Dec. 12 – Bloomberg:

Apple Computer Inc. may serve as its own wireless carrier if it delivers an iPod-based cell phone next year and rely on the company’s network of retail stores to sell service contracts for the device, UBS AG said.

To operate as a mobile virtual network operator, or MVNO, Apple may partner with Cingular Wireless LLC to provide wireless service for a so-called iPhone, Benjamin Reitzes, a UBS analyst in New York, said today in a note.

Apple may announce the iPhone in March or April, relying on its network of 174 retail stores to promote the device, he said. The iPhone may include 4 gigabytes to 8 gigabytes of flash memory and a digital camera, Reitzes said, citing unnamed sources. If the Cupertino, California-based company sells 5 million phones in 2007 for an average selling price of $300, that would add $1.5 billion to Apple’s sales, he said.



  1. Higghawker says:

    They wont be able to make enough of these! Kudos Apple!!!

  2. bill says:

    I’m going to order 100 million of them.

  3. tallwookie says:

    good idea? yes.
    will it sell? probably.
    will it flop? mebbe.

    how the hell are they going to implement this? I work in the telecom industry (cellphone tech support) and I dont see how apple can roll this out – there is too much crap to deal with.

    FCC & spectrum licensing
    Tower co-location & tower leaseing
    Roaming agreements with existing carriers
    Construction of the actual telecom network systems & subsystems
    Implementation of all of the above in a timely fashion
    And hiring & training system engineers, tech reps, financial & customer service

    Conclusion:
    manufacturer of devices? yes
    Carrier? Not a chance in hell

  4. bob willson says:

    wimax has up to a 30 mile range. how about a VOIP phone, each apple store is the main wimax location. of course it would use your .Mac account.

  5. tallwookie says:

    and how many channels per wimax tower? is 30 miles the actual distance or the usual thoeretical-not-gunna-happen bullshit?

  6. jason says:

    If apple does this it will be under the MVNO model –
    From Wikipeia –
    A mobile virtual network operator is a company that does not own a licensed frequency spectrum, but resells wireless services under their own brand name, using the network of another mobile phone operator. The first successful MVNO was Virgin Mobile, launched in the United Kingdom in 1999. Before this, Sense attempted to start an MVNO service in the Scandinavian countries, but failed. A similar strategy was pursued by MCI in the early 90s. [1]

    This is how they can “instantly” have netowrk all over the country. It is not as hard as you would think to setup a business like this.

  7. Mark says:

    Looks like Apple is doing the copying these days.

  8. Sundog says:

    Me too, Me too!

  9. The Other Tom says:

    tallwookie:
    They are not going to be a brand new carrier and instantly cover America. If you work in the telecom industry, you of all people should know what an MVNO is.

    All it means is that it would piggy back on top of a major carrier and utilize the unused portions of their licensed spectrum, for instance Cingular, like its says in the article. This is the same thing Amp’d mobile, Virgin, Helio, and all the other specialty “carriers” do.

    Check out this for more technical info.

    As far as requiring a .Mac account for wifi access? No way in hell would that ever take off.

  10. James Hill says:

    I’ll buy two, one for me and one for my wife… along with a few iTVs.

    I’ve been predicting that they’ll take the MVNO path for some time, as it fits more into Apple’s business model to control the whole thing (from a customer’s viewpoint) end to end.

    The most interesting aspect ot me is the OS used on the phone and it’s UI. Across the board I’ve been displeased with the front ends on these devices. Giving me a device with a clean interface that becomes a further extention of my computer (beyond what the iPod currently does) in addition to a decent cell phone is the kind of device that can reshape an industry…

    …just like the iPod did.

  11. Gig says:

    #3…Here’s a clue.

    “Apple may partner with Cingular Wireless LLC to provide wireless service”

  12. gquaglia says:

    The most interesting aspect ot me is the OS used on the phone

    At least me know it won’t use the crappy Win mobile OS. It would be nice if they incorporated smart phone feature in the phone as well, such as a PIM that would sync with the desktop. I also like the slider design and landscape mode depicted in this article. That would be the best design.

  13. Bill 2 says:

    make that 200 million of them…

  14. Named says:

    Holy LG Chocolate…

  15. tallwookie says:

    #9 – Yeah i’m aware of mvno, but I dont see it as an actual solution.

    Reasoning – Apple is a very popular brand. Lots of people are going to get away from their current cellular provider and jump onto the apple-bandwagon. This is going to crash or at the very least, create severy issues on the host system (Cingular = POS – I’ve worked as an advanced data tech for them, I KNOW their network sucks ass). This is a bad move for apple, and is going to generate very bad PR it this goes through

    Sounds like theres a lot of teh Apple luvers out there – I’m anti-apple, but thats cuz I’m not in gfx design or music industry, which mac’s excell at. They WONT excell at providing cellular service.

    #3 – yeah, I know

  16. Drew says:

    tallwookie, so you actually thought it would be more feasible to create their own network from the bottom than to be virtual?

    Cingular doesn’t suck as bad as you think it does. Apple must control customer service, etc. and I believe the route they are looking to go as a virtual provider is smart.

    I’m not an apple lover but if I were in their shoes, I’d go get bids from Cingular, VZW, Sprint, and Alltel. I’d go with whoever gave me the best wholesale rates. All cell companies suck equally, and all are about equally as good as each other.

  17. Larry says:

    I agree with several of the others commenters, this could turn out bad for Apple even if the iPhone itself is another great product. Reason: Apple has done well with the iPod/iTunes because they have been able to control the whole enduser experience. That won’t be the case with an iPhone. They’ll have to depend on one of the large cellular carriers for a large part of the iPhone enduser experience. About the only thing worse I can think of would be if they had to partner with a Federal Bureacracy to roll out the thing. On second thought, a Federal Bureacracy might be marginally more efficient and customer-oriented then the large cellular carriers!

  18. James Hill says:

    They’ll have to depend on one of the large cellular carriers for a large part of the iPhone enduser experience.

    You’ve managed to be wrong in two different ways.

    1. Assuming the phone is GSM, which I think is a safe bet as to allow for use in Euorpe, contracts could be struck with multiple GSM companies (Cingular, T-Mobile). While that limits them to the quality of the GSM signal in a given area, it puts them in control by selecting which GSM network to use in that area… and could be used to drive quality improvements (more towers) in that area.

    2. As opposed to having to depend on one large, closed industry to purchase music? The phone companies sound like a cake walk compared to those assholes.

  19. Sam says:

    Good luck helio! not a chance this will succeed.

    (this message is posted via my windows mobile phone, I am on a train cruising at 75mph…listening to tunes using pocket wm player and reading these posts on pocket ie)

  20. tallwookie says:

    #16 – have you worked for cingular? if so, then you can comment on their network. if not, thanks for the 2 cents, but you have no data to back it up with.

    I’m not saying that creating a network from the “bottom up” is feasible either – but – the way apple is going about it is just plain wrong. It wont work – not a chance in hell. Cingualr doesnt have shit for data roaming agreements between the company (well, theres a few, but one major) that controls the cellular service in RURAL areas. Why is this important? its not if those goodie-two-shoes apple lovers dont ever leave thier home metropolitan area. *IF* they do, their “up shit creek, without a paddle”.

    I’m gonna say “I told you so” in advance.

  21. bill says:

    What if Apple bought a wireless carrier? I think they have the cash. They certainly could print the stock…
    Interesting world… then they would have 2000+ stores from less than 200. right? What the hell call them selves Apple/AT&T
    Then we’d have to rename PacBell Park all over again!
    Happy Freaking Holidayz

  22. JP Loh says:

    If M$ got to build a phone, why not Apple?

  23. C0D3R says:

    I’d like to see Aple do something more than continualy rolling out smaller iPods and larger iTunes and labeling it “innovation.” Getting these iPhone things to catch fire in your pocket will be the true challenge. Oh, and you should be able to download something that lets you run Windows XP embedded on the phones to. Dial-tone Camp or something.

  24. James Hill says:

    More like “fuck your phone up camp”, if you want to run a M$ product on it.

  25. Brian says:

    Why do people insist this vaporware, the iPhone, would set the market on fire?

    Americans, as a whole, do not care about tons of features on their phones. All the market wants is a cheap flip phone that sounds good.

    Multimedia phones will garner attention and oohs and ahhs, but the majority of cell phone users in the US have absolutely no interest in playing MP3s on their phones – no matter who makes the phone.

    Rumor on gizmodo.com is that it will launch Monday…and the US will let out a collective yawn.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 4477 access attempts in the last 7 days.