|
Cellular forums Home > Archive > Verizon wireless > August 2006 > Verizon adds 1.8 million wireless users, Industry's No. 2 closes
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Verizon adds 1.8 million wireless users, Industry's No. 2 closes
|
|
|
| See "http://tinyurl.com/jtasv"
As soon as Sprint and T-Mobile post results I'll update the web site
with the graphs on market share.
| |
|
| Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> In alt.cellular.cingular SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
> Interesting. It looks like Verizon is doing well. However, it looks as
> Cingular stands to show improvement as well. I am curious how this shakes out
> 12 months from now.
The analysts were not thrilled with Cingular's results due to their
falling net additions, their falling ARPU, too many pre-paid additions,
and their declining market share. OTOH, profits were way up, and margins
were up, which was a positive, but the analysts complained that margins
should have been up even more because the lower net additions meant
lower acquisition costs.
In this environment it seems like _every_ metric needs to exceed
expectations in order for the analysts to grudgingly admit that a
company is doing well.
See "http://tinyurl.com/ehhx5".
| |
|
| Jack Zwick wrote:
>
> AND NAVAS WOULD NEVER ADMIT THAT AT THIS RATE (AS I PREDICTED LONG AGO)
> VERIZON WILL SOON HAVE MORE CUSTOMERS THAN CINGULAR.
Not soon. At the current rate of quarterly additions, 300K more per
quarter, it would still take about eight quarters for Verizon to pass
Cingular, and there is no telling whether future quarters will be better
or worse for each carrier in terms of net additions. Cingular has really
cut their churn, so they're not doing as poorly as before in terms of
net additions.
The loss of Radio Shack as a sales outlet helped Verizon's financials,
but it did have a negative effect on their net additions. It really hurt
Radio Shack's financial's, as they were doing extremely well with
Verizon, and now they're doing very poorly with Cingular.
| |
|
| Charles wrote:
> In article < u9Odned_Ivf2_VjZnZ2d
nUVZ_vudnZ2d@comcast
.com>, bernard
> farquart < bernardfarquart@DELE
TEhotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> I can't see why it is important. That is which has the most customers
> or predicting that one will have more than the other. I don't pick a
> carrier by which one has the most customers. Do most? I just hope
> there are multiple carriers so there is a choice.
If there were a huge difference in the number of customers it would have
an effect on which carrier to choose because of mobile to mobile
minutes. If everything else were equal, it would make sense to choose
the carrier that most of the people you call have. Of course everything
else is not equal. Coverage varies by carrier by location, but Verizon
tends to have the best coverage of any carrier judging by all the
independent surveys. In my area, the San Francisco Bay Area, Cingular
coverage is adequate, but not nearly as good as Verizon's coverage with
a tri-mode phone. It seems that every week I'm someplace where there is
no Cingular coverage, but where Verizon does have coverage.
| |
|
| SMS wrote:
> Scott wrote:
>
>
> My GSM phone is a quad band Motorola phone.
Oops, actually it's a tri-band (850/900/1900 MHz).
| |
|
| Scott wrote:
> "John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
> news:67occ21kvk4p938
ppinvl9d6ca71mbb61h@
4ax.com...
>
>
> Incorrect again, Skippy.
What happened with Radio Shack is that Verizon was unwilling to give
Radio Shack the spiffs that Radio Shack demanded. Verizon prefers to
sell as much as possible through their own stores and website, as the
margins are much higher. Verizon knew that the number of customers that
choose wireless service based on the retailer is low enough that they
wouldn't lose all that many new additions if Radio Shack ceased to be a
reseller. Who dumped who? You can say that Radio Shack got a better deal
from Cingular so they kicked Verizon out, or you can say that Verizon
wasn't interested in the Radio Shack business at the terms that Radio
Shack demanded. It's all moot now, but Radio Shack is suffering mightily
from their actions, while Verizon continues to gain market share and
enjoy large margins, while Cingular continues to lose market share and
has much lower margins.
Radio Shack was doing very well with Verizon and apparently believed
that they could continue at the same sales level with Cingular, but make
more money due to the higher spiffs. They were very, very wrong. There
are performance criteria that if not met would allow either party to
terminate the relationship, but Radio Shack is caught between a rock and
a hard place, as Verizon is not going to be interested in going back
into Radio Shack unless Radio Shack settles for much lower spiffs.
Verizon has the upper hand in the negotiations.
Radio Shack managers were complaining about Cingular even back in
January, because sales were so low compared with Verizon. The last two
quarterly reports for Radio Shack show just how correct the managers were.
| |
|
| Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> In alt.cellular.cingular SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
> I don't think there is anything crappy about the PCS band, as you indicate
> above. It has benefits and detractors. Higher potential bandwidth, smaller
> cells [a detractor in the country but a potentially postive thing in densely
> populated areas],
You can put in more, smaller cells with 800/900 if you want to. The
problem with 1900 in the U.S. is that we have a lot of sparsely
populated areas. 1800 works well in Asia, but 1900 doesn't work well
here, except in densely populated urban areas. This is why Sprint
doesn't even try to expand into less populated areas, it's much cheaper
to pay for roaming.
| |
|
| Verizon has more blind people though. I do like the phones that cingular
has. You can load a speach software package and it will read you all the
menues. The lgvx4500 on verizon does work pretty well, but I still ask
them all the time, why did they make half a phone.
|
|
|
|
|