backtop


Print 24 comment(s) - last by cuddy83.. on Mar 2 at 2:51 PM


  (Source: appadvice.com)
T-Mobile USA CEO Philipp Humm says the loss of customers is due to the lack of an iPhone 4S to sell

T-Mobile was hit pretty hard in fourth quarter 2011 with the loss of over 700,000 customers, which was attributed to the fact that T-Mobile is the only carrier that doesn't offer the iPhone 4S.

T-Mobile is trailing behind the United States' three largest mobile carriers, Verizon, AT&T and Sprint. All three of these carriers sell the iPhone 4S, but T-Mobile does not. According to Philipp Humm, T-Mobile USA CEO, this is the reason for many of the contract deactivations in Q4 2011.

By the end of Q4 2011, T-Mobile had 33.2 million customers, which is a decrease from the 33.7 million customers it had at the end of Q3 2011. The carrier lost 706,000 customers total.

T-Mobile has wanted to carry the iPhone 4S in order to stay competitive for some time now, but Apple executives have a problem with the spectrum band which T-Mobile's network operates in.

In addition to iPhone-related woes, T-Mobile USA reported service revenues of $4.57 billion in Q4 2011, which is a decrease from $4.69 billion in Q4 2010. Also, net customer losses were 526,000 in Q4 2011, which is an increase from 23,000 in Q4 2010.

Despite some disappointment, T-Mobile highlighted a few positives from the Q4 2011 results, such as an adjusted OIBDA increase of 4.3 percent year-on-year to $1.4 billion.

“In 2011, T-Mobile USA showed solid financial performance with a remarkable adjusted OIBDA turn-around in the second half of the year, despite nine challenging months during the pending acquisition. We further increased our 4G data speed to 42 Mbps, expanded our sales channels, launched 25 new 4G handsets and significantly improved our operational efficiency. As a result, adjusted OIBDA rose again year-on-year in the fourth quarter of 2011 and branded data ARPU grew 20 percent year-on-year as smartphone adoption accelerated,” said Humm. “However, not carrying the iPhone led to a significant increase in contract deactivations in the fourth quarter of 2011.  In 2012 and 2013, T-Mobile USA will invest to get the business back to growth, including an incremental $1.4 billion investment in its network modernization initiative, which will total a $4 billion investment over time.”

T-Mobile also mentioned that it will finally be rolling out a LTE network, which Verizon, AT&T and Sprint have either launched or are preparing to launch. T-Mobile's LTE network will be built using the $1 billion worth of spectrum and $3 billion in cash from the failed AT&T merger agreement, where AT&T wanted to acquire T-Mobile for $39 billion last year. However, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Department of Justice had an issue with anti-competitive practices.

T-Mobile's LTE network is expected to begin development in 2013.

AT&T and Verizon will be ahead of the curve as far as both LTE and Apple products go, since the iPad 3, which will be revealed at an event next week, will run on both of the carriers' LTE networks.

“Though we are not satisfied with the contract customer losses and the decreased total revenues, the quarterly margin improvement year-on-year was impressive," said René Obermann, CEO of Deutsche Telekom. "The spectrum gained through the break-up fee empowers T-Mobile USA to start LTE-based services in key US markets and strengthens its competitiveness."

Source: T-Mobile



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

so
By sprockkets on 2/23/2012 6:01:45 PM , Rating: 2
Who cares about those 700k customers you lost due to the iphone? Every carrier that offers it barely makes any money off of it to loses money since apple forces them to sell it for $200 even though the phone is $600.

Just look at Verizon and Sprint and what they are going through due to offering the iphone.




RE: so
By TakinYourPoints on 2/23/2012 6:45:30 PM , Rating: 3
This is common practice, most high end smartphones cost around that much and are also sold for $200. Way before the iPhone came out you'd be paying at least $600 for an unlocked top of the line Palm or Blackberry.

The first Google result for an unlocked Galaxy S II, $590 on Amazon, marked down from $900. T-Mobile sells it starting at $230 with 2 year contract: http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-i9100-Unlocked-Smart...

An unlocked Galaxy Note is around $700 unlocked and sells with contract for $300.

About the only place carriers aren't hit as hard are lower end smartphones or Blackberry devices which seem to be less expensive across the board. Then again those also cost less for the customer or are given away for free with a contract.

It appears that AT&T/Verizon/Sprint are getting squeezed because all they can sell from Apple are the highest end devices, even with the iPhone 4 and 3GS as >$100 or free options.

I haven't done any sort of breakdown, but are lower end devices more profitable for cell carriers? I know that they push Android over iOS or WP7, presumably because of greater availability and (presumably) profit on cheaper devices. Android has a lot of phones in the low end. Then again, I don't have enough information to make assumptions there, so I'm curious.


RE: so
By sprockkets on 2/23/2012 8:08:43 PM , Rating: 3
Not sure. But the conspiracy theorists seem to think that Android rarely gets updated because of the carriers wanting to sell more hardware.

