NEWS: Verizon improves churn, but still #2 to AT&T/Cingular

<http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/01/technology/01verizon.html>

Verizon’s wireless business, which Verizon owns jointly with the
Vodafone Group, reported revenue of $10.3 billion in the first
quarter. The unit added 1.7 million wireless subscribers, ending the
quarter with 60.7 million subscribers, second only to AT&T Wireless,
which serves 62.2 million customers.

So much for claims here to the contrary.

Adding to its good news, the rate at which Verizon customers canceled
subscriptions, known as the churn rate, declined to 1.08 percent from
1.14 percent a year earlier.

Very good indeed.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

---

› See More: NEWS: Verizon improves churn, but still #2 to AT&T/Cingular

But those numbers are inclusive of ALL subscribers to Cingular and VZW.
If one were to take just post paid the numbers are closer


--
Andrew D. Sisson
LG VEX-8100 VZW 14 years
SonyEricsson W300i CINGULAR NATION SINCE MARCH 2006
"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/01/technology/01verizon.html>
>
> Verizons wireless business, which Verizon owns jointly with the
> Vodafone Group, reported revenue of $10.3 billion in the first
> quarter. The unit added 1.7 million wireless subscribers, ending the
> quarter with 60.7 million subscribers, second only to AT&T Wireless,
> which serves 62.2 million customers.
>
> So much for claims here to the contrary.
>
> Adding to its good news, the rate at which Verizon customers canceled
> subscriptions, known as the churn rate, declined to 1.08 percent from
> 1.14 percent a year earlier.
>
> Very good indeed.
>
> --
> Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
> John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

On Tue, 1 May 2007 17:13:54 -0400, "Andy S"
<[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:

>But those numbers are inclusive of ALL subscribers to Cingular and VZW.
>If one were to take just post paid the numbers are closer

So what (even if true)? A customer is a customer.

p.s. Please don't switch posting styles (top vs bottom) in mid-thread
-- it makes the thread confusing and hard to follow. Thanks.

>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/01/technology/01verizon.html>
>>
>> Verizons wireless business, which Verizon owns jointly with the
>> Vodafone Group, reported revenue of $10.3 billion in the first
>> quarter. The unit added 1.7 million wireless subscribers, ending the
>> quarter with 60.7 million subscribers, second only to AT&T Wireless,
>> which serves 62.2 million customers.
>>
>> So much for claims here to the contrary.
>>
>> Adding to its good news, the rate at which Verizon customers canceled
>> subscriptions, known as the churn rate, declined to 1.08 percent from
>> 1.14 percent a year earlier.
>>
>> Very good indeed.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

Andy S wrote:
> But those numbers are inclusive of ALL subscribers to Cingular and VZW.
> If one were to take just post paid the numbers are closer

In fact, Verizon has retaken the US wireless subscriber lead from AT&T.

See
"http://www.engadgetmobile.com/2007/04/11/verizon-retakes-us-wireless-subscriber-lead-from-atandt/"

Verizon is at 56.8 million retail postpaid. 58.5 million retail
including prepaid, 0.89% retail postpaid churn, and $50.73 ARPU.

AT&T is at 56.3 million retail (including prepaid) at 1.3% retail
postpaid churn, and $49.21 ARPU. The data as to retail postpaid is not
available from AT&T, but AT&T's prepaid service is much more popular
than Verizon's, so their retail postpaid number will be a lot lower than
Verizon's.

These numbers do not include MVNO subscriber numbers, which some
carriers add to their own subscriber totals to try to gain bragging rights.

The other key indicator is the trends. This where things look extremely
bad for AT&T, and why analysts were so unhappy with the AT&T first
quarter results.

Verizon added 1.7 million customers during the quarter, 1.5 million of
which were retail postpaid. Their ARPU increased nicely, from $50.12 to
$50.73

AT&T added 1.2 million customers during the quarter, about 700,000 of
which were retail, postpaid customers. Their ARPU fell slightly from
$49.29 5o $49.21.

So the bottom line is that besides retaking the lead from AT&T for the
most subscribers, Verizon is also adding the most profitable customers
at a rate twice as fast as AT&T. It's very difficult for other carriers
to compete with a 0.89% churn rate!

AT&T may get a bump in the second quarter from the iPhone, at the
expense of Verizon and other carriers. Maybe AT&T's poor 1Q2007
performance is because potential customers are waiting for the iPhone.


