1. copernicus's Avatar
    Shaking things up is an understatement....this would only be the beginning. It would be a revolutionary move. Here is a sidebar that I am now recalling that might fit into this puzzle. I attended ATT's National Focus Conference in San Diego this past August. This conference is a yearly coming out party for ATT products and services to their large/midsize corporate customers, where they feature keynotes, workshops, and exhibits. One of the discussions that came up after one of the keynotes during the question and answer period -- was about ATT's merger with SBC and the impending acquisition of Cingular (which was in the final stages of being finalized by the FCC). There were numerous questions about customer charges for services over the ATT/SBC network. I will try to paraphrase to characterize the questions here:

    1) If ATT/SBC (The New ATT) owns the network that Cingular Cellular services operate and those networks are already joined to ATT's network, then why can't we get free in-Network calling to residential ATT customers in the same way we get free in-Network calls to other Cingular customers?

    2) As there are potentially three (chargeable) components to a phone call originating from a cell phone, that is airtime charges between the cell tower and the handset, network charges for voice and data that travel a hard wired conduit to either a residence or another transmitting tower where another cellular phone receives a transmitted signal. In that scenario, cellular to celluar is more expensive because of the airtime transmission. But Cingular offers it free. Customers at the conference wanted to know then why can't cellular calls originating on the new Cingular/ATT network to residential phone services be offered free if they are calling ATT residential customers?

    The Execs at the conference scrambled and back-pedaled a little to try to make sense of it, but admitted there was a savings and that they would have to look into it. Admittedly, ATT brass said they had put themselves in a good position to compete with the their latest acquisitions. Conclusion: ATT can offer be very profitable while lowering their profit margins because they own the largest network in the world. They can give away network time for fractions of a cent, which makes the iPhone give away seem more plausible. However I agree with you-copernicus-the devil is in the details.
    Very thought provoking post, whether or not they give anything away.
    01-25-2007 09:19 PM
  2. copernicus's Avatar
    This story is COMPLETELY uncorroborated; AFAIK, it's the usual Cramer BS.

    Marc
    01-25-2007 09:28 PM
  3. archie's Avatar
    Whatever, it's not going to be 1 1/2 years of free service. That's just made up stuff.

    Marc
    You mean kinda like the free Push IMAP email service that you get free when you buy the iPhone?! :evil:

    Look, phone manufacturers do not like these subsidies because it devalues their phone. Plus it gives them less control on how to market the phone and accessories. You and I both know that this is NOT how Apple likes to operate.

    When Apple announced their phone pricing, we all just assumed it was a subsidized price because it was followed up with the announcement that it was only available through Cingular. We probably didn't put the two bits of information together correctly. But we can now safely say that the phone will not be subsidized because of the key bits of information that I listed above throughout my first few posts.

    AND... because the iPhone will NOT be subsidized, it stands to reason that Cingular/AT&T will reward Apple iPhone customers by giving them a break of some sort.

    I touched on this before but I would not put it past Apple to charge more for the phone to account for and provide an attractively better service plan than what other phone manufacturers are able to provide. In this case - the service is better than what other phones have available in that you get one and a half years FREE.

    BRILLIANT!!!!
    01-25-2007 09:45 PM
  4. Chatter's Avatar
    Free push IMAP service has been around for a while; you can get it now at AOL and they'll give you a domain for free as well...

    Marc

    p.s. Archie - You're just making everything up, just like Cramer.
    01-25-2007 10:35 PM
  5. archie's Avatar
    Free push IMAP service has been around for a while; you can get it now at AOL and they'll give you a domain for free as well...

    Marc

    p.s. Archie - You're just making everything up, just like Cramer.
    Yeh, free, as in pay for the monthly AOL service first and then get free push email.

    By the way, AOL's version of push is not designed and optimized to operate in mobile solutions in which battery life is at a premium. If you recall this was the argument from before. You know, when I was "making everything up".

    whatEVER :shake:
    01-25-2007 11:35 PM
  6. Chatter's Avatar
    Archie - You keep demonstrating your IGNORANCE. The AOL email is completely free (no need to sign up for AOL), as in FREE. And the domain is FREE - try it yourself.

