AT&T and Verizon are about to put the squeeze on subscribers

[kckid]

"... there is no sales growth to be had from chasing new customers; all the upside is now in squeezing more money from existing subscribers."

 

 

Article:  http://bgr.com/2013/06/21/att-verizon-fees-analysis/

 

Presentation: http://www.chetansharma.com/usmarketupdateq12013.htm

 

 

[lynyrd65]

This is why wireless should be a public service. Private businesses are never content with selling services to customers to collect revenue that both covers their costs and provides sustainable profits, there has to be growth and by growth I mean more and more profit every quarter. It's what is expected from the corporate leadership and its what they're all taught in business school.

 

This is why I give my brother crap for going to business school.

 

Sent from my SCH-R970 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[JeffDTD]

The next big shift is away from subsidies. It will be more profitable for the carriers.

 

 

 

Sent from my Note II. Its so big.

 

 

[S4GRU]

This is why wireless should be a public service. Private businesses are never content with selling services to customers to collect revenue that both covers their costs and provides sustainable profits, there has to be growth and by growth I mean more and more profit every quarter. It's what is expected from the corporate leadership and its what they're all taught in business school.

 

This is why I give my brother crap for going to business school.

 

Sent from my SCH-R970 using Tapatalk 2

 

My bachelor's degree is in Business.  

 

Robert

[lynyrd65]

My bachelor's degree is in Business.  

 

Robert

 

Am I right?     

[tommym65]

"... there is no sales growth to be had from chasing new customers; all the upside is now in squeezing more money from existing subscribers."

 

 

Article:  http://bgr.com/2013/06/21/att-verizon-fees-analysis/

 

Presentation: http://www.chetansharma.com/usmarketupdateq12013.htm

 

 

I envision Masa Son laughing hysterically.  The Big 2 are setting the stage for a huge rate and marketing war, and Softbank's Japanese success has proven that Masa-san is up to the challenge.  Add to that Hesse's already-demonstrated success in turning the old Sprint into a new and much better Sprint, even before negotiating the Softbank deal, and you have a dynamic and aggressive team poised for success.

 

When the Softbank acquisition is completed (knock on wood!), look for the beginning of a major push to prove that there IS opportunity for subscriber growth in US mobile telephony.

 

Added: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/22/business/global/confidence-from-chief-of-softbank-in-sprint-bid.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

This is an interesting, newly published NY Times profile of Son.

Edited June 22, 2013 by tommym65

[chgoguy80]

This is why wireless should be a public service. Private businesses are never content with selling services to customers to collect revenue that both covers their costs and provides sustainable profits, there has to be growth and by growth I mean more and more profit every quarter. It's what is expected from the corporate leadership and its what they're all taught in business school.

 

This is why I give my brother crap for going to business school.

 

Sent from my SCH-R970 using Tapatalk 2

 

And exactly how many things does the government get right, answer: not many

[SWMich4G]

And exactly how many things does the government get right, answer: not many

But think about how much easier it will be for the government to record all our calls, texts, and data activity when they don't need to worry about getting it from a third party (the cell phone companies)!

[WiWavelength]

And exactly how many things does the government get right, answer: not many

But think about how much easier it will be for the government to record all our calls, texts, and data activity when they don't need to worry about getting it from a third party (the cell phone companies)!

 

It disturbs me how many people refer to the "government" as some third party entity.  We created the government, and we are the government.

 

AJ

[halcyoncmdr]

It disturbs me how many people refer to the "government" as some third party entity.  We created the government, and we are the government.

 

AJ

 

And now we've lost control of it and it frightens us.

 

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."

-Thomas Jefferson

[Guest sectime]

And now we've lost control of it and it frightens us.

 

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."

-Thomas Jefferson

Please, we get just what we want/deserve every election, local, state, and federal. 

Edited June 24, 2013 by sectime

[mozamcrew]

Please, we get just what we want/deserve every election, local, state, and federal. 

 

As they say in The Lone Ranger "What you mean 'We' Kiemosabe?"  

 

[mozamcrew]

I swear, I'm not trying to make this thread more political, there is a point about wireless at the end of all this.

Government and markets are just different institutional tools suited for different jobs. Neither is a panacea, but that should come as no surprise, governments and markets are human institutions, and let's face it, we aren't exactly infallible. How would you like to live in a society where every establishement/individual had all their own laws and violence (or the threat of it) was the only means of solving disputes between different parties, or in a society were everyone eats the meal that a pluraity of people vote for?

 

Democratic governments work effectively when a decision has to be made collectively (for a given geographic area) and it simply isn't feasible for us to chose individually, due to the nature of the service or item being provided. They are the alternative to mass violence and 'rule by the few', but they do have a downside. When we vote instead of choosing individually, ALL of us get stuck with whatever MOST of us want. Sure, it's better than most of us getting stuck with what only some of us want, but wouldn't it be better if EACH group could get what they want? They call that a "win-win" in business school.  That's the advantage of using a market to provide something, as opposed to having us take a vote and be stuck with whatever a majority (or maybe just a pluraity) of us want. 

 

The more choices you have, the more likely you are to find an option that you like better, relative to the others. Markets don't provide unlimted choices of course, just more choices than if we take one big vote and are stuck with only one option. Different providers can cater to different interests and needs, as long as the group being catered to is big enough to make serving it (conceivably) profitable. 

 

In the case of cell phone service, you are limited by spectrum and the cost of building and operating a network. It's nice that different carriers can serve different niches/needs. And I, for one, am happy that we have at least some choice, instead of being stuck with Big Red or Ma Bell.

[koiulpoi]

 

As they say in The Lone Ranger "What you mean 'We' Kiemosabe?"  

 

[maximus1987/lou99]

I hope they do raise prices. More subscribers for Sprint. And TMO. Though they should wait until next year this time so NV is totally done with PCS LTE and SMR LTE+1xA.