HTC EVO 4G LTE

[gr8nuguy]

We arent supposed to sell iphones off contract, they should consider themselves lucky the manager didn't get the memo

[Sgt. Slaughter]

We arent supposed to sell iphones off contract, they should consider themselves lucky the manager didn't get the memo

 

really? why?

 

just dont understand why you they wouldn't allow someone to come in and pay full price for any device...what do they lose in that situation?....seems they have more to gain from selling it at full price than not. imho

[irev210]

Just read an article that said Sprint sold 7,000,000 Evo 4Gs.

 

That's somewhat misleading.

 

The "EVO Family" has sold 7 million.

 

EVO Family includes:

 

EVO 4G

EVO Shift 4G

EVO 3D

EVO View 4G Tablet

EVO Design 4G

[Duffman]

 

That's somewhat misleading.

 

The "EVO Family" has sold 7 million.

 

EVO Family includes:

 

EVO 4G

EVO Shift 4G

EVO 3D

EVO View 4G Tablet

EVO Design 4G

 

That may be as my memory sucks.

 

I will look for the article. It was something about this being a followup to the Evo 4G, "of which 7 million were sold.

 

But I think you are probably right as Sprint has what, 50 million subs? I doubt 7 mil, or 14%, got the Evo 4G.

[S4GRU]

 

That may be as my memory sucks.

 

I will look for the article. It was something about this being a followup to the Evo 4G' date=' "of which 7 million were sold.

 

But I think you are probably right as Sprint has what, 50 million subs? I doubt 7 mil, or 14%, got the Evo 4G.[/quote']

 

I have no idea which is accurate, but given the iconic nature of the EVO, 14% doesn't seem to be beyond reason to me.

 

Robert via NOVO7PALADIN Tablet using Forum Runner

[twospirits]

i think i also read the article stating that it was only the EVo 4G, but that breakdown above makes more sense. (Pardon the pun)

 

TS

[Sgt. Slaughter]

So Engadget says the EVO 4G was actually $450 back then before discounts...

http://www.engadget....une-4-for-199//

 

http://www.rcrwirele...device-line-up/

article there states it was over 7mill for the EVO4G alone...

Now you'll also find some that state it as EVO devices being 7Mill sold but most seem to be saying EVO4G...

 

 

BUT...Reuters seems to have the actual quote in a sense in their article...

...Fared Adib, Sprint's vice president for product development told Reuters that it made sense for Sprint to stick with the EVO brand as the company has sold 7 million EVO devices in the roughly two years since its first launch....

http://www.reuters.c...ndChannel=11563

 

 

Now if you wanna get cute with it, check out wiki as it states the EVO4G sold 14Mill units. lol

http://en.wikipedia....g_mobile_phones

And another little blog picked up the 14Mill # too...no clue where they got that from as its not cited...though they were the only places to report 14M that i saw.

http://topstuffz.blo...es-of-2011.html

[gr8nuguy]

really? why?

 

just dont understand why you they wouldn't allow someone to come in and pay full price for any device...what do they lose in that situation?....seems they have more to gain from selling it at full price than not. imho

 

yes really, its because they wont get commission, which is a lot more then just selling a phone by itself

[Sgt. Slaughter]

yes really, its because they wont get commission, which is a lot more then just selling a phone by itself

 

you lost me there....only commission i know of is the one the employees get for selling a phone...that wouldn't explain why Sprint itself doesn't allow it to be done...

[gr8nuguy]

Walmart gets paid a commission from wireless carriers for each contract they sell and with the iphones being a hot item, they (walmart) wants the commission on the contract vs just the amount of the phone itself

[Sgt. Slaughter]

Walmart gets paid a commission from wireless carriers for each contract they sell and with the iphones being a hot item, they (walmart) wants the commission on the contract vs just the amount of the phone itself

 

ahhh my bad. I was assuming this was in a Sprint store....what you say kinda makes sense though....least from Walmart's perspective...

[themuffinman]

really? why?

