Piper Jaffray: 500,000 iPhones sold over the weekend

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Matthew T. Russotto) wrote:

> In article <250720070044060158%[email protected]>,
> Mitch <[email protected]> wrote:
> >In article
> ><kurtullman-D93A4B.22542424072007@customer-201-125-217-207.uninet.net.mx>
> >, Kurt Ullman <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> > I am surprised by the high number estimates, and I don't buy them, but
> >> > this 146,000 claimed today doesn't sound right at all.
> >> > If it's not accurate in some way, the SEC needs to look into it.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure why. Most of the numbers were given out by analysts. I
> >> don't remember any numbers from Apple. But I could be wrong.
> >
> >Not sure why I am surprised? Because of the very big difference, the
> >specific attention it was given, and the facts that there are a lot of
> >people hoping to pee on the parade, if only to make themselve visible
> >in the melee.
>
> AT&T had 146,000 activations in 1.5 days. AT&T was swamped with
> activations, to the point where many were delayed. To me, that says
> that this number says only one thing about iPhone sales: There were
> at least 146,000. Apple could have sold 10 million (totally made up
> number) and AT&T would still have only activated 146,000.

It goes farther than that. We don't know how many people bought iPhones
but wanted to transfer their number to the iPhone. Did Verizon, Sprint,
etc. have people over the weekend to accommodate those people? To
activate the iPhone with the number requires the previous phone to be
deactivated.

Michelle Steiner previously discussed the problems she had and
eventually said she just got a new number for her iPhone. If others did
not want to go to that hassle but just waited until the following week
to get the previous phone deactivated to keep their phone number, it
would not show in the numbers.

Having your phone number switched is not a trivial matter. I recall
having to stay at a Radio Shack for nearly two hours when I got my
Sprint LG phone two years ago and that was just switching the number
from a Sprint Samsung phone.

I have not seen any numbers on switches of numbers for people who bought
iPhones. Has anyone else?

Remove blown from email address to reply.

---

› See More: Piper Jaffray: 500,000 iPhones sold over the weekend

At 25 Jul 2007 14:51:30 -0400 Thomas R. Kettler wrote:

> It goes farther than that. We don't know how many people bought iPhones
> but wanted to transfer their number to the iPhone.

AT&T claims 40% of the acivations were from other carriers. I suspect a
good number of them ported their old number.

> Did Verizon, Sprint,
> etc. have people over the weekend to accommodate those people?

They don't have to. The porting process is computerized and automatic.
Only "rejected" ports, where the account information doesn't match
between the two providers, (i.e. "Tom Kettler" opens account at AT&T and
asks to port "Thomas R. Kettler"'s Verizon number, etc.) have to be
reviewed manually.

> To
> activate the iPhone with the number requires the previous phone to be
> deactivated.

No, not really. The porting process goes something like this: you have,
say, a Verizon phone with number 111-1111. AT&T activates your new phone
with temorary number 222-2222, and begins the port. Verizon is notified
electronically to cancel your account and release 111-1111 to AT&T, then
AT&T is notified 111-1111 is now available and changes your activated
account from 222-2222 to 111-1111. If all goes well, this is done fairly
quickly, if not, up to a couple of days. Either way, your AT&T phone is
active immediately with SOME number, and in the case of the subject at
hand, is counted as an activation.

> Michelle Steiner previously discussed the problems she had and
> eventually said she just got a new number for her iPhone.

IIRC, her problem wasn't totally port related, but had to do with an
incomplete account creation "stuck" in the system blocking her attempts
to setup an account (because the system saw it as a duplicate account for
the same phone.)

> If others did
> not want to go to that hassle but just waited until the following week
> to get the previous phone deactivated to keep their phone number, it
> would not show in the numbers.


AT&T claims systemic problems delayed 8,000-10,000 activations the first
weekend.


> Having your phone number switched is not a trivial matter. I recall
> having to stay at a Radio Shack for nearly two hours when I got my
> Sprint LG phone two years ago and that was just switching the number
> from a Sprint Samsung phone.

