05-26-10 12:28 PM
35 12
tools
  1. sivan's Avatar
    A long, interesting and pretty savvy analysis of each manufacturer's current standing and prospects.

    Smartphones Bloodbath 1Q 2010: Full Market Analysis - Bright Side Of News*

    Key points:

    1. Nokia is doing great, whatever bloggers think. Has good prospects even in smartphones
    2. RIM is doing great, whatever bloggers think. Messaging is the secret, especially with younger users. Interestingly, RIM is threatened not by iPhone or Android, but by low end manufacturers and Nokia who are onto the importance of messaging
    3. Apple is doing well financially, but the iPhone's growth is flat
    4. Android is surging. HTC is the main beneficiary, Motorola doing well in smartphones but losing its dumbphone market which is serious
    5. Palm and Microsoft irrelevant for now

    Worth reading.
    05-24-10 02:55 AM
  2. Reparkable's Avatar
    IPhones growth is flat? That seems doubtful

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-24-10 03:14 AM
  3. NinjaB's Avatar
    ^^i'm not that surprised.. everyone who really wanted one has one by now.. and they are admittedly still pretty competitive in the smartphone market even though the 3G is 2 years old, so people who bought 3G's really haven't been in dire need to upgrade to the 3GS.. I still have multiple friends still rocking the first gen...

    then a ton of people, including current iPhone and non-iPhone users, who did want to upgrade but have been holding off buying a 3G or 3GS ever since the new iPhone was announced...
    Last edited by NinjaB; 05-24-10 at 03:36 AM.
    05-24-10 03:30 AM
  4. Branta's Avatar
    No surprises there. Simple logic suggests any new entrant to the market is likely to take some share from existing players. Even RIM's decline from almost absolute dominance is to be expected as buyers get a wider range of choices. (Exactly the same happened many years ago to Ford's "Model T" in the mass produced car market)
    05-24-10 04:18 AM
  5. reeneebob's Avatar
    ****** who wrote it sure is full of himself. "I predicted" "I said" "Aren't I captain cerebral"...STFU dude.

    Oh and FYI - Palm is hardly irrelevant. They may have gotten purchased by HP, but I had to wait for my Pre because the stores here can't keep them in stock. Irrelevant? Really? Okie...I guess not being able to keep them in stock makes them irrelevant.

    Can't take an article seriously when it's so full of self pleasuring bragging.
    05-24-10 08:56 PM
  6. avt123's Avatar
    Yea a lot of this stuff was pretty obvious. We will see when the new iPhone comes out how flat the growth is...
    05-24-10 09:09 PM
  7. flakbook's Avatar
    IPhones growth is flat? That seems doubtful

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    I agree. 4G will kickstart it.
    05-24-10 09:23 PM
  8. WillieLee's Avatar
    ****** who wrote it sure is full of himself. "I predicted" "I said" "Aren't I captain cerebral"...STFU dude.

    Oh and FYI - Palm is hardly irrelevant. They may have gotten purchased by HP, but I had to wait for my Pre because the stores here can't keep them in stock. Irrelevant? Really? Okie...I guess not being able to keep them in stock makes them irrelevant.

    Can't take an article seriously when it's so full of self pleasuring bragging.
    They can't be kept in stock because no one is ordering them in numbers that matter. Palm is holding onto a lot of stock that they can't move. I'm sure you love your phone but they've poured billions into the device with very little to show for it.
    05-24-10 11:48 PM
  9. Masahiro's Avatar
    ****** who wrote it sure is full of himself. "I predicted" "I said" "Aren't I captain cerebral"...STFU dude.
    Tomi T Ahonen 3G Strategy Consultant Business Expert Community UMTS Consultancy TomiAhonen Profits Marketing Competition
    05-24-10 11:58 PM
  10. westla7's Avatar
    I agree. 4G will kickstart it.
    Not as much as 4G/HD (which is really bringing front-facing camera, and video chats, and finally separate 5Mpx camera with flash, etc.) -- but also that they are going to open it to carriers beyond of AT&T -- will definitely kickstart the growth badly. Remember the important thing - iPhone was selling *only* to AT&T. While Blackberry, Android are on all carriers.
    05-25-10 12:50 PM
  11. reeneebob's Avatar
    05-25-10 01:46 PM
  12. GlitchZero's Avatar
    Not as much as 4G/HD (which is really bringing front-facing camera, and video chats, and finally separate 5Mpx camera with flash, etc.) -- but also that they are going to open it to carriers beyond of AT&T -- will definitely kickstart the growth badly. Remember the important thing - iPhone was selling *only* to AT&T. While Blackberry, Android are on all carriers.
    And Telus. And Bell. And Rogers. And any other GSM carrier on the planet. But yeah, on planet USA, it's only AT&T.
    05-25-10 01:57 PM
  13. Masahiro's Avatar


    Sorry, he stills comes off as a know it all ******.
    Of course he is a know it all. He's a consultant. It's how he makes a living. Companies won't pay him if he seemed unsure about what he was saying.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-25-10 02:17 PM
  14. sivan's Avatar
    I think he comes across as a bit over the top, but it's worth reading. I also enjoyed some of his talks in videos elsewhere, he's pretty savvy.

    What's interesting is the contrast between the pervasive "RIM is dying" sentiment on this board and blogosphere vs. the reality of RIM actually doing very well. That should be interesting to ponder.

    What does RIM's success mean, is it because it serves people's needs better? If not, then what other explanations do you offer?
    05-25-10 02:55 PM
  15. sivan's Avatar
    Not as much as 4G/HD (which is really bringing front-facing camera, and video chats, and finally separate 5Mpx camera with flash, etc.) -- but also that they are going to open it to carriers beyond of AT&T -- will definitely kickstart the growth badly. Remember the important thing - iPhone was selling *only* to AT&T. While Blackberry, Android are on all carriers.
    Well that argument ignores the reason the iPhone is exclusive to AT&T. For it to be universally available, Apple will have to settle for either lower margins, or force carriers to offer it with more expensive monthly plans. The heart of the issue is that the iPhone is more expensive than other phones, that's why it's exclusive to AT&T.

    You can't just say, "wait until it's on other carriers", and ignore the price issue. That is a disadvantage of the iPhone, and one that Apple might be perfectly fine with, they've always been a niche player enjoying high margins.
    05-25-10 02:59 PM
  16. fearmychickens's Avatar
    Well that argument ignores the reason the iPhone is exclusive to AT&T. For it to be universally available, Apple will have to settle for either lower margins, or force carriers to offer it with more expensive monthly plans. The heart of the issue is that the iPhone is more expensive than other phones, that's why it's exclusive to AT&T.

    You can't just say, "wait until it's on other carriers", and ignore the price issue. That is a disadvantage of the iPhone, and one that Apple might be perfectly fine with, they've always been a niche player enjoying high margins.
    How is the iPhone more expensive than other phones? And the reason it's exclusive to AT&T is because Verizon turned it down years ago when Apple was trying to release it on their network.

    Bottom line is BB, iPhone, and Android are the three most popular smartphone platforms in the U.S. right now. RIM is still #1 but that can easily change.
    05-25-10 03:10 PM
  17. sivan's Avatar
    How is the iPhone more expensive than other phones? And the reason it's exclusive to AT&T is because Verizon turned it down years ago when Apple was trying to release it on their network.
    No, Verizon not carrying the iPhone doesn't entail exclusivity with AT&T. The exclusivity with AT&T gives AT&T customers in return for increased revenue-sharing or subsidy with Apple. For the iPhone to be available on all carriers, Apple will have to forgo the extra revenue from the exclusivity deal.

    Bottom line is BB, iPhone, and Android are the three most popular smartphone platforms in the U.S. right now. RIM is still #1 but that can easily change.
    Please don't use "bottom line" unless you can convincingly explain something. Saying that something can change says nothing. Explain why and how this can change and don't leave out the rest of the world.
    05-25-10 03:23 PM
  18. fearmychickens's Avatar
    No, Verizon not carrying the iPhone doesn't entail exclusivity with AT&T. The exclusivity with AT&T gives AT&T customers in return for increased revenue-sharing or subsidy with Apple. For the iPhone to be available on all carriers, Apple will have to forgo the extra revenue from the exclusivity deal.



    Please don't use "bottom line" unless you can convincingly explain something. Saying that something can change says nothing. Explain why and how this can change and don't leave out the rest of the world.
    I'm pretty sure AT&T paid Apple to keep the iPhone exclusive. So I don't think your reason is correct.
    Last edited by fearmychickens; 05-25-10 at 03:30 PM.
    05-25-10 03:28 PM
  19. sivan's Avatar
    I'm pretty sure AT&T paid Apple to keep the iPhone exclusive. So I don't think your reason is correct.
    What? That's exactly what I'm talking about. AT&T is paying Apple for this exclusivity. Saying "wait until it's on other carriers" means Apple will settle for less from each carrier. Historically, Apple has never settled for low margins on its products.

    And I can use bottom line if I want because what I stated is fact. I don't have to explain anything.
    Your "bottom line" is meaningless.
    05-25-10 03:33 PM
  20. reeneebob's Avatar
    Synthmole, your argument is flawed for the simple fact that Apple has happily provided iPhone to Bell, Telus, Rogers. All three major players up here have the iPhone. Apple was more than happy to break the Rogers exclusivity the first chance they got - which blows your theory out of the water. I know it's hard to remember there's other countries with the iPhone, but since Apple has to okay everything the fact that they expanded availability up here and they sure as **** aren't settling for less makes we wonder what's taking so long down there - except Verizon shot themselves in the foot for badmouthing Apple so much and then thinking Apple would love to give them iPhone.

    I know, Canada isn't the powerhouse that the US is, we only invented the BlackBerry so our cellular ways mean nothing to the US, but I don't think Apple craves exclusivity. Not when in the course of a hockey game I see iPhone commercials branded to Bell, Telus AND Rogers all on the same channel and within 2 hours of each other. And Apple has no problem watering down it's exclusivity - iPod and iPhone are sold as Costco and WalMart. There's a high end user base!
    Last edited by reeneebob; 05-25-10 at 03:52 PM.
    05-25-10 03:49 PM
  21. kbz1960's Avatar
    I'm pretty sure AT&T paid Apple to keep the iPhone exclusive. So I don't think your reason is correct.
    Sick those mean chickens on him!

    Be afraid.............very very afraid
    05-25-10 03:54 PM
  22. sivan's Avatar
    Of course it's available on other carriers that offer tiered or metered pricing. In the US the price point of $200 and flat rate unlimited plans force carriers and manufacturers to share revenue in other ways. Are iPhone plans comparable to other smartphone plans on those carriers? If not, it's because they have more latitude to charge more for the iPhone, whereas in the US it's hard.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-25-10 07:59 PM
  23. Jaredius's Avatar

    What does RIM's success mean, is it because it serves people's needs better? If not, then what other explanations do you offer?
    My explanation for that is the success of their entry-level 83xx. A success because of it's low price and it's availability on many carriers. Once those 83xx users who are new to the smartphone world realize the limitations of that device compared to higher-end smartphones that are now at much lower prices, and they are due for an upgrade discount I think many of them won't show the brand loyalty some of us here have shown. I bet even some loyal BB owners will inevitably take the leap because of RIM's feet-dragging on getting competitive hardware and a more robust web experience.

    Other brands have quickly closed the gap and are now competing with the Blackberry's strengths, but put mildly BB hasn't quite done the same.

    I really hope the 9800 is that phone which brings back the "wow" to RIM. Imo I think they are going to need it (the "wow") sooner than later.
    Last edited by Jaredius; 05-25-10 at 09:12 PM.
    05-25-10 09:09 PM
  24. sivan's Avatar
    My explanation for that is the success of their entry-level 83xx. A success because of it's low price and it's availability on many carriers. Once those 83xx users who are new to the smartphone world realize the limitations of that device compared to higher-end smartphones that are now at much lower prices, and they are due for an upgrade discount I think many of them won't show the brand loyalty some of us here have shown. I bet even some loyal BB owners will inevitably take the leap because of RIM's feet-dragging on getting competitive hardware and a more robust web experience.
    Okay, but doesn't this suggest that demand for good messaging is much stronger than the multimedia/app device like iPhones and Android?

    Other brands have quickly closed the gap and are now competing with the Blackberry's strengths, but put mildly BB hasn't quite done the same.
    I beg to differ on this point. They have merely offered a different set of strengths, doing away with keyboards and relegating phone and messaging to secondary status.

    I really hope the 9800 is that phone which brings back the "wow" to RIM. Imo I think they are going to need it (the "wow") sooner than later.
    Well, I think it depends how much that "wow" will cost, right? Because those users of low end devices aren't gonna pony up for huge screens and Snapdragons and hook themselves on huge monthly bills.

    So far I'm hearing that users simply don't know what they're missing and those that enjoy BlackBerries are blind. Seems like a stretch and refusal to look at reality.
    05-25-10 09:30 PM
  25. reeneebob's Avatar
    Of course it's available on other carriers that offer tiered or metered pricing. In the US the price point of $200 and flat rate unlimited plans force carriers and manufacturers to share revenue in other ways. Are iPhone plans comparable to other smartphone plans on those carriers? If not, it's because they have more latitude to charge more for the iPhone, whereas in the US it's hard.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    *sigh*

    3GS on Bell and Telus, only available with a 3 yr contract, $199 for 8GB and $299 for 16GB.

    3G? $99 only available for 3 yr contract.

    I could be wrong...but isn't that THE EXACT SAME AS THE US PRICING??!?!?

    Price plans are the same regardless of it being WinMobile, WebOS, BIS or Apple data patterns and plans.

    So again, your argument is flawed and just plain wrong.
    05-25-10 09:45 PM
35 12
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD