Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Apple Tankwatch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sylvester80 who wrote (18844)	4/11/2012 9:05:25 PM
From: pyslent	Respond to of 32680

" The results show that a bulk of Sprint's customers would have joined the carrier regardless of whether the iPhone was available, and only a fraction of the customers would have left the service for the iPhone elsewhere. " There's no meat in that article. How did they come to this conclusion? Sprint said they sold 1.8 million iPhones, 40% of which were new to Sprint as customers. That's 720K gross adds that bought the iPhone. How does the analyst conclude that those customers would have come to Sprint for a different phone? Conversely, the 1.08 million Sprint customers that signed new contracts for the iPhone-- how can he be sure they would not have left Sprint otherwise? My point still stands. Every iPhone customer is incrementally profitable for Sprint, every one is accretive. That's simple math. It IS much harder to prove that those are customers that Sprint would NOT have gotten otherwise. Put another way, every iPhone customer is a net benefit, but it would have been MORE profitable if Sprint could have obtained customer more cheaply. On the other hand, a lost customer for lack of an iPhone is a lost customer.