|
| Oxford wrote:
> they have them by the balls in how much inventory they can hold. ATT
> pretty much has to do what Apple says in many areas, Verizon simply made
> a huge business blunder since they don't understand marketing or
> inventory management to the level of Apple, so they got stung by Apple.
Yeah, just look how poor Verizon did in terms of net retail postpaid
customers and ARPU, the two standard metrics:
2Q2007
Verizon: 1.3 million
AT&T: 912,000 (including 146,000 iPhones)
This was actually a very good quarter for AT&T, they'd been lagging
Verizon by a lot more in previous quarters. Verizon has passed AT&T in
subscribers, unless you count the MVNO subscribers that are with
companies that lease space from AT&T.
> ATT needed the panache of Apple that's why they did the name change and
> got rid of the old president BEFORE the iPhone, so they could suddenly
> appear "new". Brilliant indeed.
See "http://biz.yahoo.com/seekingalpha/070709/40355_id.html?.v=1"
[Copied to alt.cellular.attws. Please post all alt.cellular.cingular
non-spam posts to alt.cellular.attws as well. The Cingular name has gone
away, and alt.cellular.attws is the proper venue for posts regarding
AT&T's Wireless Service.]
|
|