MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Verizon acting like babies. They lost out to ATT, now they cant handle it.

Apple wont even respond to any of this.

Jul 17, 09 - 02:49 pm Comment from: Predrag

The problem is, Verizon is just feeding the congress here. They are acting as if admitting wrongdoing, which fuels the inquiry and might create problems if enough lawmakers, greased by the deep pockets of small carriers, stubbornly continue to pursue the issue.

Anyone with half a brain can clearly tell that the competition is alive and well. In every single industry, the little guy simply doesn't have the buying power of the big guy, and thus can't always get the coveted product for a good price, or at all. This hasn't been an issue before, and shouldn't be an issue. Obviously, some consumers may be affected due to the lack of choice, but government simply can't go around and regulate every single inch of the economy in order to perfectly level the playing field and equalise the choice.

If we take it further, then I can complain to the government why I have to pay $12 for a movie ticket when someone in rural Idaho still pays $9? And in turn, that someone from rural Idaho has every right to complain about the dearth of choices at his movie theatre on a Friday night (after all, it's a small town with one single movie theatre; how many movies can they really offer?).

Verizon, in their effort to undermine AT&T may just have shot themselves in the foot by doing this. The only reason they continue to sustain their leading position in the US is the exclusivity of Storm. As crappy as the device is compared to the iPhone, there are large numbers of Apple haters (or BB fanbois) who purposely chose Storm and thus switched to Verizon. They'd gladly stay with T-Mobile, or AT&T, or Sprint (really cheap plans, if you have a signal) if Verizon cut short that exclusivity. Way to go, Verizon...!

Jul 17, 09 - 02:50 pm Comment from: TowerTone

Actually, I think ATT should respond with "Naw, you can keep them for 5 years. We don't care..."

BTW, can't they just go by AT now?
Are they using telegraphs as a backup?

So pointless. Exclusivity to who, Sprint? No one wants their service anyway - they're hemorrhaging 1M subs a quarter...

Besides after 6 months the device is obsolete anyway.

Just pandering to the media, there is literally no substance here from a consumer's standpoint.

Everyone now wishes they could offer the iPhone. This simply plays into Apples hands. Once the exclusivity era ends then iPhones are offered everywhere... Apple's wins...game over.

Jul 17, 09 - 03:16 pm Comment from: Lolcat

In my crazy fantasy world, when exclusivity for AT&T;ends, I wish Apple would offer cdma to the little regional wireless companies, and continue with att for the big account.

Just because Verizon is saying they won't legally bind handset makers to exclusivity agreements, that doesn't mean the manufacturer will cut deals with the smaller carriers. They could simply say "we don't feel like expanding right now" and, what do you know... nothing has changed. No formal exclusivity with Verizon and still no access for rural carriers.

That should really work. So with Verizon you'll get an iPhone for $450 and no visual voice mail. Boy, isn't competition great for the consumer?

Jul 17, 09 - 03:40 pm Comment from: Predrag

Tony,

The point of the small carriers is that the big ones ("monopolies", in a most loose sense of the word) abuse their market dominance by forcing equipment manufacturers to sign these exclusionary agreements (if you want ME to sell your phone, you can't offer it to ANYONE else). Once these agreements are limited/eliminated, small carriers will have a much better fighting chance to make a deal with the hardware makers. Obviously, it will then be to the hardware maker to decide if they really wish to bother with the small carrier, but the market would be open for both.

I'm well aware of how the exclusive agreements work. What I'm saying is just what you mentioned at the end of your comment... the hardware makers most likely WON'T want to bother with the small carriers. Especially companies like Apple. There's too much involved in supporting a whole new carrier when so few customers will come from it. There's a reason the big carriers get the exclusive agreements for stuff like the iPhone instead of the small ones... they offer more. That won't change just because Verizon doesn't legally stop handset makers from doing it.

Jul 17, 09 - 04:43 pm Comment from: qka

@ Predrag

I guess I shouldn't tell you that movie tickets are $6 in my rural area. (matinees even cheaper)

On the other hand, AT&T;doesn't have 3G coverage at all here, and there EDGE coverage sucks.

Maybe there is a connection? Congress should investigate that conspiracy!

If I was trying to sale a dud like the Palm Pre... I would want to drop the exclusivity and the Palm Pre ASAP!

@qka

I guess I shouldn't tell you that movie tickets are $6 in my rural area. (matinees even cheaper)

I hope you never have to get your windshield replaced. You or your insurance will pay average of around 500$ vs 225$ in the big city. That will pay for allot of extra butter on the popcorn. 

Verizon should be giving this "committee" the time of day. What they just did was validate The Obama Administration's "profits are evil" socialist agenda.

Oh people- this is only the beginning> you ain't see nothing yet. Wait til fucking health care "reform" hits the streets.

