and T-Mobile's network works, more power to you. Not knocking your choice, but just wanted to point out the difference isn't always as stark as the one in your example.

 

[SAD*FACED*CLOWN]

Second rate in what way? I have had Sprint, AT&T (throughout the various incarnations), and now T-Mobile. T-Mobile has by far the best customer service and network for my location out of all 3.

LMFAO!!!!! that was rich...LOL...oh wait you're not joking are you? SMH

 

[acidfast7]

But beat this. I paid $200 for my phone (including 32 GB SD card). I pay $50 a month for Unlimited Talk, Text, and Web (first 2 GB at high speed). I have yet to come near the 2 GB mark before my data gets throttled. So for 2 years I spend $1,400. I compare an AT&T plan which is the same but 3 GB and then paid for usage over that and I'm at $299 for a 32 GB iPhone and $119 a month for a total of $3,155. Every 2 years I'm can buy something like a 27" iMac with the left over $1,755!

I'd rather have an iPhone than a MyTouch but I'd rather have a MyTouch and a 27" iMac (or grocery money) than just an iPhone.

Only one time in the last 10 plus years was I in a situation where a Verizon customer had coverage and I did not.

I think all carriers should be at the price point T-Mobile is at. People I think you are paying too much for your phone and coverage. No wonder we in america are struggling financially.

or you could just buy the phone outright and drop in a prepaid uSIM and save even more money.

monthly contracts are for fools or people who can't afford the phone upfront, and therefore shouldn't be signing up for a 2000USD/2 year plan anyway

:facepalm:

----------

LOL, enjoy your downtime, Oslo!

I can only speak with the one in Stockholm but everything worked great from day 1 (with a minimum of 45Mb/s up 4.5Mb/s down)

 

[rnizlek]

or you could just buy the phone outright and drop in a prepaid uSIM and save even more money.

monthly contracts are for fools or people who can't afford the phone upfront, and therefore shouldn't be signing up for a 2000USD/2 year plan anyway

:facepalm:

Probably just a difference between Europe and the US. Why would I not sign a two year contract? I'd pay $500 more for the phone and not save much, if anything on the monthly fees.

Sure, if I went with a small carrier like MetroPCS I might (are they even compatible with the iPhone's frequency bands?), but that's not a fair comparison. I need a company with true, nationwide coverage. And to do business with them (either Verizon or AT&T, Sprint is a little on the slow side for me), I'd pay exactly the same.

 

[uknowimright]

Wait a minute here... Isn't T-Mobile the one said they don't need iPhones couple of months back?

I believe that was U.S. Cellular

T-Mobile actually has stated it has been up to Apple:

T-Mobile thinks the iPhone is a good device and we’ve expressed our interest to Apple to offer it to our customers. Ultimately, it is Apple’s decision. The issue remains that Apple has not developed a version of the iPhone with technology that works on our fast 3G and 4G networks. We believe a capable version of the iPhone for our 3G and 4G networks would offer an additional compelling option for our customers on a fast 4G network. However, the iPhone is not the only option to experience the benefit that smartphones offer.

maybe they don't want their phone to be on a "budget" network?

 

[cmwade77]

There's a few reasons. A big one is that WiFi is designed as a stationary technology. It doesn't permit roaming from site to site. So it would be completely unusable if you were on a bus, train, in a car, etc.

WiFi is also designed as a relatively short range technology. You'd be hard pressed to find good examples where it works well over a larger range, without needing a number of access points.

Finally, if you built out a nationwide WiFi infrastructure, with a similar footprint to existing cell networks, the cost of the infrastructure and the backhaul wouldn't be a lot different from what it cost to build and operate the cell network.

WiFi as a technology doesn't make sense in the context you are suggesting using it. What you're really arguing for is a government provided, nationwide LTE network. Which I don't think would have any substantial advantages over the existing system - either we'd pay for it in taxes or pay for it in our service charges to private providers. I'm generally left leaning, but I think that would really be overstepping the appropriate role for the government.

The reality is this stuff costs a lot of money to roll out and maintain, unless you're going to cherry-pick very specific areas to serve at a low cost (like MetroPCS). And even then it's pretty expensive.

