"Mobile users diss premium content"

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Thu, 23 Mar 2006 19:35:01 -0400,
Derek Broughton <[email protected]> wrote:

>> I sync with Outlook using Motorola Phone Tools. TrueSync supports Lotus
>> Notes and Palm Desktop.
>>
>Yeah, but do you need the USB cable, or can you do it with the Bluetooth?
>I'll get the cable if I must, but I'd prefer not.

I use Bluetooth.

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

---

› See More: "Mobile users diss premium content"

John Navas wrote:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Thu, 23 Mar 2006 19:35:01
> -0400, Derek Broughton <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> I sync with Outlook using Motorola Phone Tools. TrueSync supports Lotus
>>> Notes and Palm Desktop.
>>>
>>Yeah, but do you need the USB cable, or can you do it with the Bluetooth?
>>I'll get the cable if I must, but I'd prefer not.
>
> I use Bluetooth.
>
Excellent, thanks.
--
derek

John Navas wrote:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Thu, 23 Mar 2006 19:35:01
> -0400, Derek Broughton <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> I sync with Outlook using Motorola Phone Tools. TrueSync supports Lotus
>>> Notes and Palm Desktop.
>>>
>>Yeah, but do you need the USB cable, or can you do it with the Bluetooth?
>>I'll get the cable if I must, but I'd prefer not.
>
> I use Bluetooth.
>
Excellent, thanks.
--
derek

John Navas wrote:
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Thu, 23 Mar 2006
> 20:35:14 GMT, DecaturTxCowboy <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>
>>>Perhaps if you wore the remote control or a GPS on your belt.
>>
>>Nah, GPS too inaccurate for me. I use my topo maps on laptop.
>
>
> My GPS is accurate/repeatable to about 15 feet.
>
And my hummer gets 38 MPG

On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 08:01:39 -0500, in alt.internet.wireless , George
<[email protected]> wrote:

>John Navas wrote:
>> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>>
>> In <[email protected]> on Thu, 23 Mar 2006
>> 20:35:14 GMT, DecaturTxCowboy <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>>
>>>>Perhaps if you wore the remote control or a GPS on your belt.
>>>
>>>Nah, GPS too inaccurate for me. I use my topo maps on laptop.
>>
>>
>> My GPS is accurate/repeatable to about 15 feet.
>>
>And my hummer gets 38 MPG

For what its worth, _my_ GPS (Garmin eMap) /is/ accurate to 15 feet,
less sometimes. How do I know? I've stood on a trig point and compared
to where the emap thinks I am.

The only way a hummer gets 38MPG is if the M stands for metres.

Mark McIntyre
--

Mark McIntyre wrote:
> For what its worth, _my_ GPS (Garmin eMap) /is/ accurate to 15 feet,
> less sometimes. How do I know? I've stood on a trig point and compared
> to where the emap thinks I am.

I posted in 2001 about the trip my apartment building took. Two
nights in a row, my apartment building took off from my Chicago
suburb and flew into Indiana (according to my GPS). Readings stopped
when the building hit 100,000 feet at 650 MPH somewhere southwest
of Lafayette, Indiana. I also had one other occurrance where the
apartment building went up like an elevator from its ground level
(just under 700 feet AMSL) to 1100 feet, then way down to about
60 feet below sea level, then returned.

USUALLY my GPS is accurate to 15 feet or less. If you believe yours
is *always* that accurate, go try your story in sci.geo.satellite-nav.

--
All relevant people are pertinent.
All rude people are impertinent.
Therefore, no rude people are relevant.
-- Solomon W. Golomb

Mark McIntyre wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 08:01:39 -0500, in alt.internet.wireless , George
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>John Navas wrote:
>>
>>>[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>>>
>>>In <[email protected]> on Thu, 23 Mar 2006
>>>20:35:14 GMT, DecaturTxCowboy <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Perhaps if you wore the remote control or a GPS on your belt.
>>>>
>>>>Nah, GPS too inaccurate for me. I use my topo maps on laptop.
>>>
>>>
>>>My GPS is accurate/repeatable to about 15 feet.
>>>
>>
>>And my hummer gets 38 MPG
>
>
> For what its worth, _my_ GPS (Garmin eMap) /is/ accurate to 15 feet,
> less sometimes. How do I know? I've stood on a trig point and compared
> to where the emap thinks I am.

