Verizon Seeking to Shut Out T-Mobile and Sprint From iPhone in U.S.?

Android, iPhone et al will keep growing. The ownership of smartphones is still low. Plenty of opportunities.


Vulpinemac said:
That said, the US market is getting saturated by all the different Android models and even though that 200,000 per day might be a world-wide number, that adds up to over a million per week, totaling over 52 million/year.
Click to expand...
 
Going exclusive with ATT and Verizon only represents lost revenue to Apple. I'm on Sprint and not inclined to switch. If Sprint had the iPhone, I probably would gave gone with that. Sprint does not so I went Blackberry in October. Very satisfied with RIM despite Mac home otherwise. Now even thinking about RIM's new playbook rather than iPad. Perhaps Verizon should reimburse Apple for each customer at T-Mobile and Sprint that would make the switch but for the carrier.
 
Kar98 said:
This whole "Well, I've got mine and screw you if you want some, too" attitude is the cancer that's destroying this country.
Click to expand...

Agreed. And this mutation where people are submitting to corporations and organizations that take theirs and convince the people that it's in their best interest to let them do it is truly mind boggling.
 
I love this:

http://www.9to5mac.com/40546/consumer-reports-absolutely-destroys-att

Consumer Reports ranks ATT dead last among US carriers. A lot of unhappy ATT customers, looks like. Granted Verizon ranks higher than Sprint or T-Mobile, but they're pretty close-- would it really make sense to be exclusive with two carriers when one is suffering so badly? Spread it out, lessen the impact to carriers, increase your overall U.S. market share by making it available to pretty much everyone.

Glad to hear the source of this rumor is fairly unreliable.
 
I was at T-Mobile a couple of weeks ago and when I asked if they were going to get the iPhone next year - they said "not very likely..."

Looks like both AT&T and Verizon are fighting to keep competition low.

I hear Verizon nickle and dime their customers...
 
Bummer, Sprint has some really attractive pricing plans.

My question is this: why didn't Apple broadcast a preemptive strike regarding the iPhone on other carriers to dissuade people from buying competing devices as Christmas gifts? Competitors have been using this strategy for years.
 
The obvious thing to do is spread the iPhone to multiple US carriers, not just 2.
apple would make more money putting it on verizon + tmobile then just verizon + "premium" amount of money
 
MCIowaRulz said:
Why can't Apple make the iPhone sell it for $200 and let ME decide what carrier to use?
Doesn't anyone understand business 101?
The more you sell the bigger your profits are
Right?
Click to expand...
Wrong. Apple is about the profit margin. You remember how they almost died? That doesn't happen when you've got a healthy profit margin.
Anyway, even if Apple sold unlocked phones, they would only hit the two major carriers, AT&T and T-Mobile. Verizon and Sprint are on the proprietary CDMA networks and they don't accept SIM cards to use on their network.
FYI: selling in bulk isn't working too well for Dell, now is it? :rolleyes:

Amazing Iceman said:
Good luck on getting AT&T or Verizon unlock your phone so you could take them on your trip and use a local SIM card and service to make calls.
Click to expand...
Before I went on vacation in Europe, I got my old Motorola V400 unlocked by AT&T. It took them about a week, but it happened.
FYI: Verizon doesn't use SIM cards, unless they have a world phone. Even then, the GSM part doesn't work with Verizon.

firewater101 said:
So, lets stop with the subsidizing of the handsets and make the service cheaper. Yeah, you can buy the phone unlocked now, but its not worth it because you pay the same monthly service fee that everyone who got the subsidy pays.

I know I'm dreaming though, the handset makers will never let this happen because they make more money off subsidies than they could charge the general public outright for the phone. The providers won't do it because once the subsidy is paid back, the "extra" monthly fee is 100% profit. Plus, you don't even have to pay back subsidies on people who buy unlocked phones.

The only way to fix this is through regulation by the FCC. Of course, that won't happen either since they have somehow convinced everyone that you don't want the government "meddling" with their corporation's god given right to monopolize the public airwaves. God forbid we have actual competition in a free market.
Click to expand...
+1
 
2012 will be a great year with iphones on multiple carriers.

This 2011 business is more of the same; rumors that are only rumors.
 
gkarris said:
I was at T-Mobile a couple of weeks ago and when I asked if they were going to get the iPhone next year - they said "not very likely..."

Looks like both AT&T and Verizon are fighting to keep competition low.

I hear Verizon nickle and dime their customers...
Click to expand...

I would say "not likely" as there will only be ATT iphones until 2012. But as to T-mobile ever getting an iphone, I wouldn't put much stock in a retail outlet knowing what is going down.
 
koa221 said:
Going exclusive with ATT and Verizon only represents lost revenue to Apple. I'm on Sprint and not inclined to switch. If Sprint had the iPhone, I probably would gave gone with that. Sprint does not so I went Blackberry in October. Very satisfied with RIM despite Mac home otherwise. Now even thinking about RIM's new playbook rather than iPad. Perhaps Verizon should reimburse Apple for each customer at T-Mobile and Sprint that would make the switch but for the carrier.
Click to expand...