Actually, what you are looking for here is a WiMax network, this works with WiFi devices, but if it is all one network, you could move from tower to tower without interruption.

WiMax also works very well over longer distances and would be the ideal system to get around cellular carriers.

If there were a nationwide WiMax network, you could theoretically use an existing iPhone with Skype with the unlimited calling to Canada and the USA for $2.99 per month (there are discounts, if you buy a year at a time though) and then for $30 per year you can get a number that you can be called at, so your total phone bill would work out to be about $5.50 per month and you would get unlimited texting, video calling, etc. as well.

WiMax could also provide high speed internet to rural areas that currently don't have access to anything but dial up or satellite (when lucky).

This is not something the government should be doing though (of course really all they should be doing is making sure we are safe and that people that truly can't help themselves, due to injury, disability and the like are taken care of and nothing else, but that's another story), but private enterprise should be allowed and even encouraged to create such a network.

 

[SatManager]

I was a T-Mobile customer and during the summer last year I was told that T-Mobile was getting the new iPhone. Needless to say I was misinformed. I went to Verizon as they had the best coverage (equal to T-Mobile in my area) and picked up the 4S. When I dropped T-Mobile they didn't even ask why. T-Mobile will have to raise rates to afford the buildout to go LTE. They don't have the cash flow to finance the buildout.

I foresee all of the carriers dropping coverage of all service levels except LTE and migrate everyone to a VOIP protocol in the next five years. This will allow for the most efficient use of the existing bandwidth that they have available.

 

[Wicked1]

Is that Taps I hear playing in the Background

The thing that kills me, is the government was worried about jobs and lack of competition, well what happens when T-Mobile doesn't exist anymore then what.

Sometimes I wonder about the DOJ's logic, they are not getting a cash infusion from DT nor will they, bleeding $ and bleeding customer defection. Humm yeah that was a good idea blocking AT&T?

They could have allowed the deal and set some ground rules for the merger but oh well so long Pinky

 

[acidfast7]

Probably just a difference between Europe and the US. Why would I not sign a two year contract? I'd pay $500 more for the phone and not save much, if anything on the monthly fees.

Sure, if I went with a small carrier like MetroPCS I might (are they even compatible with the iPhone's frequency bands?), but that's not a fair comparison. I need a company with true, nationwide coverage. And to do business with them (either Verizon or AT&T, Sprint is a little on the slow side for me), I'd pay exactly the same.

you avoid the month fees, by "paying as you go" and taper usage to the amount of money you want to spend.

paying a contract-locked monthly fee is ridiculous

 

[DerekRod]

Is there a way to activate it on JB-ed phones? I'm just curious. If the next unlocked version supports AWS I will likely get it since I prefer T-Mobile in NYC and have a grandfathered "unlimited" plan that doesn't start throttling until 5GB and includes mobile wi-fi hotspot.

probably no way to activate it unofficially

 

[holmstockd]

its NOT just the iPhone...

I been with t-mob since 07 - and there customer service has always been stellar - but heres is why they LOST so many (IMHO).

1. The merger with AT&T scared the heck out of so many people - a lot of t-mob subscribers were people that fled from AT&T so they did not want to go back.

2. Coverage coverage coverage! rural areas still suck in my home town in VA, and it HAS NOT BEEN improved SINCE i started with them as far as i know they have made no attempt to do so.
I am still on EDGE in my home town so i really don't care for 3g/lte - we just DONT HAVE IT...

3. Areas that were GOOD in coverage now i get dropped calls and low signal. this is new and its never happened before.

4. Customer service has taken a hit, maybe due to lack of moral - people worried over their jobs and frankly they just don't care.

5. the phones they offer do suck - they have a chance and blew it with the GS II by stripping out the better processor just to get better 3g speeds. Every other phone there just about blows - I have the HTC radar and it has only 8 gig internal! WOW - I had the iPhone 1, 3gs and 4 - got tired of it - had all the androids got tired of it - then they get the top of the line blackberry (oxy moron) the bold 9900 and price it out of reach! i had it and sold it - it sucked! and now its back to wp7 on edge - yeah!

So T-Mob needs to take a look in the mirror and STOP ONLY blaming it on LACK OF IPHONE!