Sorry, just because you obtained that accuracy at a location does not
indicate in any way that it is accurate to 15 feet *all* of the time as
you state.


>
> The only way a hummer gets 38MPG is if the M stands for metres.
>
> Mark McIntyre

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Wed, 22 Mar 2006
> 22:21:05 -0700, "Scott" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>> Sure, but giving network resources away for free doesn't make sense for
>>> the
>>> carrier, unless the carrier has to give it away to make up for how
>>> uncompetitive it is, as in the case of Nextel.
>>
>>So, the highest ARPU carrier in the industry is "giving" resources away?
>
> Yes. Nextel ARPU is based on premium voice services, not data.

And SprintNextel reported data ARPU for the 4th quarter that 50% (?) higher
than Cingular. Wanna try again, genius?

>
>>Are you really that stupid?
>
> No. And you?
>

Obviously at least three rungs higher than you- your ignorance in this
thread proves that.

"Scott" <[email protected]> hath wroth:

>And SprintNextel reported data ARPU for the 4th quarter that 50% (?) higher
>than Cingular. Wanna try again, genius?

http://www.networkworld.com/news/200...nt-nextel.html
Nextel has been able to nab a nearly $20 premium per user vs.
Cingular primarily because of its high ratio of business to
consumer customers (80% vs. 20%). Business users tend to spend
more for features, applications and reliability.

The article and accompanying numbers are a bit dated but the effect of
the large number of business customers is still the same.

Sprint/Nextel:
http://www.kensei-news.com/bizdev/pu...le_43647.shtml
4th quarter ARPU = $63 per user.

Cingular:
http://www.kensei-news.com/bizdev/pu...le_42884.shtml
4th quarter ARPU = $49 per user.

Difference = (63 - 49) / 49 = 29%
Not anywhere near 50%.
The difference again is mostly due to the different business/consumer
mix.

For sake of completeness, Verizon = $49 per user, same as Cingular.

--
Jeff Liebermann [email protected]
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

clifto <[email protected]> hath wroth:

>Mark McIntyre wrote:
>> For what its worth, _my_ GPS (Garmin eMap) /is/ accurate to 15 feet,
>> less sometimes. How do I know? I've stood on a trig point and compared
>> to where the emap thinks I am.

>I posted in 2001 about the trip my apartment building took. Two
>nights in a row, my apartment building took off from my Chicago
>suburb and flew into Indiana (according to my GPS). Readings stopped
>when the building hit 100,000 feet at 650 MPH somewhere southwest
>of Lafayette, Indiana. I also had one other occurrance where the
>apartment building went up like an elevator from its ground level
>(just under 700 feet AMSL) to 1100 feet, then way down to about
>60 feet below sea level, then returned.

Reflections and crappy processing. I drive through a small canyone
every day. The moving map display is truely artistic when the signals
have to go through trees, bounce off hillsides, and fade in and out.

>USUALLY my GPS is accurate to 15 feet or less. If you believe yours
>is *always* that accurate, go try your story in sci.geo.satellite-nav.

I suggest downloading and running:
http://www.visualgps.net/VisualGPS/
and see for yourself. One version is free. I sometimes have it
running for hours when my car is parked somewhere. One standard
deviation is about 20ft for my ancient Magellan map 410.