 

just dont understand why you they wouldn't allow someone to come in and pay full price for any device...what do they lose in that situation?....seems they have more to gain from selling it at full price than not. imho

 

Remember, they make their money on contracts not phones. At full pop I highly doubt sprint makes any profit at all, at best they may break even. Even if they make a few bucks per unit it still won't be enough to cover overhead costs so thats why contracts are important. Thats probably why other retailers like bestbuy and radioshack raise their prices so if someone wanted to buy one off contract they can atleast make their money upfront since they will lose out on signing them up for a contract. So why should I sell it to you off contract when I can sell it to other people on a contract which guarantees me significantly more cash flow? They have no incentive at full price.

[themuffinman]

I have no idea which is accurate, but given the iconic nature of the EVO, 14% doesn't seem to be beyond reason to me.

 

Robert via NOVO7PALADIN Tablet using Forum Runner

 

And thats probably why sprints network went to shit a few months after the evo was released. There really are a lot of evo 4g's out there, then add iphone 4's and 4s's and we can really see how sprints network took a dump so quickly.

[Sgt. Slaughter]

Remember, they make their money on contracts not phones. At full pop I highly doubt sprint makes any profit at all, at best they may break even. Even if they make a few bucks per unit it still won't be enough to cover overhead costs so thats why contracts are important. Thats probably why other retailers like bestbuy and radioshack raise their prices so if someone wanted to buy one off contract they can atleast make their money upfront since they will lose out on signing them up for a contract. So why should I sell it to you off contract when I can sell it to other people on a contract which guarantees me significantly more cash flow? They have no incentive at full price.

 

Because Sprint HAS to fulfill the iPhone contract they signed...this and only this is the reason why I thought they would be encouraged to sell them off contract full price...During the first part of the contract they are recouping the subsidy anyway so I dont see how its that bad of a deal in the end...

[themuffinman]

Because Sprint HAS to fulfill the iPhone contract they signed...this and only this is the reason why I thought they would be encouraged to sell them off contract full price...During the first part of the contract they are recouping the subsidy anyway so I dont see how its that bad of a deal in the end...

 

Just buying it full pop with no contract means that there is no commitment. Not only do they need to full fill their agreement with apple but they also have other bills to pay to stay in business. If I sign a two year contract not only will they recoup the cost of the phone but they will then turn a reasonable profit and if I leave before my contract is up then I will pay an ETF which goes towards lost revenues from terminating the contract early. If I just buy one off contract then guess what, that iphone isn't tied to any ETF or contract which makes that sale potentially not profitable. An iphone sale off contract doesn't guarantee anything other that the sale price of the phone ($600 for example) which is probably what sprint paid apple for the same phone. The same phone on contract gets them $2,119 (assuming the $79.99 plan) over two years not including additional fees. So they definitely have more incentive to sell you on contract versus off.

[Sgt. Slaughter]

Just buying it full pop with no contract means that there is no commitment. Not only do they need to full fill their agreement with apple but they also have other bills to pay to stay in business. If I sign a two year contract not only will they recoup the cost of the phone but they will then turn a reasonable profit and if I leave before my contract is up then I will pay an ETF which goes towards lost revenues from terminating the contract early. If I just buy one off contract then guess what, that iphone isn't tied to any ETF or contract which makes that sale potentially not profitable. An iphone sale off contract doesn't guarantee anything other that the sale price of the phone ($600 for example) which is probably what sprint paid apple for the same phone. The same phone on contract gets them $2,119 (assuming the $79.99 plan) over two years not including additional fees. So they definitely have more incentive to sell you on contract versus off.

 

BUT selling 1 phone is 100x better than selling 0 phone...least with 1 sell you will have a customer making money off them from day 1...

[themuffinman]

BUT selling 1 phone is 100x better than selling 0 phone...least with 1 sell you will have a customer making money off them from day 1...

 

I agree but when you are dealing with a product that is as hot as the iphone, they wont have a problem telling you no because they can always find someone else to sell it to. This reminds me of when I used to be a honda car salesman back in the day. When the honda s-2000 first came out the msrp was about $32k with no options. These cars were selling like crazy and our average selling price was actually at around $37k with no options. People were willing to pay well over retail just to get one and there were many times we simply told customers no because we knew that someone else would walk in and pay the higher price. Now I know this isn't a perfect example but the point is businesses will tell customers no if they know they can be profitable elsewhere especially if the demand is there. Its just like the iphone, they are moving iphone inventory like crazy and as long as people keep buying these things like they are then sprint would have absolutely no reason to sell you one for the simple fact that someone else will come in right after you and sign a contract to get it. Again though, its not always about what they can get now, with these types of businesses long term cash flow in a 2 year contract is far more beneficial than a short term sale that isn't tied to a contract.