[Copied to alt.cellular.attws. Please post all alt.cellular.cingular
posts to alt.cellular.attws as well. The Cingular name is going away,
and alt.cellular.attws is the proper venue for posts regarding AT&T's
Wireless Service.]

SMS wrote:
> In fact, Verizon has retaken the US wireless subscriber lead from AT&T.

I thought it was at&t. We shouldn't call them AT&T because that's their
old name. It's easy to see that the difference between AT&T and at&t is
substantial.

--
Music hath charms to soothe the savage breast.
That's why stereo has two channels.

clifto wrote:
> SMS wrote:
>> In fact, Verizon has retaken the US wireless subscriber lead from AT&T.
>
> I thought it was at&t. We shouldn't call them AT&T because that's their
> old name. It's easy to see that the difference between AT&T and at&t is
> substantial.

Yes, my mistake.

You need to watch "http://tinyurl.com/22d4a9" in order to understand the
difference between AT&T and at&t.

"SMS" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> clifto wrote:
>> SMS wrote:
>>> In fact, Verizon has retaken the US wireless subscriber lead from AT&T.
>>
>> I thought it was at&t. We shouldn't call them AT&T because that's their
>> old name. It's easy to see that the difference between AT&T and at&t is
>> substantial.
>
> Yes, my mistake.
>
> You need to watch "http://tinyurl.com/22d4a9" in order to understand the
> difference between AT&T and at&t.

No. You were right the first time. It's AT&T. It's only at&t if it's
accompanied by the globe.


--
Andrew D. Sisson
LG VX-8100 VZW 14 years
SonyEricsson W300i CINGULAR NATION SINCE MARCH 2006

On Tue, 01 May 2007 15:51:14 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>Andy S wrote:
>> But those numbers are inclusive of ALL subscribers to Cingular and VZW.
>> If one were to take just post paid the numbers are closer
>
>In fact, Verizon has retaken the US wireless subscriber lead from AT&T.
>
>See
>"http://www.engadgetmobile.com/2007/04/11/verizon-retakes-us-wireless-subscriber-lead-from-atandt/"
>[SNIP]

<http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/01/technology/01verizon.html>

Verizon’s wireless business, which Verizon owns jointly with the
Vodafone Group, reported revenue of $10.3 billion in the first
quarter. The unit added 1.7 million wireless subscribers, ending the
quarter with 60.7 million subscribers, second only to AT&T Wireless,
which serves 62.2 million customers.

So much for claims here to the contrary.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

Andy S wrote:
You need to watch "http://tinyurl.com/22d4a9" in order to understand the
>> difference between AT&T and at&t.
>
> No. You were right the first time. It's AT&T. It's only at&t if it's
> accompanied by the globe.

Ah, so they only use lower case in the logo. Maybe it was cheaper to use
only lower case letters.

Whatever. The important thing to remember is that whatever the logo, it
didn't help them much in terms of customer additions or ARPU.

"http://www.informationweek.com/mobility/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=GZS4HVCWRLF4WQSNDLRCKH0CJUNN2JVN?articleID=198800153"

Sprint actually got a rare bit of good news, moving ahead of Verizon in
data ARPU, $8.32 versus $7.91. Cingular was a strong third at $7.88.

On Wed, 02 May 2007 16:01:10 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>Andy S wrote:
>You need to watch "http://tinyurl.com/22d4a9" in order to understand the
>>> difference between AT&T and at&t.
>>
>> No. You were right the first time. It's AT&T. It's only at&t if it's
>> accompanied by the globe.
>
>Ah, so they only use lower case in the logo. Maybe it was cheaper to use
>only lower case letters.
>
>Whatever. The important thing to remember is that whatever the logo, it
>didn't help them much in terms of customer additions or ARPU.

In your opinion. Most observers think the AT&T name gives the company a
significant boost.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

At 03 May 2007 20:39:03 +0000 John Navas wrote:

> In your opinion. Most observers think the AT&T name gives the company a
> significant boost.

Not necessarily- RCR News reported a few weeks ago that polls show
customers thought more highly of "Cingular" rather than "AT&T" when it
came to wireless service. The article assumed that the negative
association with AT&T was due to the prior AT&T Wireless' troubles.

Add to that the trouble Cingular is having with NASCAR (NASCAR is
preventing Cingular from re-logoing their sponsored car, most likely at
the request of Sprint who pours a lot of money into NASCAR) and Cingular
is facing a less than smooth rebranding campaign.