--
Jeff Liebermann [email protected]
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

"Jeff Liebermann" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Scott" <[email protected]> hath wroth:
>
>>And SprintNextel reported data ARPU for the 4th quarter that 50% (?)
>>higher
>>than Cingular. Wanna try again, genius?
>
> http://www.networkworld.com/news/200...nt-nextel.html
> Nextel has been able to nab a nearly $20 premium per user vs.
> Cingular primarily because of its high ratio of business to
> consumer customers (80% vs. 20%). Business users tend to spend
> more for features, applications and reliability.
>
> The article and accompanying numbers are a bit dated but the effect of
> the large number of business customers is still the same.
>
> Sprint/Nextel:
> http://www.kensei-news.com/bizdev/pu...le_43647.shtml
> 4th quarter ARPU = $63 per user.
>
> Cingular:
> http://www.kensei-news.com/bizdev/pu...le_42884.shtml
> 4th quarter ARPU = $49 per user.
>
> Difference = (63 - 49) / 49 = 29%
> Not anywhere near 50%.

The numbers I referred to were data (premium service) APRU numbers
specifically reported by each carrier- I believe I was quite clear about
that.

Cingular reported data ARPU in excess of $4.50 while SprintNextel came in at
over $6.00, which was the highest in the industry. You'll notice that the
50% is followed by question marks, indicating that I was unsure of the
actual number- unlike Navas, I actually have a life and the actuial numbers
had slipped my mind. The estimates were posted to invalidate the claim that
Nextel "has to give it away to make up for how uncompetitive it is" (a
direct quote from John Navas). And while my numbers are not accurate to the
penny or percentage point, they are much more accurate than anything Navas
has posted in this thread.

You'll also notice that Navas will never respond to these numbers, as he
knows that he was caught in a lie yet again. SprintNextel is not giving
away services as he claimed- the numbers don't lie.


> The difference again is mostly due to the different business/consumer
> mix.
>

A non-factor- money is money no matter where it comes from.

Scott wrote:

> A non-factor- money is money no matter where it comes from.

Well it does show that Sprint's purchase of Nextel may have been a good
idea, but time will tell if they get a positive ROI out of the deal. So
far no one else's PTT is as good as Nextel's. If the iDEN network is
shutdown, suddenly you'll have three carriers competing for PTT
customers with poorer quality PTT, both in service and equipment, but
with much better coverage overall. No incentive to stay with Sprint if
that happens, though Sprint will try to retain them, and just the effort
to change carriers will help them retain most of the Nextel users.

"Scott" <[email protected]> hath wroth:

>The numbers I referred to were data (premium service) APRU numbers
>specifically reported by each carrier- I believe I was quite clear about
>that.

Sorry. I missed the word "data" in your statement below. I was
thinking overall revenue.
"And SprintNextel reported data ARPU for the 4th quarter
that 50% (?) higher than Cingular. Wanna try again, genius?"

>Cingular reported data ARPU in excess of $4.50 while SprintNextel came in at
>over $6.00, which was the highest in the industry.

From:
| http://www.sbc.com/Investor/Financia...r_Earnings.pdf
I find Cingular ARPU from data at $4.71 for 4th quarter 2005. Close
enough.

I couldn't find anything specific for Sprint/Nextel with some sources
mentioning "about $6" for wireless data ARPU.

Interesting article on the subject of wireless data revenues.
| http://www.chetansharma.com/66.pdf

>You'll notice that the
>50% is followed by question marks, indicating that I was unsure of the
>actual number- unlike Navas, I actually have a life and the actuial numbers
>had slipped my mind. The estimates were posted to invalidate the claim that
>Nextel "has to give it away to make up for how uncompetitive it is" (a
>direct quote from John Navas). And while my numbers are not accurate to the
>penny or percentage point, they are much more accurate than anything Navas
>has posted in this thread.
>
>You'll also notice that Navas will never respond to these numbers, as he
>knows that he was caught in a lie yet again. SprintNextel is not giving
>away services as he claimed- the numbers don't lie.

I'm not so sure he's totally wrong. Nextel is selling GPS location
and navigation services which is a big seller among public safety
organizations using Nextel in place of conventional 2-way radio.
Cingular has nothing that's even close. Nextel gets $20/month per
phone for "mobile location" which methinks is rather expensive and
will certainly skew the wireless data derived ARPU numbers.
http://www.nextel.com/en/services/gps/gps.shtml
It's become almost a requirement for the local security services and
delivery agents that use Nextel.

