Verizon CEO Reveals That He Has Asked Apple for iPhone Rights

[PandaOnslaught]

verizon is my least favorite service, i used to like them because i thought i was paying for the best, but when i switched over i realized their prices are outrageous and its not any better, so far sprint has been the most fair, although im not much a fan for anything but the palm pre, but the palm pre plus is better and that is a verizon phone lol, and personally i wish that the phones themselves where universal regardless of what service you have, i really want a droid and im on AT&T : /

 

[tbrinkma]

agreed...why do people keep posting this and preaching it like gospel? take a look at the droid and the pre and the blackberries. People who say verizon locks things down clearly do not know verizon at all

That's the problem with developing a reputation. It takes a *lot* longer to kill a bad reputation than a good one.

 

[Maverick1337]

I never got those Verizon commercials where there is an imaginary map floating over the person's head. Particularly, the one where the guy sits down in front of the television and his floating 3G map is blocking the view and his friends tell him to move. Is there some sort of hidden meaning to it? Is it that his internet coverage is so awesome that it grabs the attention of an entire room of people?

Please tell me you're being sarcastic

 

[cjmillsnun]

if The CEO of Verizon has to make this type of statement publicly..this should serve as proof that Verizon is not getting the iPhone...not any time soon...if they were getting the iPhone mum would be the word until Apple announced it...by the way where is that CDMA iPad?

Bingo! Absolutely spot on. Steve likes to make these announcements himself. Not have some supposed potential partner company give out crap like this. He's trying to force Steve to release a Verizon iPhone. I personally don't think that will happen.

 

[NikeTalk]

With AT&T's prorated ETF canceling them should never really be an issue cause since you've already got an iPhone it'll be pretty much like a cycle and a half you woulda paid for anyway if that.

 

[bergmef]

Bingo! Absolutely spot on. Steve likes to make these announcements himself. Not have some supposed potential partner company give out crap like this. He's trying to force Steve to release a Verizon iPhone. I personally don't think that will happen.

Like the newspaper people telling about the ipad? Or hill-mcgraw for that matter?

 

[seedster2]

First, do you think any carrier can do the iPhone better? I believe carriers weren't ready for the iPhone, none of them. AT&T however has another issue and that is coverage. I am a firm believer now that Verizon and I would have a happy union if they'd get the iPhone. I may be alone here but for me Verizon wins with coverage in my area. With the Droid they showed us that vCast won't be on an iPhone like device. They've managed to get their heads out of their asses (which is more than I can say for Apple) and listen to their customers who don't need vCast or a service similar built into the phone further crippling it.

Second, if Apple wants to pout about it then sure, they should stay away from Verizon, but let's be real. This is business and in business you make mistakes and try to rectify the error. Verizon may be kicking themselves now for their decision but who knows, maybe they've made provisions for devices like the iPhone to come their way and if that happens maybe it'll be a real seamless transition. Did you ever think that Verizon admitting a stupid mistake is a step in a better direction?

Third, it is laughable that people don't want choice. Carrier choice is what I'd like to have.

For all those thinking all Verizon phones are locked down, take another look. You may be surprised.

I may not be ready to give up my iPhone for a fancy user replaceable battery but I sure as hell am ready for some changes.

Couldnt agree more. Coverage trumps all in my book

Apple needs Verizon way more than Verizon needs Apple at this point in the game.

-Since the iPhone was released, Verizon has not had a single quarter with negative subscriber growth for postpaid customers.

-Since the iPhone was released, Verizon still has one of the lowest churn rates in the industry.

It's not like Verizon is bleeding customers over the iPhone. If Apple stays with AT&T their overall base won't grow by very much.

Did Verizon miss out on some possible extra growth without the iPhone? Maybe. However business is far more than getting the best numbers possible. Look at AT&T's reputation now. It's pretty crappy. People associate AT&T with subpar service, while Verizon is associates with the most reliable network and the best coverage. While AT&T was busy drowning as their network overloaded Verizon was making upgrades and beefing up their network getting ready for the smartphone revolution. AT&T's growth happened too fast, while Verizon's growth was controlled.

Anyone remember the days of AOL dialup long before broadband? They were the first to offer an unlimited dialup price for a cheap amount. People flocked to AOL, their growth was extraordinary. Great, right? Wrong. It grew too fast and couldn't keep up with demand so while AOL was being killed the other dialup companies like MSN, Compuserve, etc were beefing up their capacity and rolling out unlimited dialup at a more controlled rate. Even after AOL solved their problems they were known as the unreliable dialup provider with a lot of busy signals.

The smartest thing Verizon did was let AT&T get the iPhone. AT&T got to deal with the growing pains and should Verizon get it this summer then they get a tested product and are prepared to handle it.