In the long run, the rebranding will be a good move, but in the short run
it'll probably be a major PITA for Cingular. I suspect they'll hold back
the hard rebranding push to coincide with the iPhone launch.


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> On Wed, 02 May 2007 16:01:10 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
> wrote in <[email protected]>:
>
>>Andy S wrote:
>>You need to watch "http://tinyurl.com/22d4a9" in order to understand
>>the
>>>> difference between AT&T and at&t.
>>>
>>> No. You were right the first time. It's AT&T. It's only at&t if
>>> it's accompanied by the globe.
>>
>>Ah, so they only use lower case in the logo. Maybe it was cheaper to
>>use only lower case letters.
>>
>>Whatever. The important thing to remember is that whatever the logo,
>>it didn't help them much in terms of customer additions or ARPU.
>
> In your opinion. Most observers think the AT&T name gives the company
> a significant boost.
>

Such as who? You don't count- we need something from someone other than an
average user such as yourself.

On Thu, 03 May 2007 16:19:56 -0600, Todd Allcock
<[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:

>At 03 May 2007 20:39:03 +0000 John Navas wrote:
>
>> In your opinion. Most observers think the AT&T name gives the company a
>> significant boost.
>
>Not necessarily- RCR News reported a few weeks ago that polls show
>customers thought more highly of "Cingular" rather than "AT&T" when it
>came to wireless service. The article assumed that the negative
>association with AT&T was due to the prior AT&T Wireless' troubles.

Lack of citation or specifics makes it hard for me to say much in
response to your paraphrase except that much depends on what specific
questions were actually asked. All I could find with a quick search was
an unscientific online poll (not a properly conducted study) that simply
asked people whether Cingular should change its name or not, which is
quite a bit different from your paraphrase.

>Add to that the trouble Cingular is having with NASCAR (NASCAR is
>preventing Cingular from re-logoing their sponsored car, most likely at
>the request of Sprint who pours a lot of money into NASCAR) and Cingular
>is facing a less than smooth rebranding campaign.

That's seems pretty insignificant to me in the great scheme of things.

>In the long run, the rebranding will be a good move, but in the short run
>it'll probably be a major PITA for Cingular.

I personally don't think it will be terribly significant. Some very
smart people are working on the rebranding.

>I suspect they'll hold back
>the hard rebranding push to coincide with the iPhone launch.

I personally doubt that -- I'm seeing steady progress on rebranding.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

At 04 May 2007 00:44:58 +0000 John Navas wrote:
ubles.
>
> Lack of citation or specifics makes it hard for me to say much in
> response to your paraphrase except that much depends on what specific
> questions were actually asked. All I could find with a quick search was
> an unscientific online poll (not a properly conducted study) that simply
> asked people whether Cingular should change its name or not, which is
> quite a bit different from your paraphrase.


I wished I saved the article. From my fading memory the question was a
simply a theoretical "confidence" question- do you feel "better" about
wireless service from "Cingular" or "AT&T."
Certainly nothing that would (or should) make Cingular think twice about
rebranding- it was just a data point that shows some people still have a
bad taste in their mouth from experiences with the former ATTWS.


> >Add to that the trouble Cingular is having with NASCAR...
> That's seems pretty insignificant to me in the great scheme of things.

Although NASCAR isn't my cup of tea, a lot of money gets thrown at it-
money all but wasted if AT&T is forced to advertise an obsolete name/logo
for the length of that contract. Again, nothing that should or would
change AT&T's plans, but another bump in the rebranding road..


> I personally don't think it will be terribly significant. Some very
> smart people are working on the rebranding.

Fair enough. Still, it's a pity- I think Cingular did a good job
creating the Cingular brand out of nothing- it's sad to see that time,
money and effort go to waste.

> I personally doubt that -- I'm seeing steady progress on rebranding.

As expected, it's mostly co-branding at this point. ("Cingular is now
the new AT&T..."). My guess is we might see the iPhone launch coincide
with the diminishing of the Cingular-brand, (i.e. "a new phone for a new
AT&T.")

Either way, it should be fas inating to watch the rebranding unfold.


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:


> I personally don't think it will be terribly significant. Some very
> smart people are working on the rebranding.
>

Based on their track record, I think you are being very kind by branding
them as "very smart."