 

[linux2mac]

So much for this:

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1321445/

And this:

https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=14154582#post14154582

Which was contradicted here:

Verizon CEO: We hope our 4G rollout will help us earn the iPhone
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Veri...-rollout-will-help-us-earn-the-iPhone_id13479

LOL!

It amazes me how folks are still in denial of the power of the iPhone. I have to quote John Gruber again.

"Negotiations with the carriers:

Android handset makers: Here are our phones. How would you like us to change them so that you will sell them?

Microsoft: Here’s $200 million. Please sell our phones.

Apple: Here is our new phone. It comes in black or white. We will let you sell it."

http://isource.com/2012/01/12/recom...ple-microsoft-negotiations-with-the-carriers/

 

[swift93]

I bought my first smartphone when the iPhone 4s was available unlocked and used it on T Mobile for several months, but the Edge network was too frustrating. In certain areas of the northwest they altered the frequency to work with 3G, but not where I live.

Consequently, last week I switched to Good2Go which runs on ATT network at 3G speeds for less money.

 

[DerekRod]

Probably just a difference between Europe and the US. Why would I not sign a two year contract? I'd pay $500 more for the phone and not save much, if anything on the monthly fees.

Sure, if I went with a small carrier like MetroPCS I might (are they even compatible with the iPhone's frequency bands?), but that's not a fair comparison. I need a company with true, nationwide coverage. And to do business with them (either Verizon or AT&T, Sprint is a little on the slow side for me), I'd pay exactly the same.

Metro PCS is CDMA so you couldn't bring an iPhone there even if it was unlocked

 

[rnizlek]

Actually, what you are looking for here is a WiMax network, this works with WiFi devices, but if it is all one network, you could move from tower to tower without interruption.

WiMax also works very well over longer distances and would be the ideal system to get around cellular carriers.

If there were a nationwide WiMax network, you could theoretically use an existing iPhone with Skype with the unlimited calling to Canada and the USA for $2.99 per month (there are discounts, if you buy a year at a time though) and then for $30 per year you can get a number that you can be called at, so your total phone bill would work out to be about $5.50 per month and you would get unlimited texting, video calling, etc. as well.

WiMax could also provide high speed internet to rural areas that currently don't have access to anything but dial up or satellite (when lucky).

This is not something the government should be doing though (of course really all they should be doing is making sure we are safe and that people that truly can't help themselves, due to injury, disability and the like are taken care of and nothing else, but that's another story), but private enterprise should be allowed and even encouraged to create such a network.

How is that different from an LTE network? Clearwire has tried to do an WiMax network and last I checked, they (or Sprint) were dropping it for LTE. But sure, WiMax would work. LTE works. The reality is it costs a lot to build a nationwide network like that out. Why hasn't Clearwire been more successful than they are if the model works well?

I know there's some small providers in rural VT that are using these technologies to do rural broadband. So yes, it is happening. The reality is though that it's very costly to build something like this out, and providers need to recoup their costs in fees.

 

[skellener]

Perfect time for Google to swoop in and buy T-Mobile cheap. I still think they are the only ones that have the clout and resources to disrupt the status quo among cell carriers and start pushing innovation. They have the potential to turn the current system on its head with higher bandwidth and cheaper plans. Bring on G-Mobile!!

 

[DerekRod]

How is that different from an LTE network? Clearwire has tried to do an WiMax network and last I checked, they (or Sprint) were dropping it for LTE. But sure, WiMax would work. LTE works. The reality is it costs a lot to build a nationwide network like that out. Why hasn't Clearwire been more successful than they are if the model works well?

I know there's some small providers in rural VT that are using these technologies to do rural broadband. So yes, it is happening. The reality is though that it's very costly to build something like this out, and providers need to recoup their costs in fees.

Sprint is actually smart instead of falling back to EV-DO from LTE you can fall back to Wi-max to soften that blow its actually very smart to have LTE and Wimax

 

[cmwade77]

Except that, when you expand T-Mobile's footprint to be that of AT&T's or Verizon's, the cost increases that much more.

Part of the savings in T-Mobile is a reduced coverage area. If T-Mobile with an equal competitor in terms of coverage, I'd agree that AT&T or Verizon was a waste of money. Also, I don't know if T-Mobile's rates are sustainable over the long term. We will see.