It's become smoother, but I had a nightmarish double port just last year
that took three days. I simultaneously ported my old contract cellphone
number into a prepaid phone while porting a business land line into my
contract phone. (I wanted to keep my old number alive to setup a
voicemail directing people to the new number, hence the port to the
prepaid.)

Not once in the three-day process did either phone stop working, but
different numbers rang different phones throughout the process! Through
the magic of call forwarding and the hassle of lugging two phones around,
I don't think I missed any calls in those three days.

> I have not seen any numbers on switches of numbers for people who
> bought iPhones. Has anyone else?


I haven't, but I assume the majority of the 40% changing providers to
AT&T ported their number.


--
Todd Allcock

"I don't need my cell phone to play video games or take pictures or
double
as a Walkie-Talkie; I just need it to work. Thanks for all the bells and
whistles,
but I could communicate better with ACTUAL bells and whistles."
-Bill Maher 9/25/2003

In article <[email protected]>, Matthew T.
Russotto <[email protected]> wrote:

> AT&T had 146,000 activations in 1.5 days. AT&T was swamped with
> activations, to the point where many were delayed. To me, that says
> that this number says only one thing about iPhone sales: There were
> at least 146,000. Apple could have sold 10 million (totally made up
> number) and AT&T would still have only activated 146,000.

Another good point: the number may not reflect all activations
attempted or begun during that time. They may be applying some lkind of
additional consideration (like the billing was sent out).
Some of these people are ignoring that we're talking about the business
practices, not some absolute value of actually moved items. The
business practices may not even count anything where that wasn't a
physical transation of money yet (which means all credit card payments
wouldn't have been counted until Monday, for instance.)

It's also important for them to remember that the threshold is over a
matter of a few hours -- even partially begun activations may be a
significant quantity to consider.

Again, I just hope someone can explain the difference in values.

In article <[email protected]>,
"Thomas R. Kettler" <[email protected]> wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (Matthew T. Russotto) wrote:
>
> > In article <250720070044060158%[email protected]>,
> > Mitch <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >In article
> > ><kurtullman-D93A4B.22542424072007@customer-201-125-217-207.uninet.net.mx>
> > >, Kurt Ullman <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> > I am surprised by the high number estimates, and I don't buy them, but
> > >> > this 146,000 claimed today doesn't sound right at all.
> > >> > If it's not accurate in some way, the SEC needs to look into it.
> > >>
> > >> I'm not sure why. Most of the numbers were given out by analysts. I
> > >> don't remember any numbers from Apple. But I could be wrong.
> > >
> > >Not sure why I am surprised? Because of the very big difference, the
> > >specific attention it was given, and the facts that there are a lot of
> > >people hoping to pee on the parade, if only to make themselve visible
> > >in the melee.
> >
> > AT&T had 146,000 activations in 1.5 days. AT&T was swamped with
> > activations, to the point where many were delayed. To me, that says
> > that this number says only one thing about iPhone sales: There were
> > at least 146,000. Apple could have sold 10 million (totally made up
> > number) and AT&T would still have only activated 146,000.
>
> It goes farther than that. We don't know how many people bought iPhones
> but wanted to transfer their number to the iPhone. Did Verizon, Sprint,
> etc. have people over the weekend to accommodate those people? To
> activate the iPhone with the number requires the previous phone to be
> deactivated.

And the phone companies have at least 10* days in which to release it.

>
> Michelle Steiner previously discussed the problems she had and
> eventually said she just got a new number for her iPhone. If others did
> not want to go to that hassle but just waited until the following week
> to get the previous phone deactivated to keep their phone number, it
> would not show in the numbers.
>
> Having your phone number switched is not a trivial matter. I recall
> having to stay at a Radio Shack for nearly two hours when I got my
> Sprint LG phone two years ago and that was just switching the number
> from a Sprint Samsung phone.
>
> I have not seen any numbers on switches of numbers for people who bought
> iPhones. Has anyone else?
>
> Remove blown from email address to reply.

* this number was given me by an AT&T wireless company employee.

--
regarding Snit "You are not flamed because you speak the truth,
you are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting
the newsgroup." Andrew J. Brehm