Windows Phone boost as carriers “sick of taking orders from Apple”

News emerged yesterday that AT&T is planning a major new marketing assault, to widen its promotion of the Nokia Lumia 900. The carrier has already been hard at work in promoting the device, with its in-store sales staff being widely praised for their knowledgeable recommendations of the product, and those efforts seem to be paying off so far, with the company reporting that sales have so far exceed its expectations.

Meanwhile, AT&T’s arch-rival, Verizon Wireless, recently confirmed that it is working directly with Microsoft on Windows Phone 8, which will see the carrier stock multiple devices with the new mobile OS later this year. This is in stark contrast to the support that Verizon has so far given to Windows Phone – the operator continues to offer just a single model, the HTC Trophy, a first-generation Windows Phone that has now been on-sale for almost 18 months.

Casual observers might take this increasing show of affection towards Windows Phone by the operators to be a sign that the OS is finally getting the attention that it’s always deserved. But is there more to it than that?

Katie Lewis, associate analyst at Yankee Group, noted recent claims in The New York Times that America’s two largest networks are focusing more on Windows Phone “to both blunt Apple’s influence in the device ecosystem and provide a hedge against what Google may do, now that it has Motorola Mobility under its belt”. But she feels that’s only half of the story.

She says that “mobile operators are sick of taking orders from Apple”, adding that “iPhones are occupying an increasingly dangerous share of mobile operators’ smartphone sales.” Indeed, we recently reported that despite aggressive marketing of next-generation 4G LTE devices, Verizon’s sales of the 3G-only iPhone dramatically exceeded sales of all of the network’s 4G devices combined.

As the reliance of networks on iPhone sales grows, Apple’s influence over them also increases. As WMPoweruser notes, the cost of adding an iPhone subscriber can be up to 40% higher than if that new customer were to sign up with a different device. Apple demands vast handset subsidies from the operators, far higher than for other smartphones. AT&T’s recent quarterly results speak well to this state of affairs – business news outlets widely reported that while the company’s iPhone sales fell by a massive 43% over the previous quarter, its profits increased to $3.58bn; headlines such as “AT&T profit up, helped by iPhone sales drop” were commonplace.

Yankee’s Katie Lewis added that “the success of the third mobile ecosystem would put control over the US smartphone market back into the hands of mobile operators – backing Windows Phone is AT&T and Verizon’s chosen method of self-preservation.”

An analyst’s note from BTIG Research a few weeks ago adds further context to the situation. BTIG’s Walter Piecyk asserted that “as Android’s initial popularity continues to fade because of its uneven and fragmented performance, and BlackBerry falls further into oblivion, there is renewed hope that Microsoft and Nokia will be able to produce a viable alternative to Apple. We expect wireless operators to join in [their] investment, as they increasingly fear Apple’s stranglehold on their margins.”

Given that well over half of Verizon’s smartphone sales – and a staggering 78% of AT&T’s – were iPhones last quarter, there’s evidently a great deal of work to be done. But it bodes well for Windows Phone, as carriers look beyond the short-term spoils of iPhone sign-ups, towards a future where the third ecosystem brings them greater profits and more flexibility than simply becoming ‘dumb pipes’ for Apple.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

NVIDIA announces GeForce GTX 690 dual graphics card

Next Story

Samsung Galaxy S III - dual-core only for the US?

65 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I have personally used both WP7 and Android. Both have good and bad about them. WP7 does have less (menu) lag overall then Android. Android has better hardware spec'd phones and more customization options/better apps and the such. They are both good phones and are IMO superior to iOS. They just look and feel more tech savvy.

I've never been too fond of "carrier control" to be honest. While I dont agree apple having that much "power" is a solution to anything, the solution to this is not giving the carriers more control. Carriers have a long history of f*cking things up.

when it comes to the iphone its not carrier control its apple control. the carriers need to just say we are not gonna pay you billions of dollars just so we loose money selling your product.

It's odd. Strategically, I'd almost want to support the iOS platform at this point, thinking it would hasten the break-down of carrier control over the current state of mobile tech. But I've long been one of the people who'd prefer they be nothing more than dumb pipes.

If a few more years of Apple staying on top could get us to the final nails in the wireless telecom coffin, it's possible competition could actually open up later on, as Apple suddenly has to sleep in the bed it made for itself.

The carriers should just stop subsidizing iphones so much and pass the cost they pay apple onto the customer and then we will see how long applemania lasts.