Either you are Android doing what you can to sell phones, WP7 trying to keep it clean but with no carrier support since they want more control, and Apple who knows the world is their b1tch and can squeeze profit from everyone but themselves and get away with it.


RE: so
By TakinYourPoints on 2/23/2012 8:41:05 PM , Rating: 1
On the subject of carrier control, the Apple and Microsoft approach is the best for consumers. It is a shame that carriers are burying WP7 at the expense of Android because of the amount of control that Microsoft wants, which is pretty much the same level of control Apple that gets.

The amount of control carriers and hardware manufacturers have over Android is one of my main issues with it, and it is a big reason why carriers love/push it. The fact that a phone that is well within a two year contract period does not get a major OS update is weak. Even the flagship Droid X from a year ago isn't getting official ICS support, while an iPhone 3GS from 2009 runs iOS 5 and an original WP7 device from 2010 runs 7.5.


RE: so
By mcnabney on 2/24/2012 9:31:43 AM , Rating: 3
That is more about the manufacturers not keeping their devices updated, not the carriers.


RE: so
By TakinYourPoints on 2/24/2012 1:17:55 PM , Rating: 2
Got it. The point still stands, inconsistent OS upgrades are bad for consumers.


RE: so
By MScrip on 2/24/2012 4:07:49 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Every carrier that offers it barely makes any money off of it to loses money since apple forces them to sell it for $200 even though the phone is $600.

True... but the carrier also makes $80 a month for 24 months.

They might lose $400 on the phone itself... but they end up netting $1600 with service fees over the life of the contract.

Carriers are in business to sell service plans... not hardware.

BTW... most subsidized smartphones are around $600 but sold for $200.

I've read plenty of articles in the past few days saying "Carriers lose money on the iPhone"

I simply don't believe it... not when they charge $30 for 2GB of data and $20 for unlimited texting.

Texts are the biggest scam of all... since they piggyback on top of other services and use hardly any resources at all.

So... the iPhone might cost the carriers a little more money in the beginning... but all smartphones make the same money month after month thanks to those expensive service plans.


I just switched to Tmobile
By Fenixgoon on 2/23/2012 7:36:59 PM , Rating: 4
They're the only ones who don't seem to be raping and pillaging their customer's wallets and aren't scum of the universe.

talk, text, and unlimited data (2gb @ 4g speed) for $60/mo with a fully paid phone.




RE: I just switched to Tmobile
By MABManZ on 2/23/2012 8:50:27 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed. I'm on the unlimited value deal, only $50 a month but you buy your own phone. Saves so much money in the long run even for high-end devices.

I think these losses have much more to do w/ the failed merger than the lack of iPhones. People jumped ship because they didn't want to be under AT&T or have their carrier in limbo.

Since the iPhone (any model) is not even an LTE device, how can you blame lack of LTE for losses and also point to lack of iPhones? T-Mobile's HSPA+ is pretty darned good even if it's not LTE.


RE: I just switched to Tmobile
By atlmann10 on 2/24/2012 12:05:03 AM , Rating: 2
I have been on T-Mous since last may now. I have no issues VoIP over wireless is included so I get a strong connection at home which I cannot do on ATT, Verizon, or Sprint unless I pay them extra every month and or by a wifi router from them. I pay less for 2 Android smart phones with free texting, unlimited minutes, and data on both than I would for one on ATT or Verizon and while Sprint is pretty even I would have to buy a wifi router from them for $100 and pay them an xtra 10 monthly on each phone to use it, or at least I would have when I had them for 28 days in October of 2010, after which I returned there EPIC and got my money back because I could not connect at all at home and they refused to fix it even though they could have (and they lost 4 active units in the bargain which are all 4 now on T-Mous).


RE: I just switched to Tmobile
By Chaser on 2/24/2012 12:16:45 PM , Rating: 2
On paper it sounds good. But with T-Mobile you get what you pay for.

1) Their coverage is significantly limited compared to other carriers. If you live in a decent sized city and don't leave it then T-Mobile can work for you. Try going to a rural area and drive away from the interstate and see how wonderful T-Mobile is then.

2) 4G? Please. That's the biggest farce T-Mobile tries to pull off with their advertising. It's boosted 3G speed over their comparatively limited coverage network as it is. If you are outside of a city and you don't have T-Mobile 3G data guess what you have now? 2G. Have fun with that.

3) "Unlimited data?" Right. How about telling them what happens after you go over your "limit". Unlimited. Limit. What a Dichotomy. Well I will tell you. T-Mobile throttles their "unlimited" data to something that's a fraction above dial up. yeah it's slow. Very slow and mostly useless. Unless you are waiting for the 3 line email message without attachments in central Nevada and you actually have signal.

So OK. If you live in a decent city. Don't travel and don't go over your "unlimited" limit then T-Mobile can save you $20.00 month.

As a business traveler I gave T-Mobile a try and returned it in the two week trial period thank goodness. Even locally here in a medium sized city my T-Mobile friends regularly have spotty coverage as nearly a way of life.

You get what you pay for. But count me as 699,999th.


RE: I just switched to Tmobile
By MABManZ on 2/24/2012 6:12:09 PM , Rating: 2
Perfectly happy with T-Mobile coverage in the DMV area (DC, Virginia, Maryland)

You must be a Sprint customer touting the "unlimited" data because they're the only ones that don't have a bottleneck or overcharge. And guess what, Sprint does not have LTE deployed yet either!

So what 4G speeds are you talking about?? Benchmarks have shown HSPA+ to be on par with Wimax.

It's obvious you should have a carrier with good coverage in your area. 99% of people are not traveling around the country and downloading multiple GB's of data on the road. If you are in a T-Mobile covered area then there's nothing to complain about.


RE: I just switched to Tmobile
By V-Money on 2/25/2012 1:03:06 AM , Rating: 2
I agree, I am waiting for my 2 year contract to expire so I can switch to it, although I don't pay too much now anyways. I just bought an unlocked galaxy nexus from the UK. This way I can continue to use tmobile, and should they fail me I can always switch to ATT as a backup.


lost 706,000 customers total.
By YashBudini on 2/23/2012 6:50:16 PM , Rating: 1
Carly Foulkes skirt needs to become shorter.

https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&hl=en&sourc...




RE: lost 706,000 customers total.
By carigis on 2/23/2012 9:03:34 PM , Rating: 2
carly is hot,, especially since they fixed her teeth...


RE: lost 706,000 customers total.
By dsquare86 on 2/24/2012 6:30:58 AM , Rating: 3
Those legs...


RE: lost 706,000 customers total.
By Jahooba on 2/24/2012 9:55:25 AM , Rating: 2
"Related Searches: carly foulkes feet"

Huh? Why? What's up with her feet?


Another possibility...
By albundy2 on 2/27/2012 12:31:17 PM , Rating: 2
Were it not for over $700.00 in fee's, i was going to drop all 4 of my lines. They added data to my plan without notifying me and that caused my bill to double.

I would not mind paying the extra charge for the service, but the data charges came from; updating time and date [turning phone off and on], text and picture messaging [even though i have unlimited text and picture, somehow there is data usage there?]. Those were the only things done on my phone and my family swears they did not use internet or gps on theirs.

I'm sick, so pick on my spelling/grammar all you want. There are several links if you search for this problem, here is one of them...
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/cell-phones/warning-t-mo...




RE: Another possibility...
By cuddy83 on 3/2/2012 2:51:30 PM , Rating: 1
why dont u use the community on the web page of the company to inform ur selves about the services of the company custmer service have to keep they horses when people like u doen fucking understaan a charge that u have create ur selves


I propose another explanation
By clhathat on 2/24/2012 7:38:52 AM , Rating: 2
perhaps they lost 700,000 customers because of those ads where the douche is rapping next to the hot girl




t-mobile overseas
By agent2099 on 2/24/2012 10:45:37 AM , Rating: 2
What's ironic is T-Mobile sells the iphone in Europe, just not in the U.S.




Could have been 699,999
By HoosierEngineer5 on 2/24/2012 12:01:57 PM , Rating: 2
... if only they would provide coverage in our area. We tried their service first, but no luck. They clearly have the best understanding of the technology, with Verizon next and AT&T dead last.




Subsidizing is anti-competitive
By jmunjr on 2/24/2012 12:47:38 PM , Rating: 2
This is a good example why subsidizing is anti-competitive. Apple won't make a product everyone wants for T-Mobile but will for everyone else? Why is this? Not a big enough customer base? That's nuts. Subsidizing phones gives consumers less choice and once they make a choice forces them into a narrower decision.

Heck, government subsidizes are one of the most criminal and anti-competitive actions around and I am surprised those are allowed(corruption allows them to continue)..

I wish we could ditch the subsidies and separate the phone purchase from the carrier decision...




HAHAHAHHAHA
By cuddy83 on 3/2/2012 2:40:33 PM , Rating: 2
they said they have lost that amount because of the iphone 4s they are not say the true the custmer leave tmobile because the said the will pay certain amount fora rate plan and the end up pay stuff the where not even explain wht t f aare and the also have to stick for 2 year contraactg the custmer prefer to pay the 200 early termination fee than stick around be treat aas dumb for example a clasicc unlitedd talk and text supposedly is for 69.99 and th paay the 69.99 for the unlimited min adn 20 dollars more for the unlimited text and when they aadd the data 200 mb for 10 2gb for 20 and 5gb for 30 do the math u will see the true




"I mean, if you wanna break down someone's door, why don't you start with AT&T, for God sakes? They make your amazing phone unusable as a phone!" -- Jon Stewart on Apple and the iPhone














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki