Verizon Android phones to compete with AT&T iPhone

Verizon has been hurting ever since it lost the iPhone beauty contest to
AT&T, pushing BlackBerry while scrambling for a real iPhone alternative,
which we now know to be Google Android phones (Motorola and HTC):
"Groundbreaking Agreement Between Verizon Wireless and Google to
Leverage High-Speed Network and Open Android Platform for Wireless
Innovation"
<http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/groundbreaking-agreement-between-verizon-wireless-and-google-to-leverage-high-speed-network-and-open-android-platform-for-wireless-innovation-63587582.html>
"Verizon’s Android vs. the iPhone"
<http://www.theweek.com/article/index/101263/Verizons_Android_vs_the_iPhone>
"Verizon-Android: Rotten deal for Apple and its iPhone"
<http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/10/07/verizon-android-rotten-deal-for-apple-and-its-iphone/>
"Google Chief Shows Verizon Android Phone"
<http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2353851,00.asp>
"Motorola’s Jha Sees Benefit From Verizon-Android Deal"
<http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=au7gYZTnB_kI>
"Verizon's Android Phone Passes FCC Tests"
<http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2353458,00.asp>
"Verizon Android Handset will be the Motorola Droid without MOTOBLUR
<http://www.phonesreview.co.uk/2009/10/02/verizon-android-handset-will-be-the-motorola-droid-without-motoblur/>
"Verizon Motorola DROID... More Details"
<http://phandroid.com/2009/10/01/verizon-motorola-droid-more-details/>

--
Best regards,
John <http:/navasgroup.com>

If the iPhone is really so impressive,
why do iFans keep making excuses for it?

John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> Verizon has been hurting ever since it lost the iPhone beauty contest to
> AT&T, pushing BlackBerry while scrambling for a real iPhone alternative,
> which we now know to be Google Android phones (Motorola and HTC):
> "Groundbreaking Agreement Between Verizon Wireless and Google to
> Leverage High-Speed Network and Open Android Platform for Wireless
> Innovation"
> <http://www.prnewswire.com/news-relea...t-between-veri
> zon-wireless-and-google-to-leverage-high-speed-network-and-open-android-platfo
> rm-for-wireless-innovation-63587582.html>
> "Verizon’s Android vs. the iPhone"
> <http://www.theweek.com/article/index/101263/Verizons_Android_vs_the_iPhone>
> "Verizon-Android: Rotten deal for Apple and its iPhone"
> <http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/10/...eal-for-apple-
> and-its-iphone/>
> "Google Chief Shows Verizon Android Phone"
> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2353851,00.asp>
> "Motorola’s Jha Sees Benefit From Verizon-Android Deal"
> <http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=au7gYZTnB_kI>
> "Verizon's Android Phone Passes FCC Tests"
> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2353458,00.asp>
> "Verizon Android Handset will be the Motorola Droid without MOTOBLUR
> <http://www.phonesreview.co.uk/2009/1...t-will-be-the-
> motorola-droid-without-motoblur/>
> "Verizon Motorola DROID... More Details"
> <http://phandroid.com/2009/10/01/verizon-motorola-droid-more-details/>

great, but the Android has many years of development before anyone will
compare them to an iPhone. Opensource just isn't a good model for
phones. Too many people in the mix, you need a tight team with extreme
attention to detail. Something that Google nor any of these companies
are able to do.

On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 13:38:04 -0600, Mike Hofman <info@recreate68.org>
wrote in <4accee1c$0$89876$815e3792@news.qwest.net>:

>John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> Verizon has been hurting ever since it lost the iPhone beauty contest to
>> AT&T, pushing BlackBerry while scrambling for a real iPhone alternative,
>> which we now know to be Google Android phones (Motorola and HTC):

>great, but the Android has many years of development before anyone will
>compare them to an iPhone. Opensource just isn't a good model for
>phones. Too many people in the mix, you need a tight team with extreme
>attention to detail. Something that Google nor any of these companies
>are able to do.

I think you're underestimating Google, Motorola, HTC and Verizon,
but only time will tell.

--
Best regards,
John <http:/navasgroup.com>

If the iPhone is really so impressive,
why do iFans keep making excuses for it?

John Navas schrieb:
> Verizon has been hurting ever since it lost the iPhone beauty contest to
> AT&T [...]

Huh? Beauty contest? Imagine Verizon had won that contest, only to find
out that GSM iPhones do not work on CDMA networks.

Wilfried Anders wrote:
> John Navas schrieb:
>> Verizon has been hurting ever since it lost the iPhone beauty contest to
>> AT&T [...]
>
> Huh? Beauty contest? Imagine Verizon had won that contest, only to find
> out that GSM iPhones do not work on CDMA networks.

LOL, yeah that would have been terrible. Of course the reality is that
Apple approached Verizon with the iPhone before AT&T but Verizon balked
at Apple's proposals for revenue sharing (something AT&T accepted but
that didn't last long).

Verizon's done very well without the iPhone, continuing to add customers
at a much higher rate than AT&T, with lower churn. Nearly all of AT&Ts
new postpaid subscriber growth has come only from the iPhone, and
financial analysts don't like the reliance on a single device. So the
Dell announcement should partially satisfy them that AT&T is trying to
promote other smart phones.

On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 18:05:12 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in <4acd3a77$0$1672$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>Wilfried Anders wrote:
>> John Navas schrieb:
>>> Verizon has been hurting ever since it lost the iPhone beauty contest to
>>> AT&T [...]

>Verizon's done very well without the iPhone, continuing to add customers
> at a much higher rate than AT&T, with lower churn.

Only by buying Alltel.

Dennis Strigl, Verizon's COO, admitted that the Apple iPhone, sold
exclusively in the U.S. by AT&T, had affected their sales. He said
that they saw customers moving over to AT&T for the new iPhone 3GS in
the last part of June. Apple's new iPhone went on sale in the middle
of June, just two weeks before the end of AT&T's second quarter. AT&T
reported last week it activated more than 2.4 million devices before
the end of the second quarter. AT&T's second quarter highlighted 1.4
million subscriber gains.

Verizon’s wireless churn rate continues to be the lowest in the
industry with an overall rate of 1.37 percent. Its churn rate for its
post-paid customers, or customers who pay their service monthly, was
1.01 percent. Meanwhile, AT&T reported an overall churn rate of 1.49
percent and a post-paid churn rate of 1.09 percent for the second
quarter.

That's essentially a wash.

--
Best regards,
John <http:/navasgroup.com>

If the iPhone is really so impressive,
why do iFans keep making excuses for it?

John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in
news:f6gqc55qnj1q9v3an17omfv021m8p3h1gr@4ax.com:

> On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 18:05:12 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> wrote in <4acd3a77$0$1672$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:
>
>>Wilfried Anders wrote:
>>> John Navas schrieb:
>>>> Verizon has been hurting ever since it lost the iPhone beauty
>>>> contest to AT&T [...]
>
>>Verizon's done very well without the iPhone, continuing to add
>>customers
>> at a much higher rate than AT&T, with lower churn.
>
> Only by buying Alltel.
>
Untrue, Novice. Even prior to the merger, Verizon was showing much lower
churn than AT&T. And with many reliable reports of customers leaving in
droves because of the network, AT&T may find itself worst of the bunch
once again.