Another important element in this discussion is the general public because they choose what they purchase. Consumer choice determines which company has the power. Companies in turn determine how they use that power. Apple is well known for having a culture of control and seeks partnerships in which they have controlling interest. If you don't want Apple to have as much power as they do, buy a different product. Unfortunately, we live in an age of Applemania so until the public's fascination with Apple's brand wanes Apple will have the power.

yes but what extent do carriers goto to sell iphones now, are they willing to take big loses overall to keep iphones in the market. Or is it time for carriers to say to apple enough, lower your prices or we will not support you so much and balance out the other platforms to cover what we loose selling iphones.

It was Apple who shook things up with the carriers and it was Apple who made the phone experience better for us all.

derekaw said,
It was Apple who shook things up with the carriers and it was Apple who made the phone experience better for us all.

And it was apple who killed the flash and it was apple who made first great computers. the only problem apple have is that they are so proud and they don't listen to critics.

jasonon said,
how long until people figure out that wp7 > android. that's the big question

A lot of them don't know and don't care either.

They'll buy whatever carriers sell them.

Edited by illegaloperation, Apr 29 2012, 11:47pm :

jasonon said,
how long until people figure out that wp7 > android. that's the big question

Maybe when WP7 doesn't use 3 year old hardware?

its like I have said before that carriers actually loose money selling the iphone, they have to pay apple to much and to sell them on subsidized plans to customers it is starting to hurt there bottom line as recently reported in Rogers Canada, they have activated a record amount of iphones but also posted a lose on money earned from those activations.

"Yankee's Katie Lewis added that “the success of the third mobile ecosystem would put control over the US smartphone market back into the hands of mobile operators -"

I wonder how anybody could consider such a scenario better for customers......…

Just for the records I use a Lumia 800 and not an iPhone; of course my phone is SIM free, no Carriers diktaat here.

Fritzly said,
"Yankee's Katie Lewis added that “the success of the third mobile ecosystem would put control over the US smartphone market back into the hands of mobile operators -"

I wonder how anybody could consider such a scenario better for customers......…

Just for the records I use a Lumia 800 and not an iPhone; of course my phone is SIM free, no Carriers diktaat here.

I understand where you're coming from but look at how things are over in the EU when it comes to the phone market. There's more competition there because carriers often all have the same phones for sale and have to compete on contract pricing to win customers since, at least here where I live, no one carrier has an exclusive (or if they do it's only for a bit). It also helps that all the carriers use the same type of network and none of that silly GSM/CDMA crap like in the US.

GP007 said,

I understand where you're coming from but look at how things are over in the EU when it comes to the phone market. There's more competition there because carriers often all have the same phones for sale and have to compete on contract pricing to win customers since, at least here where I live, no one carrier has an exclusive (or if they do it's only for a bit). It also helps that all the carriers use the same type of network and none of that silly GSM/CDMA crap like in the US.

I totally agree with you; I spend a lot of time in Europe, I am Italian, and the best way to describe how the carriers handle the market in the US is racketeering, no question about it. Even worse is the fact that they are allowed to do it.

Competition is always good. I can see a very happy Apple salesman making mobile phone companies pay top dollar as they have no choice. No iPhone, they lose a lot of sales and profit.

If they had a product that would sell equally well, it would be in Apple's and Microsoft's interest to provide a better deal for the carriers. Eventually it would help drive down cost to the consumers eventually or drive further innovation in the mobile arena.

Verizon's really changing their stance on Windows Phone. They were quite bearish on the platform in the beginning, which probably had something to do with the whole Kin debacle (which was a massive mess from the get-go, due to both Microsoft and Verizon).

Anthony Tosie said,
Verizon's really changing their stance on Windows Phone. They were quite bearish on the platform in the beginning, which probably had something to do with the whole Kin debacle (which was a massive mess from the get-go, due to both Microsoft and Verizon).

I blame Verizon more on that one. The Kin phones had a good design and build quality was solid but they needed to be sold without a expensive data plan to fit into the target market they were aimed at (teens with no money). Verizon decided to slap on their crazy data plan prices and they killed any chance it had. It would've been best if it was sold with a pay-as-you go service imo.

Anyways, I think Verizon sees what's going on with the Lumia 900 over at At&t and wants in, plus they've probably seen some beta builds of WP8 and like where it's going.

GP007 said,

I blame Verizon more on that one. The Kin phones had a good design and build quality was solid but they needed to be sold without a expensive data plan to fit into the target market they were aimed at (teens with no money). Verizon decided to slap on their crazy data plan prices and they killed any chance it had. It would've been best if it was sold with a pay-as-you go service imo.

Anyways, I think Verizon sees what's going on with the Lumia 900 over at At&t and wants in, plus they've probably seen some beta builds of WP8 and like where it's going.


I agree. Verizon was at fault for the Kin, noone else. They need to take responsibility for this.

And I like the regret I'm sure they're feeling now that the Lumia is doing so well and they're missing out.

GP007 said,

I blame Verizon more on that one. The Kin phones had a good design and build quality was solid but they needed to be sold without a expensive data plan to fit into the target market they were aimed at (teens with no money). Verizon decided to slap on their crazy data plan prices and they killed any chance it had. It would've been best if it was sold with a pay-as-you go service imo.

Anyways, I think Verizon sees what's going on with the Lumia 900 over at At&t and wants in, plus they've probably seen some beta builds of WP8 and like where it's going.


That's why Verizon deserves blame, but Microsoft didn't do itself any favors and deserves blame as well. The Kin phones were missing tons of features, and not having a legitimate app store was insane. Microsoft also had plenty of well-documented in-fighting between its teams, and it was clear Kin wasn't going to get much support from the beginning. The advertising campaign was also horrible -- it was worse than the Zune advertising campaign. There was no discussion of the actual features, it was just marketed as being hip. You can't market products like that.

webdev - even if MS or Nokia capitulates to the carriers they do allow for the removal of the software which almost makes it a non-issue. Nokia Drive, Maps, Music is a strong product offering for the WP handsets. As the processors and screen resolutions increases I am sure Nokia will put out better software as well as hardware to even the playing field. Samsung will follow suit but I think they have found a home in Android for better or worse.

It's no secret that I wouldn't mind more Windows Phones out there. Okay I'm on Verizon, so even one more model to complement the HTC Trophy would be great.

What I don't want is Microsoft to capitulate to the carriers and allow them to make their crapware permanent. I'd also like to see MS put the hammer down and just bypass the carriers for OS updates that don't have anything to do with the radio. The carriers have no excuse holding up security updates. NONE.

webdev511 said,
It's no secret that I wouldn't mind more Windows Phones out there. Okay I'm on Verizon, so even one more model to complement the HTC Trophy would be great.

What I don't want is Microsoft to capitulate to the carriers and allow them to make their crapware permanent. I'd also like to see MS put the hammer down and just bypass the carriers for OS updates that don't have anything to do with the radio. The carriers have no excuse holding up security updates. NONE.

This is my concern as well. Say what you like about Apple and their practices, but I think they're the lesser of two evils when it comes to carriers vs Apple. The original iPhone brought a lot of good for consumers, stuff like visual voicemail, better (although getting worse as time goes by) data plans, not to mention that their device update process is still the smoothest. I don't want to see MS making concessions to AT&T in order to gain a better footing. As is, removing all those crappy AT&T Uverse and whatever else installs automatically is a pain. If they gain some headway without screwing the end user, I'm down with this. But don't give control of the phone over to AT&T. As it is, we get left out of updates already.

mherweg said,

This is my concern as well. Say what you like about Apple and their practices, but I think they're the lesser of two evils when it comes to carriers vs Apple. The original iPhone brought a lot of good for consumers, stuff like visual voicemail, better (although getting worse as time goes by) data plans, not to mention that their device update process is still the smoothest. I don't want to see MS making concessions to AT&T in order to gain a better footing. As is, removing all those crappy AT&T Uverse and whatever else installs automatically is a pain. If they gain some headway without screwing the end user, I'm down with this. But don't give control of the phone over to AT&T. As it is, we get left out of updates already.


I think that is the problem MS is facing. The carriers want to make demands before they will offer because they know MS is in a difficult place. They have all the tools in place but the carriers are refusing to budge with their stipulations. I would think Verizon would have learned from the iPhone mistake but it seems they have made the same blunder with the Lumia.

mherweg said,

This is my concern as well. Say what you like about Apple and their practices, but I think they're the lesser of two evils when it comes to carriers vs Apple. The original iPhone brought a lot of good for consumers, stuff like visual voicemail, better (although getting worse as time goes by) data plans, not to mention that their device update process is still the smoothest. I don't want to see MS making concessions to AT&T in order to gain a better footing. As is, removing all those crappy AT&T Uverse and whatever else installs automatically is a pain. If they gain some headway without screwing the end user, I'm down with this. But don't give control of the phone over to AT&T. As it is, we get left out of updates already.


I agree. I don't want the carriers involved in the update process at all.

So it is Apple's fault that AT&T is hell bent on selling iPhone hugely below cost on contracts? fill me in but how is it Apple's fault again? Last time I also checked there were 10 carriers offering the iPhone vs. not too long ago there were only two carriers - maybe the drop in sales has to do more with consumers being able to make a carrier decision based on coverage rather than having to go with what ever carrier has a particular device - something that the vast vast vast majority of consumers have had outside the US since the iPhone started shipping internationally.

Because Apple will only sell it to the carriers on their terms, and if a carrier doesn't want it, then they'll be steamrolled over by every single other carrier that offers it.

And Apple will charge career billions of dollars for the privilege of selling iPhone.

And on top of that careers cannot do any branding. All iPhones have to be identical - which careers are not crazy about.

greenwizard88 said,
Because Apple will only sell it to the carriers on their terms, and if a carrier doesn't want it, then they'll be steamrolled over by every single other carrier that offers it.

Well, when you spell it out that way, it still sounds like the carrier's problem. Can't compete, oh well.

It says that their profits are going down because of iPhone sales, but nothing says that the customer will get any of this money back by switching to a non ios device. Just my thought on this article

Dale said,
It says that their profits are going down because of iPhone sales, but nothing says that the customer will get any of this money back by switching to a non ios device. Just my thought on this article

The consumer may beneift by paying the same amount of money for better services. ATT may choose to use the extra non-loss revenue to increase its capacity or provide better service. ATT's service is terrible everywhere I've been with it. I'd welcome that change.

MrHumpty said,

The consumer may beneift by paying the same amount of money for better services. ATT may choose to use the extra non-loss revenue to increase its capacity or provide better service. ATT's service is terrible everywhere I've been with it. I'd welcome that change.

Not to mention that, by the sheer nature of the cell phone industry, users of other smart phones find themselves subsidizing iPhone customers as most of the cost gets booked into what they need to charge for a plan to make a profit...

Androids Fanbase is fading? thats a shocker... Anyways.. I think Microsoft and Nokia have a good product with the Nokia Lumia to really spur up the competition, however, I really don't think AT&T & Verizon should have that much power.. cause all they'll do is screw us over into higher phone bills!

dimithrak said,
Androids Fanbase is fading? thats a shocker... Anyways.. I think Microsoft and Nokia have a good product with the Nokia Lumia to really spur up the competition, however, I really don't think AT&T & Verizon should have that much power.. cause all they'll do is screw us over into higher phone bills!

Well, I dunno what is or is not fadding but if HTC is anything to go by they're not looking that good these past 2 or 3 quarters.

dimithrak said,
Androids Fanbase is fading? thats a shocker... Anyways.. I think Microsoft and Nokia have a good product with the Nokia Lumia to really spur up the competition, however, I really don't think AT&T & Verizon should have that much power.. cause all they'll do is screw us over into higher phone bills!

I think the Android fan base is shrinking. If you look it has increasingly become a brand thing among Android users with Samsung growing while the others are fighting for mind share. All that means is that whatever the brand puts out and markets will grow and not the OS.

pwgarner said,

I think the Android fan base is shrinking. If you look it has increasingly become a brand thing among Android users with Samsung growing while the others are fighting for mind share. All that means is that whatever the brand puts out and markets will grow and not the OS.


Can't edit I meant
whatever the brand puts out and markets will grow the brand not just the OS.

GP007 said,

Well, I dunno what is or is not fadding but if HTC is anything to go by they're not looking that good these past 2 or 3 quarters.


Agreed, and you also have to look at how much less profit there is for an OEM with an Android phone. HTC said that WP7 was like 30% of their revenue... That really says something.

its pretty comical how much of a monopoly apple is becoming... dare i say that if apple were not an american company, they would never have been able to undertake some of the practices that they currenlty do now... If Microsoft had this sort of hold on the market i can't help feeling people would be up in arms anywhere outside of the states.

neokal said,
its pretty comical how much of a monopoly apple is becoming... dare i say that if apple were not an american company, they would never have been able to undertake some of the practices that they currenlty do now... If Microsoft had this sort of hold on the market i can't help feeling people would be up in arms anywhere outside of the states.

When the iPhone launched MS had almost 50% of the smartphone market................ when MS entered the PDA market Palm controlled it completely; guess what ? Palm laughed at MS and Mr. Ballmer, a man affected by short memory problem laughed when the iPhone was launched.
History repeats itself.................

neokal said,
its pretty comical how much of a monopoly apple is becoming... dare i say that if apple were not an american company, they would never have been able to undertake some of the practices that they currenlty do now... If Microsoft had this sort of hold on the market i can't help feeling people would be up in arms anywhere outside of the states.