By the way I'm no Verizon fanboy. In fact, I believe people keep overlooking Sprint. They're the true hidden gem of the cell phone industry in the US in my opinion.

These facts are always ignored when iPhone carriers are discussed. Im pretty sure that Apple has a CDMA version of every iPhone model in their labs. I would be shortsighted not to do so.

Just what exactly do some people have against competition and choice? If you are an AT&T fanboy (I'm absolutely amazed these people exist) you can continue to give your hard earned money to said corporation. And others who do not like AT&T will have a choice. Competition may bring prices down which in the end helps everyone, AT&T subscribers and others. Some of these responses actually hoping that AT&T remains the sole carrier make absolutely no sense in any rational world--except it's clear by now that these people are really elitists who don't want the iPhone available to everyone because then their precious phone will not be as "exclusive" or something like that. To that, I say go cry a river.

It's some unexplainable allegiance to everything Jobsian. Just take a look at how many times Steve is referenced in their posts. Almost like he is some deity who is more interested in holding personal grudges than making moola

If Apple and Verizon did release the original iPhone many of these guys would be saying who needs talk and data at the same time.

 

[zsqure]

Verizon is actually quite tired of losing their subscribers to the IPhone on a competitors network. The Droid has not pluggged the hole in the ship they had hoped it would. A little "Apple" gamesmanship works in the industry of "I want the new toy."

 

[str1f3]

Bingo! Absolutely spot on. Steve likes to make these announcements himself. Not have some supposed potential partner company give out crap like this. He's trying to force Steve to release a Verizon iPhone. I personally don't think that will happen.

If I was Steve I would be looking at this as a total sign of humility and begging on Verizon's part. Remember that Verizon has been the most vocal critic of the iPhone. He has not publicly admitted anything like the McGraw-Hill CEO.

People have to actually understand that there are many who are disappointed at at&t's service. Whether it is poor data speeds, lost calls, problems with visual voicemail or the lack of tethering.

As of right now my kid sister would have liked to have got an iPhone but she goes to school in upstate NY and Verizon is the only one with good coverage. She opted for BB instead.

 

[robertjm]

I'd hazard a guess that the announcement of OS4.0 had something to do with that being dredged up again.

Some of the info in the article was posted quite a few months ago on engadget also, the part about "We are ready for the iPhone" and such, why is this news again?

 

[Otaviano]

I don't know about a CDMA iPhone we are getting closer and closer to the 4G rollouts, in Europe they are rolling out 4G already in certain cities.

Why make a phone model for a dying standard?

Then imagine all of the possible PR nightmares, when people wonder why their friends iPhone (AT&T) can call and surf at the same time and theirs (Verizon) can't. Why their friends iPhone (AT&T) can roam in Europe without problems and their get's no reception.

Apple likes tight product lines, I don't see them making a CDMA phone just for Verizon. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think Apple will likely try and just spec their way forward this year. Increase RAM, processor, and hard disk, add a front facing camera and some new features.

Then hold out until the transition to 4G

 

[robertjm]

You're wrong. He's reply. It'll just be "Not to worry."

I cant wait for Steve's reply! but knowing apple we really won't get one, it'll just announce the iphone is coming to other networks and that'll be that..

 

[NikeTalk]

If they BOTH wanna make some more money then they NEED each other. Please stop thinking that EVERY company needs Apple. Yea Verizon screwed up by not accepting the deal in the beginning but i'm sure they viewed the terms as "ridiculous" which seriously come on guys anyone would have assumed the same. AT&T was down at the time and needed a spark so they bit.

 

[techwhiz]

Apple iPhone on Verizon

If they BOTH wanna make some more money then they NEED each other. Please stop thinking that EVERY company needs Apple. Yea Verizon screwed up by not accepting the deal in the beginning but i'm sure they viewed the terms as "ridiculous" which seriously come on guys anyone would have assumed the same. AT&T was down at the time and needed a spark so they bit.

Exactly. Apple will not see the additional penetration of 10 Million devices that are potentially there. There are plenty of Verizon subscribers that would buy an iPhone. Those are the people that will not switch to another carrier. Also AT&T will feel churn if/when Verizon gets the iPhone due to people going back to Verizon for whatever reason. Apple needs Verizon for handset sells. Verizon needs the iPhone. It's about cash and nothing else.

Apple wants to sell as many phones as possible. To do that in the US they need Verizon. If they want more penetration in S.E. Asia, they need a CDMA version.

 

[crackbookpro]

Exactly. Apple will not see the additional penetration of 10 Million devices that are potentially there. There are plenty of Verizon subscribers that would buy an iPhone. Those are the people that will not switch to another carrier. Also AT&T will feel churn if/when Verizon gets the iPhone due to people going back to Verizon for whatever reason. Apple needs Verizon for handset sells. Verizon needs the iPhone. It's about cash and nothing else.

