Free Newsletter
Do AT&T rivals need an iPhone killer anymore?
Free newsletter via e-mail
Tools
Another smartphone dubbed an iPhone killer launched this weekend. This time it's Sprint Nextel's Palm Pre, and by some accounts it is the strongest rival to the iPhone to date.
Sprint is smartly staying away from any iPhone comparisons this time around. A year ago it launched the Samsung Instinct, hyping the device as an iPhone killer. The operator made the comparison a major part of its push for the device, mentioning the iPhone 3G in its ad campaign and even adding a link on the official Instinct website that explained why the Instinct was better than the iPhone 3G. While the iPhone 3G continues to do well, the Instinct never made the top five.
Fast forward to June 2009 and it's clear that smartphones of all kinds are fueling growth across all operators--with more growth to come, given the fact that smartphones still represent a minority of devices in the market. That trend wasn't so clear a year ago. To me, the trend takes the pressure off carriers a bit to find an iPhone killer. Granted, the iPhone continues to generate tremendous financial metrics for AT&T, and competitors like Verizon Wireless would love to get their hands on the iPhone, but the market is so young and there's so much opportunity for both operators and device makers now that the wireless consumer understands the power of the smartphone.
Tero Kuittinen, telecom analyst with Avian Securities, recently noted that as 3G networks become widespread and device price points drop, the uptake of smartphones is likely to grow dramatically. But he also noted that smartphones have to address different niches. "We can't continue to have a $500 smartphone trend and still drive sales." Even the iPhone at a single price point would eventually have its limit.
Of course, Apple could give the mobile industry another headache today if rumors are correct in predicting that the company is introducing an iPhone priced at either $99 or $149, down from the current low end of $199. AT&T would continue to subsidize the smartphone when subscribers sign a two-year service contract.--Lynnette
Comments
Posted by Anonymous | June 8, 2009 - 6:52pm
I personally think that the Nokia N series, specifically the N95, 96, because they most of the IPhone's features and a camera. With all it's features, the IPhone doesn't have a camera!!!
Posted by Anonymous | June 9, 2009 - 4:43am
Anonymous.... The iPhone has had a camera since day 1 (iPhone 2G). Now it (the iPhone 3GS) has a 3.2MP camera and a video recorder. Your post is perplexing and wrong.
Posted by Anonymous | June 22, 2009 - 6:10am
Lynette - they don't need an Iphone killer. They need the Iphone to be given to them. If every one wants that phone they are going to leave one carrier and go to the next one to get it. That is how cable got its monopoly status and by using deceptive advertising about satellite television. There was no other alternative to offer with repect to cable. Then came Fios and U-verse. We have seen with the four services available not much going on in the lowering of bills department. I certainly haven't seen it in my state or neck of the woods!!! AT&T only has the device. AT&T and Apple are reaping the benefits solely to themselves. That is what we call stifling competition. Only people who are their customers can get it. It hurts all the carriers. I do not know why we have to keep saying this over and over again. The exclusivity deal is too long and they are taking to many customers away from their competitors.
P.S. do you really believe those comments in the paragraph - Fast forward to June 2009??? Smartphones are a minority of devices??? I'm starting to see them every where. Besides - What does that have to do with the Iphone problem??? I know you can't be saying that if there is proliferation of smartphones that it will alleviate the need and desire for the Iphone. (Not gonna happen in my book - Sorry!!!)Phones and smartphones are being announced weekly and monthly and it has not fended off the Iphone - YET!!!
Comments (3) | Post a comment