>> The difference again is mostly due to the different business/consumer
>> mix.

>A non-factor- money is money no matter where it comes from.

I beg to differ slightly. If the data services are subsidized by
equipment and 3rd party vendors, it's not money spent by the customer.
The real issue (from my warped perspective) is how much does Joe
Sixpack pay for the service. However, I see no evidence of a Nextel
giveaway or subsidies for data services at this time.

If the numbers were broken down seperating the various data components
such as:
1. Internet access
2. SMS messaging
3. photo distribution
4. GPS services
5. mapping and direction services.
6. etc.
it would probably be much easier to see where the giveaways and
subsidies are hiding. For example, it seems that Nextel charges
$0.15/SMS message while Cingular charges $0.10 (based on overage
charges). If the number of messages were equal and fairly
substantial, that would skew the ARPU numbers.



--
Jeff Liebermann [email protected]
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

"Jeff Liebermann" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Scott" <[email protected]> hath wroth:
>

>>You'll also notice that Navas will never respond to these numbers, as he
>>knows that he was caught in a lie yet again. SprintNextel is not giving
>>away services as he claimed- the numbers don't lie.
>
> I'm not so sure he's totally wrong. Nextel is selling GPS location
> and navigation services which is a big seller among public safety
> organizations using Nextel in place of conventional 2-way radio.
> Cingular has nothing that's even close. Nextel gets $20/month per
> phone for "mobile location" which methinks is rather expensive and
> will certainly skew the wireless data derived ARPU numbers.

It doesn't skew- it increases the number, which is the whole point of
measuring it. That is why it is measured as an average (and is essentailly
measured identically by all carriers).


> http://www.nextel.com/en/services/gps/gps.shtml
> It's become almost a requirement for the local security services and
> delivery agents that use Nextel.
>
>>> The difference again is mostly due to the different business/consumer
>>> mix.
>
>>A non-factor- money is money no matter where it comes from.
>
> I beg to differ slightly. If the data services are subsidized by
> equipment and 3rd party vendors, it's not money spent by the customer.

But they are not in that sense. Any subsidy would come as a decrease in
licensing or development cost or a service discount, not as a service
subsidy.

> The real issue (from my warped perspective) is how much does Joe
> Sixpack pay for the service. However, I see no evidence of a Nextel
> giveaway or subsidies for data services at this time.
>
> If the numbers were broken down seperating the various data components
> such as:
> 1. Internet access
> 2. SMS messaging
> 3. photo distribution
> 4. GPS services
> 5. mapping and direction services.
> 6. etc.
> it would probably be much easier to see where the giveaways and
> subsidies are hiding. For example, it seems that Nextel charges
> $0.15/SMS message while Cingular charges $0.10 (based on overage
> charges). If the number of messages were equal and fairly
> substantial, that would skew the ARPU numbers.

Again, it doesn't skew. In your example, Nextel would simply have a higher
ARPU.

"SMS" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Scott wrote:
>
>> A non-factor- money is money no matter where it comes from.
>
> Well it does show that Sprint's purchase of Nextel may have been a good
> idea, but time will tell if they get a positive ROI out of the deal. So
> far no one else's PTT is as good as Nextel's. If the iDEN network is
> shutdown, suddenly you'll have three carriers competing for PTT customers
> with poorer quality PTT, both in service and equipment, but with much
> better coverage overall. No incentive to stay with Sprint if that happens,
> though Sprint will try to retain them, and just the effort to change
> carriers will help them retain most of the Nextel users.

And if the assumption that any non-iDen PTT alternative is the same as the
VZW or Cingular crap, you are correct. However, the company has technology
licensed that (at least on paper) appears to be far superior and does not
rely on a bastardization of normal telephony (like Cingular). They are in
no hurry to get something out there- they have a working product that will
soon be available on cross-platform phones. By the time they get ready to
shed the iDen network (still years away), most of their voice and data
traffic will be CDMA and a viable CDMA PTT solution will also exist.