Apple wants to sell as many phones as possible. To do that in the US they need Verizon. If they want more penetration in S.E. Asia, they need a CDMA version.

You are exactly 100% correct. It is about the cash... the dough. There is too much dough to be had for both companies. And, you are correct about - people will go back to Verizon for the better network, and there will also be the consumer's whom will/won't not switch networks because of a particular phone model. Now, they can have their cake & eat it too, and stay with Verizon & get an iPhone. We are talking about millions of customers & billions of dollars in profit for both companies.

There is just too much coin to be had...

Yes, there is/was tech issues with CDMA/GSM debates & exclusivity control, but nonetheless... It is about the dough.

And, I've been preaching this on here. It is all about the business decision...

 

[Lara F]

That's the problem with developing a reputation. It takes a *lot* longer to kill a bad reputation than a good one.

Yup - and that's the price AT&T will pay for a long time for getting the iPhone despite their network improvements (which I must admit to noting in NYC).

I don't think Verizon's suffered too bad in the end - if it taught them to open up and significantly improve their phone selection, it was worth it IMO. But of course they'd love to have the iPhone regardless.

Apple's the one that needs to be careful IMO. Most willing switchers will have done so by now. If no iPhone's announced this year there's going to be a lot of satisfied subscribers locked into Android for the next two years (or maybe Palm now that the price and free hotspot will get more people to look at WebOS). To not deal with Verizon out of spite would be just as stupid as the initial turning down of the iPhone.

 

[SAD*FACED*CLOWN]

Smh

stop being naive people...if Verizon does get an iPhone why do you think that would spark some sort of competition between AT&T and Verizon? if anything Apple will just stand on the fence while ALL of us get fleeced...you think these giant corporations are gonna slash prices for us?...what does Apple have to gain if they can't leverage a carrier? how can Apple leverage a carrier if they're on all of them..understand?...The CDMA iPhones that somebody thinks are coming to the US are going straight to China Mobile...you should be more interested in the fact that at this point you still can't get a Google N1 on Verizon, and you also can't get a CDMA iPad on Verizon...the writing is on the wall..maybe at some other point in the future we'll see a Verizon iPhone, but not this summer..probably not this year either...what gives Apple the illusion of being this exclusive creator of magical technological breakthroughs is the fact that they don't partner up with everybody...

 

[kryptonianjorel]

A lot of you guys here dis Verizon for not taking the iPhone (which we all assume that Apple approached VZW in the first place with reasonable terms). Well, friends, hindsight is 20/20

I think it was the smart thing to do back in 2006. VZW was riding the moto razr train, and getting people hooked on internet-capable featurephones. Verizon was getting into the music distribution and application distribution services for its mobiles. While Vcast and get-it-now were total flops, they put a lot of money and resources into it. So to have Apple come to them and say:

"We've never made a phone before, but we want you to carry it. Of course, it'll only use iTunes for music purchases, and we won't give you any money for those. Vcast apps? nah, we'll pass, we're working on our own application delivery method. Oh, you charge $30+ for data, we'll we're gonna need you to put that down to $20, and give us a cut of it. What? you don't want out phone?"

Verizon never crippled their smartphones (only their featurephones with that god awful BREW POS), just fyi.

AT&T didn't have a music distribution method, nor an application distribution method at the time. AT&T was really a sinking ship before the iPhone, and it really saved them. Contrary, Verizon hasn't had a quarter since the iPhone's release where they've lost more subscribers than they've gained, so its hard to say that VZW made the wrong choice.

Now that Vcast and get-it-now are pretty much abandoned, the iPhone can come to Verizon no problem.

 

[StuddedLeather]

Um. . . Unless Verizon give Apple the same control AT&T has I don't see it happening.

I like (Not love, and I'm ONLY speaking for myself) my service with AT&T, and it does come down to "You should've got it when we asked you the first time" CLEARLY if the CEO is asking for the iPhone on Verizon he wish they had this toy to promote. Furthermore if he's just asking then that means it's probably not even in production yet.

I can see a T-Mobile version before Verizon simply because of the network. It's so many delusional people thinking Apple is making a mistake for not carrying the iPhone on Verizon. Pshhh they don't even think about this any longer.

Verizon wants a treat even though it's been a bad dog.

I can't imagine an iPhone with a check mark on it. . . Apple will not allow. Just face it. (Oh and the Driod and the blackberries have the check mark) NOT Apple's way of business.

 

[MizzouCowboy]

I'd rather have a little slower 3G than none at all.

It's called EDGE, and AT&T has it. I get great 3G reception in middle American, have full bars around most of the city, with some exceptional areas where i get 4 bars.