It's not a monopoly. It offers a product consumers demand and because of that demand they can negotiate highly favorable contracts. Nothing is wrong with what they are doing, in fact it has spurred tons of great innovation from their competitors.

Can Neowin check all the windows are being locked each night. I fear Microsoft have been sneaking in and using the front page a bit in the last few weeks.

Orange Battery said,
Can Neowin check all the windows are being locked each night. I fear Microsoft have been sneaking in and using the front page a bit in the last few weeks.

What part of neoWIN did you not understand? You must be new here as this site was mainly MS focused base long time ago, meaning that a lot of users are using MS products and want to hear MS news,

Orange Battery said,
Can Neowin check all the windows are being locked each night. I fear Microsoft have been sneaking in and using the front page a bit in the last few weeks.

You "fear"?? LOL. This is a tech news site not a please the bitter fanboys site, maybe a Thomas the tank engine site would be more suitable for you?

LOL, it is a great tech news site with a Win and MS focus, but seriously, that's a lot of the tech world I live in. But, it does have more than it's share of rabid, uninformed, out of control fanboys that make you wonder if they're MS evangelists waiting for their free license key after RTM. But hey, ALL online sites have those. That's just a part of the Internet ecosystem.

funkydude said,

You "fear"?? LOL. This is a tech news site not a please the bitter fanboys site, maybe a Thomas the tank engine site would be more suitable for you?

Orange Battery said,
Can Neowin check all the windows are being locked each night. I fear Microsoft have been sneaking in and using the front page a bit in the last few weeks.

Apple has nearly every other tech site in their back pocket. On some of the biggest sites out there (verge), you can't say positive things about Microsoft without the owner of the site screaming obscenities at the users. There have been a number of pro Apple, anti-MS articles, and the growing list of Apple fans that will spare no expense in attacking the non faithful. But I guess until every site is under Apple's control, and this renamed neoapple.net, the day is not yet done.

nohone said,

Apple has nearly every other tech site in their back pocket. On some of the biggest sites out there (verge), you can't say positive things about Microsoft without the owner of the site screaming obscenities at the users. There have been a number of pro Apple, anti-MS articles, and the growing list of Apple fans that will spare no expense in attacking the non faithful. But I guess until every site is under Apple's control, and this renamed neoapple.net, the day is not yet done.

yes sure and Saddam Hussein was going to nuke the US................

Fritzly said,

yes sure and Saddam Hussein was going to nuke the US................

So you deny that sites like Verge, Engadget, etc. are not pro-Apple and at the best "meh" towards Microsoft?

When I write those sites are in Apple's back pocket I don't mean paid by, but rather fiercely loyal to Apple. The one time when one site goes against Apple - Gizmodo when they release info about an unannounced iPhone - Apple pulled their invite to a press conference circus. You don't think other sites that rely upon those Apple conferences as a big part of their clicks, are scared to go against Apple? Topolsky used to run Engadget. When there was Apple fanboy rage over them writing an article about Antenna Gate, they sat back and let it go with no problems. But they print articles at his new site that criticizes WP7 about a bug in a 3rd party web site, and first he will tell people that he knows better than others, then tell people to "chill the F*** out."

NeoWin prints articles that are both positive and negative towards both Apple and Microsoft. Print an article about Woz standing in line for an iPad or iPhone, and the Apple crowd cheers and uses it as proof of the greatness of Apple. Print an article about Woz buying a WP7, and they start screaming that it is not news, why was it printed? One of the few sites that does not base their entire model of giving Apple free advertisment, and they are accused of being a propaganda site that has been hacked by Microsoft.

Edit: And as for the Hussein bit, I can picture you in front of a bit of cameras saying "Nothing to see here, there is no Apple bias on the web. Now go out and buy iPads so help support the glorious revolution against the infidels"

nohone said,

So you deny that sites like Verge, Engadget, etc. are not pro-Apple and at the best "meh" towards Microsoft?

Edit: And as for the Hussein bit, I can picture you in front of a bit of cameras saying "Nothing to see here, there is no Apple bias on the web. Now go out and buy iPads so help support the glorious revolution against the infidels"

I am sure that bloggers and journalists have their own preferences, they are human beings too.
That is, actually should be, the difference between an article reporting news and an editorial.
Said that I am also very well aware that based on your apocalyptic tones such differentiations are just small and insignificants details for you..............