[twospirits]

interesting thread.

[irev210]

That may be as my memory sucks.

 

I will look for the article. It was something about this being a followup to the Evo 4G, "of which 7 million were sold.

 

But I think you are probably right as Sprint has what, 50 million subs? I doubt 7 mil, or 14%, got the Evo 4G.

 

At the end of 2011, Sprint had about 28.7 million postpaid subs, 4.3 million postpaid iDEN, and 14.8 million direct prepaid subs.

 

So it would be off 28.7 million.

 

Still, 7 million total HTC EVO devices on a base of 28.7 is mighty impressive.

Edited April 11, 2012 by irev210

[pyroscott]

At the end of 2011, Sprint had about 28.7 million postpaid subs, 4.3 million postpaid iDEN, and 14.8 million direct prepaid subs.

 

So it would be off 28.7 million.

 

Still, 7 million total HTC EVO devices on a base of 28.7 is mighty impressive.

 

That would mean that 25% of Sprint customers bought an EVO. I can't see that. There were a lot of people who bought the OG Epic and a lot that bought the other smartphones released around that time. If anything, I could see 7 million sales of the whole EVO line. Evo 4G, EVO 3D, EVO Shift and EVO Design combined.

[irev210]

That would mean that 25% of Sprint customers bought an EVO. I can't see that. There were a lot of people who bought the OG Epic and a lot that bought the other smartphones released around that time. If anything, I could see 7 million sales of the whole EVO line. Evo 4G, EVO 3D, EVO Shift and EVO Design combined.

 

yup, 7 million on the entire family is correct.

 

 

That's why the 24 million apple devices over four years doesn't seem ALL that bad. The EVO line of phones, while iconic, does not have the pull that four years of new apple products will have.

 

8 million i-devices a year * 4 years = 32 million

 

People get too caught up in the base number of subscribers that sprint has (28.7 million). Figure that they can throw in another 14.8 million of direct prepaid to sell the old iPhone 4, and convert another 3 million in postpaid iDEN into postpaid CDMA and you are at 45.5 million potential iPhone customers.

 

Doing the math, you essentially need about 25% of Sprint's subscriber base to be on i-devices.

[pyroscott]

yup, 7 million on the entire family is correct.

 

 

That's why the 24 million apple devices over four years doesn't seem ALL that bad. The EVO line of phones, while iconic, does not have the pull that four years of new apple products will have.

 

8 million i-devices a year * 4 years = 32 million

 

People get too caught up in the base number of subscribers that sprint has (28.7 million). Figure that they can throw in another 14.8 million of direct prepaid to sell the old iPhone 4, and convert another 3 million in postpaid iDEN into postpaid CDMA and you are at 45.5 million potential iPhone customers.

 

Doing the math, you essentially need about 25% of Sprint's subscriber base to be on i-devices.

 

And judging by the market share that Apple has been building in the US, I can see 25% on i-devices in the near future. HTC needs to market the EVO LTE to keep OG EVO customers on the EVO bandwagon and not jump to iPhones. I know there were a lot of people that bought an EVO simply because they wanted to stay Sprint and not go to AT&T.

[buckhunter]

 

And judging by the market share that Apple has been building in the US' date=' I can see 25% on i-devices in the near future. HTC needs to market the EVO LTE to keep OG EVO customers on the EVO bandwagon and not jump to iPhones. I know there were a lot of people that bought an EVO simply because they wanted to stay Sprint and not go to AT&T.[/quote']

 

Jump to an iphone holy @&$* HTC fan here. Lmao

Edited April 11, 2012 by buckhunter

[pyroscott]

Jump to an iphone holy @&$* HTC fan here. Lmao

 

HTC Hero killed any HTC fandom I might ever experience.

[buckhunter]

 

HTC Hero killed any HTC fandom I might ever experience.

Lmao. There have been a few improvements since then.