I've had Verizon phones and plans. I'll stick with AT&T. I personally like voice and data at the same time.

 

[christian_k]

It's sad too, because CDMA is the superior technology to GSM in terms of encryption, building penetration, and more. Also it's not just Verizon in the US using CDMA. Alltel (non-divested alltel), and Sprint.

Its not CDMA vs. GSM that makes the difference in indoor penetration. It is the frequency band. Lower frequencies (900 MHz for CDMA in the US) give better indoor coverage than higher frequencies (1900 MHz for GSM in the US). In Europe GSM is often used at 900 MHz resulting in indoor coverage probably comparable to CDMA in the US (and much better than 1800 which is also used in Europe and similar to the 1900 used in the US).

I think the most significant advantage in GSM was that it used SIM cards right from the start. In an enviroment with many networks in many countries and even more virtual network operators and service providers all using compatible technology like Europe this is an important feature.
Of course other aspects of the system like time division multiple access that was only designed with voice in mind and the later added (high latency) GPRS are outdated and mainly relevant as a backup when current technology (UMTS / HSDPA / HSUPA) or future (LTE) is not available yet.

Christian

 

[Eric S.]

Waiting for this. Hope it happens. Personally I don't care about voice and data together.

 

[icyfire]

AT&T didn't have a music distribution method, nor an application distribution method at the time. AT&T was really a sinking ship before the iPhone, and it really saved them. Contrary, Verizon hasn't had a quarter since the iPhone's release where they've lost more subscribers than they've gained, so its hard to say that VZW made the wrong choice.

It could be argued that VZW still made the wrong choice back in 06. Sure, they haven't lost any subscribers since the iphone release, however, if they had accepted the iPhone, then AT&T probably wouldn't exist today (or it would be relegated to a budget carrier status ala Sprint). Why Verizon decided to ignore Apple is absolutely astounding, even considering hindsight. Just from the success of the iPod, Verizon should have realized that Apple really had something big up their sleeve and should have certainly given them much more attention. So from a competitive standpoint, VZW lost big.

 

[icyfire]

Its not CDMA vs. GSM that makes the difference in indoor penetration. It is the frequency band. Lower frequencies (900 MHz for CDMA in the US) give better indoor coverage than higher frequencies (1900 MHz for GSM in the US). In Europe GSM is often used at 900 MHz resulting in indoor coverage probably comparable to CDMA in the US (and much better than 1800 which is also used in Europe and similar to the 1900 used in the US).

I think the most significant advantage in GSM was that it used SIM cards right from the start. In an enviroment with many networks in many countries and even more virtual network operators and service providers all using compatible technology like Europe this is an important feature.
Of course other aspects of the system like time division multiple access that was only designed with voice in mind and the later added (high latency) GPRS are outdated and mainly relevant as a backup when current technology (UMTS / HSDPA / HSUPA) or future (LTE) is not available yet.

Christian

As per my understanding, CDMA is superior to GSM in a few important ways. Primarily, it compresses everyone's signal as more people connect to a tower, allowing a ton more phones to connect than a GSM tower. Additionally, EV-DO was sort of integrated into CDMA from the start allowing CDMA carriers to supply 3G speeds much sooner and over a much larger area than GSM providers. This wasn't as big of a deal in smaller countries such as throughout Europe and Japan where 3G rollout was quick, but it was a big deal in the US and as you can see, many people still don't have GSM 3G access today in the US while pretty much everyone has CDMA 3G access. The only reason GSM became popular (and eventually the world standard) was because CDMA liscening fees were too high and by that point of time (mid 90s to 2000), the world was split pretty evenly between CDMA and GSM. So all the new providers went with GSM for lower costs. CDMA actually does have SIM type cards (called R-UIM cards) but they weren't used in the US because of Verizon's policy of controlling phone access to their network. I believe they are used in other countries who have CDMA providers.

 

[LagunaSol]

Why Verizon decided to ignore Apple is absolutely astounding, even considering hindsight. Just from the success of the iPod, Verizon should have realized that Apple really had something big up their sleeve and should have certainly given them much more attention. So from a competitive standpoint, VZW lost big.

Verizon surely insisted on a crippling amount of control over the iPhone, to which Apple surely laughed. Apparently memories here are short, but Verizon has been the most controlling over its devices of the major carriers over the years, and only the success of the iPhone on AT&T made them change their ways (something that is clear to all but the most delusional).

Guaranteed you wouldn't see Android on Verizon today if the iPhone didn't exist - just more crap devices with Verizon's crap proprietary "software" mods over the junk software the device makers were pumping out, tied exclusively to Verizon's proprietary services.

(Of course you probably wouldn't see Android today in its existing form if the iPhone didn't exist either, but that's another argument for another thread).