I almost forgot: I can picture you as the perfect spokesperson form Mr. Rumsfeld and Co. : the same attitude to dodge uncomfortable question.

DKAngel said,
glad they are finaly waking up

Except they never will, if anytime unlimited web usage with WiMax would be at a reasonable price I would say they are.

"Given that well over half of Verizon's smartphone sales - and a staggering 78% of AT&T's - were iPhones last quarter"

Crazy! - I had no idea the iPhone was selling that well.

Vice said,
"Given that well over half of Verizon's smartphone sales - and a staggering 78% of AT&T's - were iPhones last quarter"

Crazy! - I had no idea the iPhone was selling that well.

And carriers are loosing money for all of them.

Great business practice 101

Since you seem to not know, ALL smart phones are sold at a loss no matter the maker.

FoxieFoxie said,

And carriers are loosing money for all of them.

Great business practice 101

rippleman said,
Since you seem to not know, ALL smart phones are sold at a loss no matter the maker.

Apple does not sell any phone for a loss. Your statement is too generalized and is directed more at subsidies from other manufacturers. Apple gets it(profit/sales) from the carrier agreements before the contract from the carrier is even signed by the consumer. What did you think the 15 Billion dollar deal with Sprint was about? They don't gain 20B in cash in one QTR from instantaneous payment after a contract is signed. That is why Apple handles the post sales service/support on the phones. THEY GOT PAID!

The subsidy business model in the past gave carriers control and the incentive for MFR's was to go with the larger pool of consumers. Apple now has such control that they demand everything and anything they want because if the carriers do not sell it the public outcry would be tremendous. So they have no choice but to carry Apple at a loss or breakeven over the past few years. Apple actually erodes their profitability.

mrmomoman said,

Apple does not sell any phone for a loss. Your statement is too generalized to directed more at Samsung, LG, etc. Apple sells at a pure profit model. They get it from the deal before the contract from the carrier is even signed by the consumer. What did you think the 15 Billion dollar deal with Spring was about? They don't gain 20B in cash in one QTR from instantaneous payment after a contract is signed. That is why Apple handles the post sales service/support on the phones. THEY GOT PAID!!

He means the Carriers sell the phones at a loss. Not the manufacturers of the devices.

rippleman said,
Since you seem to not know, ALL smart phones are sold at a loss no matter the maker.

You are not aware about the Apple subsidies, are you? Listen to the ATT conference call

FoxieFoxie said,

And carriers are loosing money for all of them.

Great business practice 101

How do you say that they're losing money on them? Of course they lose money on the initial purchase. Almost all phones are like that, including the '$99' or 'free' Lumia 900.

They make it up with the two year contract at ~$100 a month. That's why there's an ETF if you cancel early, to cover the cost of the phone you haven't paid for yet.

Stetson said,

How do you say that they're losing money on them? Of course they lose money on the initial purchase. Almost all phones are like that, including the '$99' or 'free' Lumia 900.

They make it up with the two year contract at ~$100 a month. That's why there's an ETF if you cancel early, to cover the cost of the phone you haven't paid for yet.

Listen to the ATT conference call

Vice said,

He means the Carriers sell the phones at a loss. Not the manufacturers of the devices.

Figured as much but when someones says maker it means MFR's.

FoxieFoxie said,

And carriers are loosing money for all of them.

Great business practice 101

Grown up people look at balance sheets not conference calls.......

Fritzly said,

Grown up people look at balance sheets not conference calls.......


Grown up people don't just see profits, they seen missed profits and potential losses. Let me lay it out for you:

The guy who buys a Lumnia 900 allowing AT&T to make a little money off of the phone and they guy who buys an iPhone costing AT&T money both buy the same contracts. The adult table sees the losses involved there, even though the net is still a profit for AT&T.

MrHumpty said,

Grown up people don't just see profits, they seen missed profits and potential losses. Let me lay it out for you:

The guy who buys a Lumnia 900 allowing AT&T to make a little money off of the phone and they guy who buys an iPhone costing AT&T money both buy the same contracts. The adult table sees the losses involved there, even though the net is still a profit for AT&T.

Why do not you enlighten me about the reasons that keep AT&T selling the iPhone if it is a loss for them?
Let me give you a hint: could it be because there are more customers looking for an iPhone than a Lumia.
I am not an AT&T shareholder: with the money I earnt I buy what I like not what generates more profit for the seller.