*shouldn't

Jul 17, 09 - 09:00 pm Comment from: Gregg Thurman

"Sending such a letter is very easy to do when nobody wants the "exclusive" devices that you're trying to pawn off as iPhones."

70+% of ALL handsets sold by ATT since iPhone 3GS has been the iPhone. Conversion from other carriers is running as high as 40%.

Verizon's big (and unstated) motive here is that without exclusivity they will get product without exclusivity premiums. This is nothing but a ploy to lower costs, and has nothing to do with being 'fair'.

Jul 17, 09 - 10:21 pm Comment from: amyhre

@TowerTone

I'd have to say they keep the last T in AT&T;out of tradition, not that that stopped Apple from changing their name not so long ago. Telegraph may be for backup when North Korea nukes us. Guess we should have made people learn Morse Code more, huh?

@iLuvMyMacs
Yeah, socialism/communism is such a great system that doctors made less money than a night shift cab driver in Red Square. Sure makes me want to become a doctor, right?

Most of my dad's family is in medicine (yes, we live here in the States). The malpractice insurance runs one of my great uncles around 1 million dollars each and every year. Then tack on utilities and payroll (he owns a practice) and it goes up even more. So the practice has to make over a million a year just to stay afloat. Granted, he is a specialist which is infinitely better than general, but it's still insane.

General practice, which I am not disparaging in any way, are overworked and underpaid. Most American medical students, if they can, are increasingly turning to specialties and leaving general practice to doctors coming from foreign countries. You want to know why you spend so little time with your doctor? It's because he's trying to make ends meet by squeezing as many people in as he can. Just because you are smart and work hard does not mean you will be well-paid or have an enjoyable life. After all, most doctors don't get their student loans paid off until they're around 50 years old, and then most don't live much more than a few years longer due to the stress of the job.

Competition is good.
Competition in the handset market is at a perfect balance right now.
Verizon and the Pre are a good alternative to the iPhone, a worthy opponent for Apple for once.

Just in time for the Nobama administration to screw it up.

Jul 18, 09 - 07:30 pm Comment from: macbones

Not sure how the medical comments fit in here, and I'm in that field.

Rather than worry about which carrier can carry a given handset, our politicians should be mandating that carriers provide the coverage they promise. For example, I live in Upstate NY near the Canadian border. While I can't pick up ATT from my home, I get 5 bars Canadian/Rogers 3G. If ATT cannot provide coverage they promise, they should be mandated to strike a deal with a carrier who can - to provide service to their customer. (or they should be claiming such wide coverage). Want to see coverage improve very quickly? Want to see coverage maps suddenly become more accurate? You bet it would. There is currently not a lot of incentive for these companies to deliver what they promise. Meanwhile, our law makers are piddling around managing 'competition' in the phone business.

As it stands, I get charged an extra $9 fee so that I'm only charged 9 cents/ minute for calls made on a Canadian tower. Not bad if I'm actually in Canada, but I'm on American soil. In an area ATT claims to have coverage in.

@tony,

i too want the iPhone on my T-Mobile... in my area it is the best deal and the coverage is almost flawless. I do have friends with jailbroken iPhones, but if i was to invest in such a device, i would want the total experience...

so, i would love the gov't to have handset makers not have exclusive deals. of course, being that iPhones G3/G3S are variants of GSM, CDMA is out of the question...

Looks like we all have to wait for LTE/G4 to have the iPhone truly available to all carriers. If that was to happen sooner, Blackberrys, Palms, Androids, Symbians, etc would all be choked out in the smartphone space.

Jul 19, 09 - 02:30 pm Comment from: KingMel

I see a similarity to the history of the Wilt Chamberlain rules in the NBA. No one thought much about the rules until someone totally dominated. It is amazing to me that few people recognize the enormous impact that Apple has had on technical products over the past decade. Everyone is trying to play follow the leader, but they can only attempt to copy last year's products while desperately guessing where Apple is going next.

No one cared too much about these "carrier exclusivity agreements" until a product came along that made it critically important - the iPhone.

Jul 21, 09 - 06:17 pm Comment from: Hugh Jass

You guys are all missing the point... what if Apple is having Verizon do this so as to break their exclusivity w/ AT&T;? The AT&T;network, by Apple's own admission is pathetic....

Here's the quote from Fake Steve Jobs...

.... some guy at TechCrunch says the iPhone is great but AT&T;is a "big, steaming pile" of poop. I have to agree. If anything, we hate those morons at AT&T;more than you do. Do you have any idea how awful it is to be yoked to a pack of bozos like that? Truth is, nobody around here runs their iPhone on AT&T;. Most of us are on Verizon -- we're doing a trial before the official announcement, which should come later this year or early next. Oops. Did I just say that out loud? In case you're wondering what it's like on Verizon -- it's spectacular.