I'd say look the other way around.

Going with a carrier that locks you in to their own exclusive network represents lost revenue to Apple. If you have noticed, that with the exception of China Unicom, Every single network Apple has the iPhone on is GSM-based. This means that you have interoperability with those other networks, and aren't locked exclusively to buying a new phone every time you want to jump ship to another network. You had to buy a Sprint phone to use Sprint; you had to buy a Verizon phone to use Verizon. You do NOT have to do that with ATT, T-Mobile, Orange, Vodafone, 3, Telstra, Optus, Softbank, Rogers, Telus, O2, and others. You can take the phone and use it anywhere, because they decided to standardize on the NETWORK. Sprint and Verizon are playing catchup with that and won't catch up until LTE is fully implemented (their '4G' crap doesn't count; you still fall back to CDMA).

This is where the bulk of the US is misguided. The Phone manufacturers shouldn't have to build the phone to suit the carrier; the carrier should build the network to suit the phone.

BL.
 
After experiencing Android on the Epic 4G, I'm not interested in the iPhone anymore (I still thinks a good phone, but I don't think its the best anymore). But Apple should allow the phone on all US carriers. By having the iPhone exclusive to certain carriers, Apple is losing phone sales & app store sales. Their exclusive deal with at&t left the door wide open for Android.
 
bergmef said:
or if you buy an iphone you can only get apps from apple ... oops, nevermind.
Click to expand...

Shenanigans.... Of course Apple offers their own apps, but I'm betting of the over 150,000 available most are from developers other than Apple.

If you want to download shareware, flash-playing, battery-hogging, poorly-written, trojan-filled freebie apps from every Tom, Dick, and Harry website for your mobile device... Get a Windows Phone.
 
Subsidized is almost like leased--or rather, rent to own. If you look at the different rent to own companies around the US, to buy anything at all, you're paying at least twice the retail value, if not three times; a subsidized phone isn't that much different.

Remember when cell phones only cost $35 a month? How many of you are paying less than $100/month with a smart phone? Why? Cellular service should still be about $35 and for most of the more basic 'Feature Phones', it is. Data shouldn't be so grossly overpriced, no matter the network, not when the cost is divided among so many million users.

Personally, while the price of the iPhone seems high, the Android phones aren't really that much cheaper. This is why the contracts are so high--you're paying for more than the phone itself and more than the contract. You're paying for pure profit as well. While you think the Android phones are selling for less, the average contract is higher for them than for the average iPhone on AT&T.

I also want to point out that AT&T's service really isn't as bad as so many people claim--as long as you're in an area that has decent coverage, that is. AT&T's problem isn't how good or bad their service is, but rather that their 3G coverage in particular is so limited; even AT&T expressed that issue not so long ago. I can get AT&T's EDGE almost anywhere, but compared to 3G its about as good as a 28.8kbps modem on a land line.

At the moment, only Verizon has better 3G coverage, though it's slower than AT&T's and T-mobile's so-called 4G. In other words, Verizon's advantages are broader 3G with a larger user base. They feel they can handle the added user load since supposedly the Android phones haven't really stressed it yet. Verizon didn't want the iPhone under Apple's requirements originally, now they seem to want it under any conditions--as long as nobody else gets it at the same time. Personally, I believe this shows both their greed and their short-sightedness. If they get swamped with iPhone activations while T-mobile and Sprint get off scott-free, all of a sudden these other two providers will look better and surge ahead in service quality. A greedy move by Verizon could spell it's downfall just as AT&T has fallen. The winner will be the provider that can recover the quickest.
 
I think Verizon would have to throw ALOT and I mean ALOT of money at apple if they really expect this to happen. Personally I think Apple would be fools to fall for it. I really think in a business sense it would be better to get it on all the major carrier's networks. Sprint and T-Mobile still do alot of business, but Verizon does have ALOT of money so who knows.
 
Stella said:
Android, iPhone et al will keep growing. The ownership of smartphones is still low. Plenty of opportunities.
Click to expand...

That's the biggest point. Despite Apple selling gobs of smartphones and Android selling like hot cakes, smartphones in general are still the smaller portion of the market.

I love watching companies compete for the slice of the growing smartphone pie. I hate waiting for the delicious Apple:apple: pie to come to my carrier.
 
While I think the iPhone is a great product I am no longer interested in any platform that limits my carrier choices. Shame on Apple if they did not learn their lesson with AT&T.

Android may not be quite as sophisticated as iOS but I can get a great android phone on any carrier and find the more open platform offers me more flexibility and functionality that more than makes up for it's associated frustrations.
 
Vulpinemac said:
Verizon didn't want the iPhone under Apple's requirements originally, now they seem to want it under any conditions--as long as nobody else gets it at the same time. Personally, I believe this shows both their greed and their short-sightedness.
Click to expand...

Note that so far, it's just a rumor from a famously unreliable source.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top