    And there is no commercial IMAP service that is optimized for mobile solutions, if you're referring to P-IMAP. None. (No fair counting iPhone's vapor Yahoo service, which will NOT be P-IMAP either).

    Why you insist on embarrassing yourself in front of everyone is beyond me.

    Marc
    01-26-2007 12:46 AM
  7. G-funkster's Avatar
    debunked:

    Rumor Smashed: iPhone Will NOT Come With 1.5 Years of Free Service
    ...
    "The report is nonsense. We've always said the only way you can get the iPhone is with a Cingular rate plan."
    so much for that, it seems.
    01-26-2007 09:06 AM
  8. archie's Avatar
    Archie - You keep demonstrating your IGNORANCE. The AOL email is completely free (no need to sign up for AOL), as in FREE.
    This is what you said.
    Free push IMAP service has been around for a while; you can get it now at AOL and they'll give you a domain for free as well...

    Marc
    I was assumming when you said free push IMAP was free from AOL... and that it was... push IMAP email... that was what you meant.

    You see what happens here?
    01-26-2007 11:23 AM
  9. archie's Avatar
    Archie - You keep demonstrating your IGNORANCE. The AOL email is completely free (no need to sign up for AOL), as in FREE. And the domain is FREE - try it yourself.

    And there is no commercial IMAP service that is optimized for mobile solutions, if you're referring to P-IMAP. None. (No fair counting iPhone's vapor Yahoo service, which will NOT be P-IMAP either).

    Why you insist on embarrassing yourself in front of everyone is beyond me.

    Marc
    Marc,
    Why YOU insist on embarrassing yourself is beyond ME.

    As far as your ridiculous claim of being "no fair counting iPhone's vapor service", I disagree. It IS fair because you can get the service now if you want to pay for it and it WILL be available for the iPhone FREE. Which leads me to my next point, there ARE commercial push IMAP services that are optimized for mobile solutions. One is called the Blackberry email system, another is called push IMAP email. I would like to refer you to this Internet Society draft here.

    It says "the primary feature of P-IMAP is that of great extended capabilities to push changes actively to a client, rather then requiring the client to initiate contact to ask for state changes."

    I hope that it helps for me to talk in circles like this. I didn't know what else to do because nobody here seems to get it.
    01-26-2007 11:52 AM
  10. Pearl_Diva's Avatar
    Honestly, I feel Apple and/or ATT will have to do SOMETHING for the customer because $600 is very high for a locked phone and 2 yr. contract. They will not be getting too many consumers with that requirement.

    Now if it's unlocked and you can buy it through Apple and not necessarily ATT, that's another story.
    01-26-2007 11:56 AM
  11. archie's Avatar
    debunked:



    so much for that, it seems.
    I particularly like the way that Brian Lam specifically refers to my hypothesis here at TreoCentral.

    So, why give away the minutes and data for 18 months, leaving 6 months of paid service on the 2-year contract? Bunk...unless that 50% margin on the totally unsubsidized phone is going into Cingular's pockets. That could rewrite the way phones are sold...Yes! UGH, no. Must...resist...rumors.

    Let's get the word out that this isn't true.

    –Brian Lam
    And do you really think that Brain Lam holds any credibility after all the lame negative Apple related stunts he has pulled over the last 2 years? And do you really think that Cingular is going to tell Brian Lam their business strategies?
    01-26-2007 12:04 PM
  12. Chatter's Avatar
    Archie - There are so many untruths in your last post that I shake my head in disbelief. I give up; it's impossible to argue with a moron, and I'm content to let other readers figure out for themselves who is right.

    Marc
    01-26-2007 12:17 PM
  13. archie's Avatar
    Archie - There are so many untruths in your last post that I shake my head in disbelief. I give up; it's impossible to argue with a moron, and I'm content to let other readers figure out for themselves who is right.

    Marc
    I want you to name one thing.

    Please take it easy on me, just one thing. :evil: Meant to entice you.
    01-26-2007 12:43 PM
  14. archie's Avatar
    You know, Brian Lam also claimed to be the third cherished news reporter to get an advanced screening of the iPhone. Yeh, it was Time Magazine's Lev Grossman, New York Times' David Pogue along with... Gizmodo's Brian Lam?

