Verizon's open door policy all hype, no change?

[WaltA]

There is no money to be made by selling full price handsets.

I agree. Someone would need to be powerful enough to quickly drive their retail price to less than VZW's subsidized prices. Honestly, the only possible player I could envision capable of doing that, is Walmart.

[johncase3]

Verizon only allows Verizon handsets because they want to make money on the handset. PERIOD. Any "technical" reason is pure BS.

What is especially hilarious are the Verizon subs who worry about unapproved handsets causing interference to their "Network". HELLOOOO!! Millions of non-Verizon handsets from Sprint, Alltel, USCC, etc, roam on the Verizon network every day. (Even my Verizon banned E816 phone activated on Alltel is on the Verizon network 24-7 as there are no Alltel towers in NJ)

Moreover, practically any CDMA phone can be activated on Verizon MVNO's like Page Plus. This is all about greed folks, not protecting the network.

[GuyinLACA]

They make very little on handset sales, however they make A LOT on monthly fees for 2 year contracts. Once they've got a signed 2 year agreement, they are set, and THAT is what they are after. Realizing that most people won't spend $300 for a phone, they will soon allow people to remain month to month if they buy at full retail, but so few will, I don't think Verizon is anticipating any major repercussions.

[wnrussell]

Opinions vary in this thread, but does it really matter?

Apple has already sold 2.4 million of the original iPhones in the first half of 2008, which brings the tally to around the 8 million mark. If sales continue at the same rate, the 10 millionth iPhone will be sold in September, ahead of the company's target.

People who really want features are willing to pay hefty retail prices to get them. Is there any question about that?

[samab]

Opinions vary in this thread, but does it really matter?

Apple has already sold 2.4 million of the original iPhones in the first half of 2008, which brings the tally to around the 8 million mark. If sales continue at the same rate, the 10 millionth iPhone will be sold in September, ahead of the company's target.

People who really want features are willing to pay hefty retail prices to get them. Is there any question about that?

Their goal is 1% of the market share (or 10 million handsets) this calender year --- not cumulative sales.

No question about the high end demand. But there is more money to be made by targeting the normal population. You can go and make Rolls Royce automobiles. I'll make a million times more making toyota's.

Somehow you are offended by companies who think that they can make more money with machine-to-machine stuff.

[huntm856]

There is no money to be made by selling full price handsets.

Last time I looked, Nokia, HTC and Sony Ericsson were doing very well selling full-priced GSM handsets. The 2g iPhone proved that Americans are willing to pay full price for an attractive, feature-loaded phone. Are you telling me that there aren't VZW subs who'd pay big money for a super-capable phone not hamstrung by the VZW UI and walled-garden philosophy, and there aren't people who'd prefer to buy their own equipment and not be locked to a contract?

There are a lot of people buying, for example, Nokia and SE phones for use on ATTM and T-mo for these very reasons. I don't see why the same wouldn't be true for VZW.

[huntm856]

No question about the high end demand. But there is more money to be made by targeting the normal population. You can go and make Rolls Royce automobiles. I'll make a million times more making toyota's.

You are missing the point. VZW has said it will open its network to 3d-party suppliers so long as their devices could be certified. There may be more money to be made in the low- and mid-range handset markets, but the success of handset mfgs. like Nokia, SonyEricsson, HTC, and Vertu, etc., make it clear that the high-end market is worth pursuing, so one would think there'd be mfgs. trying to fill this role in the CDMA world.

And its not like there aren't CDMA superphones already in production, e.g., the sorts of phones you can get in S. K. It should be a relatively simple matter for a Korean handset mfg. to get its high-end CDMA phones certified for use on VZW, but yet, so far as I know, so far not one of them is even trying.

Why do you think that is? I have a couple theories:

Either (i) the certification process VZW has is nowhere near as simple and straightforward as VZW has claimed; or

(ii) (I think this more likely) VZW has let it be known that it would perceive a mfg's pursuit of selling unlocked CDMA handsets for use on its network to be deleterious to business arrangements with that mfg to sell *subsidized* handsets in partnership with VZW.

(This is exactly the same reason, btw, that I think Nokia has such an apparently bad relationship with ATTM: ATTM will only sell subsidized Nokias if they contain UI mods that restrict the device, and Nokia will not refrain from also releasing unlocked generic versions of the same handsets in most cases because the economics of developing a handset exclusively for ATTM don't make sense to them).

Since VZW is the 800-pound gorilla of CDMA providers, there is no way that the income gained by marketing unlocked CDMA handsets would compensate from losses incurred by no longer being in VZW's best graces as far as its willingness to do business on subsidized handsets is concerned.

So the big CDMA manufacturers, the ones in a position to easily produce unlocked CDMA handsets, won't do so, and all you'll see is efforts like this little handset VZW certified that I couldn't even tell you who makes it or where you could buy it because they are so obscure.

[wnrussell]

No question about the high end demand. But there is more money to be made by targeting the normal population. You can go and make Rolls Royce automobiles. I'll make a million times more making toyota's.

Somehow you are offended by companies who think that they can make more money with machine-to-machine stuff.

Samabe, I am not offended at all. In fact, I enjoy responding to your posts.

What I do get 'angry' about though is Verizon's continuing failure to come through on the "Verizon Wireless To Introduce ‘Any Apps, Any Device’ Option For Customers In 2008 Press Release" they made last year.

In early 2008, the company will publish the technical standards the development community will need to design products to interface with the Verizon Wireless network. Any device that meets the minimum technical standard will be activated on the network. http://news.vzw.com/news/2007/11/pr2007-11-27.html

What happened to that?

I don't want a Rolls Royce, nor do I know anyone who has one, but if I did, I would want to be able to drive it down the highway. What I do want however is a Toyota Prius, which will take about 9 months to receive after the day it is ordered.

When I select the ideal phone I want to pair with that car (maybe at the International CES show) next year, which meets the minimum technical standard to be activated on the Verizon network, if they won't do it, I'll go ballistic and start another Class Action.

[samab]

I don't get how you can start a lawsuit at all.

It's a press release about what they announced. What,you are going to start a class action lawsuit every time silicon valley announce vapor ware.

[huntm856]

So you are admitting the VZW 'any apps, any device' announcement was the equivalent of vaporware?

[Vic Ferrari]

I really feel as if Verizon is throwing around idle concepts of an open network to get the press off of their backs.

Do you actually think the press really cares about this? I mean is there some reporter or news agency crusading to get VZW to act on their press release about this subject?

[C DM]

Do you actually think the press really cares about this? I mean is there some reporter or news agency crusading to get VZW to act on their press release about this subject?

Perhaps not yet, and not to that degree, but if the year goes by without much on that front, after the big deal VZW (themselves) made about it late last year and early this year, then someone will be on the case, perhaps a bit at first, but over time there will be someone.

[samab]

So you are admitting the VZW 'any apps, any device' announcement was the equivalent of vaporware?

No, I don't believe that the announcement is vaporware --- I believe that some people have an vivid imagination of the extent of VZW's announcement would be.

[huntm856]

I'm only going by what I read; and by the way, at the time I said, here and elsewhere, that there was a lot less to the announcement than met the eye.

What do you interpret it to mean?

[huntm856]

Do you actually think the press really cares about this? I mean is there some reporter or news agency crusading to get VZW to act on their press release about this subject?

It's a story that is beginning to pick up again: I've seen a couple of 'Whatever happened to VZW's "any apps..." policy?' stories lately.

Whether it's something someone in the media is going to run with remains to be seen.