I pay $94 a month on AT&T. That includes AT&T's tethering plan, which I use to work on the go. If I excluded it, I'd be paying $78 a month, which is $1,872 every two years (keep in mind I get a discount on AT&T through my employer, but that's not uncommon and only saves me about $10 a month). Factor in that AT&T subsidizes a new iPhone to the tune of $500 every two years, and what I pay to AT&T is exactly in line with what you're paying to T-Mobile (or on slightly more, if T-Mobile includes tethering by default (not sure if they do)).

If an iPhone 3GS is good for you and T-Mobile's network works, more power to you. Not knocking your choice, but just wanted to point out the difference isn't always as stark as the one in your example.

I disagree, honestly, my wife has T-Mobile and she often has coverage when my iPhone from AT&T doesn't. T-Mobile also has far fewer dropped calls.

With T-Mobile, we pay about $23 per line per month and that has two lines with unlimited data, text and minutes. The remaining lines do not need data, so they have unlimited text, t-mobile to t-mobile, nights and weekends and 500 anytime minutes per line.

So that is a savings of about $55 per month, per line over what you are paying, so over two years that amounts to $1,320. So even with the $500 subsidy, we will save $820 per line over two years.

This doesn't even count tethering into the mix, as officially, you are supposed to pay a $10 fee per line per month to tether with T-Mobile, but when you call and ask to add it, most of the representatives will give you instructions specific to your phone to get around having to do so instead of adding the feature to your line. From what I have been told, they are encouraged to do this kind of thing to show good customer service.

T-Mobiles rates are indeed sustainable over the long term, the problem might be a short term cash flow problem, but since AT&T had to pay a fair amount of money to pull out of the proposed merger, I think that might even have been solved.

I think the bottom line here though is that T-Mobile (not AT&T) should have been the first carrier to get the iPhone as their customer service is almost as good as Apple's.

 

[RalfTheDog]

The problem with T-Mobile is that they are too cheep. If they don't increase their margins, they will not be able to compete with ATT or Verizon. Bottom feeding is, quite often a very bad strategy.

 

[devinci99]

Didn't T-Mobile spokesperson said a few months back (when iPhone4S launched) that it would be fine without the 4S because it was offering a compelling line of Android phones which are as good as or superior to the iPhone?

=/

 

[Surreal]

I would switch to T-Mobile if they did allowed an proper unlock after the 2 years.

seriously, why doesn't any US carrier do this? I would even take a lesser subsidy for this.

 

[linux2mac]

Didn't T-Mobile spokesperson said a few months back (when iPhone4S launched) that it would be fine without the 4S because it was offering a compelling line of Android phones which are as good as or superior to the iPhone?

=/

Yup.

T-Mobile: Sorry, but we're not getting the iPhone
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-20112426-94/t-mobile-sorry-but-were-not-getting-the-iphone/

"T-Mobile Chief Marketing Officer Cole Brodman posted a letter to customers on the company's blog yesterday, saying that while he would love to carry the iPhone, the company is currently focusing on 'the best that Android has to offer.'"

ROFLMAO!

 

[Bear]

Sequentially, the decline in branded net contract customers was driven primarily by higher branded contract deactivations as a result of the launch of the iPhone 4S by three nationwide competitors in mid-October.

Or maybe a huge portion of that loss was the AT&T merger... failed or not.

 

[Plutonius]

I think all carriers should be at the price point T-Mobile is at. People I think you are paying too much for your phone and coverage. No wonder we in america are struggling financially.

T-Mobile USA is losing money / customers which is why their parent company wants to dump them. The other providers are charging more since they are paying large subsidies to Apple for the iPhone and they are trying to run their business at a profit. Look at the fiscal info for the other companies. Even with what they charge, their profits are not exceptional.

T-Mobiles rates are indeed sustainable over the long term

What evidence do you have supporting your statement ? Even though they got some cash from AT+T, they are consistently losing customers. T-Mobile's parent company wants to dump them and I can't see T-Mobile being around in the future.

 

[SockRolid]

New ad tagline.

[...] T-Mobile USA is seeking to reposition itself with a "challenger strategy" and move aggressively to roll out 4G LTE services beginning next year. [...]

We're #4. We try harder.