I think cellphones company are making less revenue because smartphone users use more data and text. smartphone users don't go over the limit on the call plans. Remember cellphone company charge about .40 cents a minutes for overage.
I think cellphones company are making less revenue because smartphone users use more data and text. smartphone users don't go over the limit on the call plans. Remember cellphone company charge about .40 cents a minutes for overage.
Less revenue???? VZW July 2010 Data alone was bringing in 5 Billion a quarter
Sorry about that. I didnt know. When I first saw it, I was able to read the whole article which was very interesting and thinking nothing of it, I created the thread. When I went back to it, I got the normal "must subscribe". Any suggestions? Any subscribers here who can paste it here?
I love how the carriers brag to Wall Street about how much they can raise our rates:
"An AT&T spokeswoman said the higher-priced data plans should help drive ARPU this year, as will the move by customers upgrading to smartphones. "We also get more than $6 more in postpaid ARPUs (Average Revenue Per User) than any of our competitors," she added."
this pulled up the full article, your luck may vary.
Thank you...worked great for me! This article reiterates what I have said about AT&T: they sign up fewer customers than Verizon and bleed more customers than Verizon. They are far too dependent on the iPhone. And they only expect to cover 150 million pops with LTE by day 1 2013? Verizon has ~205 today! I realize they have HSPA+ which works great in some places, but wow...deploying LTE at the same pace? If AT&T plans to complete their LTE by the end of 2013 as stated,
A- their footprint will be tiny even though we know they can do more
or
B- they will miss that deadline altogether, which wouldn't surprise anyone
or
C- they have to light up a TON of LTE in 2013.
I am anxious to see where both carriers stand at day 1 2013...
AT&T is rolling heads now...I personally think having an engineer in the #2 position (Stankey) is a nice move. Also, from the capital expenditures released, it is apparent AT&T is at least trying. That's not saying they still don't have trouble spots but it's a start.
SCH-a870, SCH-a650, SCH-411; Nokia 3589|POS: LG Voyager, VX8500; Audiovox CDM8600
Carrier
Airtouch ;)
Feedback Score
0
As long as the eyephone remains 3G only, AT&Tingular will have an advantage in competing for the eyephone customers due to their higher speed 3G network. But, like the former exclusive agreement with Apple, this one is a ticking clock. AT&Tingular needs to have enough LTE coverage to retain their iSheep once Apple adds 4G; they don't necessarily need as much LTE coverage as VZW to compete, since their 3G is faster (at least sometimes...).
Tom
"Fundamentally, there are only two ways of coordinating the economic activities of millions. One is central direction involving the use of coercion - the technique of the army and of the modern totalitarian state. The other is voluntary cooperation of individuals - the technique of the marketplace."
-- Milton Friedman
As long as the eyephone remains 3G only, AT&Tingular will have an advantage in competing for the eyephone customers due to their higher speed 3G network. But, like the former exclusive agreement with Apple, this one is a ticking clock. AT&Tingular needs to have enough LTE coverage to retain their iSheep once Apple adds 4G; they don't necessarily need as much LTE coverage as VZW to compete, since their 3G is faster (at least sometimes...).
If AT&T went to HSPA+ 42 in non-LTE areas and heck, even upgraded EDGE areas to HSPA+ 42, that would buy time. In the 17% of areas that are spectrum constrained where LTE deployment without refarming can't happen, HSPA+ would buy AT&T more time until they can land a national spectrum band similar to VZW's.
WSJ: AT&T Stuck Behind Verizon
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by moto94536
Bookmarks