    Yeh, RIGHT!
    01-26-2007 12:43 PM
  15. archie's Avatar
    And then right after the keynote, he posted a size comparison chart that had it obsurdely oversized next to comparable phones. Everybody here at TreoCentral was freaking out (understandably) because it was apparently so big.

    He also incorrectly stated specs.
    01-26-2007 12:46 PM
  16. archie's Avatar
    Do I need to dig up his classis iPod postings? Obvious spawn of fear, uncertainty and doubt along with statements of untruth.

    It's quite well known he has no like for Apple, Inc.
    01-26-2007 12:49 PM
  17. archie's Avatar
    Not to mention his Jack *** of the Week awards web-wide in Dec '06 for that iPhone stunt he pulled.
    01-26-2007 12:52 PM
  18. Pearl_Diva's Avatar
    OT slightly and to lighten things up a bit(come on guys, it's an object. and many reporters have inflated egos anyway, we know that.) but I need to ask any Apple insiders if they know if the true video iPod is going to be released soon. No one really ever replied before.

    Otherwise I'm about to buy the U2 iPod within the next 2 months, maybe sooner.

    If the iPhone is supposed to be the actual true video iPod, I still don't know if I can buy it. I already have too many phones and really don't want to be stuck only with ATT for 2 more years.
    01-26-2007 01:17 PM
  19. G-funkster's Avatar
    You will see this new interface and display on a non-phone ipod.

    Saying something about that now would cannibalize sales of existing iPods, so that was not mentioned. I don't know when that would be released though, but there's no reason for Apple to wait until June, as the playback portions of the device seem complete.

    But you should really ask in a new thread. This one should die.
    01-26-2007 01:33 PM
  20. specimen38's Avatar
    One more thought, you can think of ATT offering 18 months of free services as an $849.00 incentive for switching from Verizon. That is, $250.00 to break your Verizon contract + $599.00 to purchase the iPhone = $849.00.


    Very thought provoking post, whether or not they give anything away.
    01-26-2007 01:52 PM
  21. Pearl_Diva's Avatar
    You will see this new interface and display on a non-phone ipod.

    Saying something about that now would cannibalize sales of existing iPods, so that was not mentioned. I don't know when that would be released though, but there's no reason for Apple to wait until June, as the playback portions of the device seem complete.

    But you should really ask in a new thread. This one should die.
    Well notice the bickering stopped?

    On the other hand, the 5.5 gen U2 iPod is still nice and I may still get it anyway. Even if a new one is released before June. I can just sell my other one to buy the new one.

    People are still selling 4th gen and mini iPods on Craig's List.
    01-26-2007 03:36 PM
  22. cjdaniel's Avatar
    Verizon has the greatest customer market share, no? just asking, but if so, that might suggest why they (T/Cingular) are aiming at them.
    Cingular has the largest share already, Verizon being next. The reason they are going after Verizon is the customer base is not as concerned about price.

    Sprint and T-Maybe are both discount carriers. They are both doing terrible. Sprint is doing especially bad already losing big numbers to other carriers.

    Stupidest move in the world was to buy Nextel.
    01-26-2007 04:16 PM
  23. oalvarez's Avatar
    hey, u and i agree on something, actually, two things. the nextel purchase/integration is causing real havoc on their profitability. one thing they do have going for them is a widespread network that someone could potentially care about. and yes, verizon customers are much less price sensitive but perhaps willing to pay for the services that they're not able to receive by other, lesser expensive carriers within their geographic area.

    agreed: stupidest move in the world was to buy Nextel
    01-26-2007 04:36 PM
  24. archie's Avatar
    But you should really ask in a new thread. This one should die.
    Why do you think this thread should die? Do you really believe that Cingular's top brass would confide in Briam Lame of Gizmodo and no one else?

    Seriously, this is the last person on earth that I would trust on this issue.

    Second would probably be Surur.
    01-27-2007 04:56 PM
  25. Chatter's Avatar
    The thread should die because it's basically a soapbox for you to demonstrate your ignorance.

    Marc
    01-27-2007 09:47 PM
57 123
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD