Haha, nope! I just have a wee inkling about how business works. I don't mean small, sole proprietor businesses that makes people who run them think they know everything.MLAM said:
Owning An iPhone Will Cost You $4,000 In 3 Years
- Thread starter Music_Box
- Start date
Once again, you all are talking the equipment to run the entire network and most likely incluidng the digital cable, internet and voip phone services as well.MLAM said:
I was STILL talking about the network in each individual building. I STILL say the equipment to run the cable network (now I'm talking about the entire network for a 530 unit building) probably costs less than a new PC.
NOw yes, when you start branching out from there, say to 10 buildings, 100 buildings, 1000 homes, the equipment gets more and more complex and more and more costly. I never disagreed with that......
A Polish mobile operator admitted on Friday it had hired actors to stand in line for Apple Inc.'s iPhone in an attempt to generate buzz for the handheld device.
22/08/2008 10:50:42 AM
CBC News
The company, PTK Centertel, which operates under the brand name Orange Poland, said it hired the fake customers to stand in line Friday as the device went on sale for the first time in the eastern European country.
"It was a part of our marketing strategy, the concept was thought up at Orange Poland," the company told the Associated Press in an e-mail. "The aim was to 'warm up' the atmosphere around the launch of the iPhone."
In Canada and other parts of the world, genuine interest in the device led consumers to line up around the block to pay for the iPhone.
Orange Poland, however, is facing added competition from Era, the brand of rival mobile operator Polska Telefonia Cyfrowa (PTC). Era is also scheduled to begin selling the iPhone on Friday. There were no lineups outside Era retail stores, according to numerous reports.
Poland is one of the fastest-growing wireless markets in Europe, according to a February report from IE Market Research, a Vancouver-based research firm. IEMR said Poland's subscriber growth rate is expected to be about 22 per cent over the next three years. Poland has a subscriber base of about 43 million as of 2007, the company said.
http://technology.sympatico.msn.cbc...line=True&subtitle=&detect=&abc=abc&date=True
22/08/2008 10:50:42 AM
CBC News
The company, PTK Centertel, which operates under the brand name Orange Poland, said it hired the fake customers to stand in line Friday as the device went on sale for the first time in the eastern European country.
"It was a part of our marketing strategy, the concept was thought up at Orange Poland," the company told the Associated Press in an e-mail. "The aim was to 'warm up' the atmosphere around the launch of the iPhone."
In Canada and other parts of the world, genuine interest in the device led consumers to line up around the block to pay for the iPhone.
Orange Poland, however, is facing added competition from Era, the brand of rival mobile operator Polska Telefonia Cyfrowa (PTC). Era is also scheduled to begin selling the iPhone on Friday. There were no lineups outside Era retail stores, according to numerous reports.
Poland is one of the fastest-growing wireless markets in Europe, according to a February report from IE Market Research, a Vancouver-based research firm. IEMR said Poland's subscriber growth rate is expected to be about 22 per cent over the next three years. Poland has a subscriber base of about 43 million as of 2007, the company said.
http://technology.sympatico.msn.cbc...line=True&subtitle=&detect=&abc=abc&date=True
Music_Box said:
Well, let's see.
If you get the rogers $30 a month for 6 gigs of data plan= 30x36=1080+tax
$40 a month for my talking minutes=40x36=1440+tax
$15 a month for unlimited text,mms, voice mail=15x40=600
6.95 saf. 6.95x36=250.20
$1080+1440+600+250=$3370+tax.
$$349 for the iphone itself from rogers+$3719+ all the taxes on that.
So really it is costing me that with a windows phone and not an iphone. So in the end if you use your data then it is about the same as everything else out there.
Iphone is no more or no less then any other data intensive phone.
Music_Box said:So in other words, it's $30/month for the morons who get the data plan but then in 3 months they will have to drop their pants and take it from behind from the Rogers serial rapist
No. When you get that promo plan it is yours until you tell them you dont want it anymore. Why do you like to drop your pants?
People's hatred for Rogers have obviously masked their intelligence. Bottom line is it will cost you about $100 a month for ANY phone service with data access. I guess all the telecom companies are satanic in that sense.
i thought this thread is about the iphone which run on wireless network, not about cable network that run mostly on coaxial cable.tboy said:
Don't you know the the world is more than just the building you locked yourself in? Do you know what it takes to maintain and support a network? the cost of the equipment? maybe you should request to have just the cable installed in the building but not have any service delivered to it.tboy said:
that's more like it, the cable in the building is not what you are paying for, it is the network where the money goes to.tboy said:
You wingnut, my whole line of posts was in response to someone bringing up the costs of maintaining robbers coax cables.....which is pretty much NIL.captainc said:
Also, it seems to me the big equipment investment isn't necessarily due to all the various technologies in use, but dependant upon the number of users and areas serviced. Is this assumption semi-correct?
If so, then for every piece of equipment they have to install you can extrapolate that that investment is a result of adding x number of users, paying x number of dollars per month. So (according to their financial statements for 2007) one can assume for $1.00 they spend, they earn $9.00 in profits (before expenses).
Check out the Financial Ratios section from this link:
http://www.hoovers.com/rogers-communications/--ID__42405,ticker__RCI--/free-co-fin-factsheet.xhtml
Robbers operates at 1.82 (I guess its to 1.82 to 1?) and the industry standard is 0.82. SO I have to assume that for every dollar they spend, they make .82 in net profit....PFG IMO.
Or so they'd have you believe. How about because we're used to and willing to pay high fees for other services in the communication monopoly?Compromised said:
I know the GTA has a much higher population density than much of the US.
Please read the title of the thread.tboy said:
FYI, next session in the esl class is reading comprehension.
it seems to you uh?? trying to look outside of your building? maybe you can be more specific with examples before making the assumption?tboy said:
profit is not allowed? maybe you should go to china and live a communist life.tboy said:
No...
...not true. TELUS and Bell are building 3G networks as we speak, and the CRTC just conducted spectrum auctions which will introduce at least two new wireless players in most major markets.
I remained stunned at how comfortable people are with talking out of their ass and presenting it as fact....
emvee said:
...not true. TELUS and Bell are building 3G networks as we speak, and the CRTC just conducted spectrum auctions which will introduce at least two new wireless players in most major markets.
I remained stunned at how comfortable people are with talking out of their ass and presenting it as fact....
The population density of Toronto
Additionally, the population density of Canada pales in comparison to the U.S.
You couldn't build a wireless network for JUST Toronto and have the numbers work...certainly not for anything less than what Canadians pay now....think of it this way...both AT&T / Cingular AND Verizon have more people on their networks in New York than there are PEOPLE in Toronto....indeed, both have more people on their networks in New York than either Bell or TELUS have subscribers period.
It IS a different business model...no question.
That said...your point is valid...it is much like why Canadians pay more for cars that are manufactured 10kms from their home and the dealership they purchase them at. Why? Because you always have...and don't seem to have a problem with it. This is of course very recently changing...enough people have asked "wtf", that the auto makers responded.
Hopefully the same will occur when the wireless spectrum auction winners have their networks complete and start putting phones on the street. Previous experience has shown us that they will damn near GIVE those phones away in order to gt the cash flow required to pay back the loans they took to buy that hundreds of millions of dollars in spectrum...you simply MUST impregnate the network ASAP to offset your sunken capital costs (plus those loans undoubtedly came with financial benchmarks and milestone commitments that include subscriber counts). It will be interesting to see how the established players respond.
...pales in comparison to places like New York, DC and other East coast cities in the U.S.basketcase said:
Additionally, the population density of Canada pales in comparison to the U.S.
You couldn't build a wireless network for JUST Toronto and have the numbers work...certainly not for anything less than what Canadians pay now....think of it this way...both AT&T / Cingular AND Verizon have more people on their networks in New York than there are PEOPLE in Toronto....indeed, both have more people on their networks in New York than either Bell or TELUS have subscribers period.
It IS a different business model...no question.
That said...your point is valid...it is much like why Canadians pay more for cars that are manufactured 10kms from their home and the dealership they purchase them at. Why? Because you always have...and don't seem to have a problem with it. This is of course very recently changing...enough people have asked "wtf", that the auto makers responded.
Hopefully the same will occur when the wireless spectrum auction winners have their networks complete and start putting phones on the street. Previous experience has shown us that they will damn near GIVE those phones away in order to gt the cash flow required to pay back the loans they took to buy that hundreds of millions of dollars in spectrum...you simply MUST impregnate the network ASAP to offset your sunken capital costs (plus those loans undoubtedly came with financial benchmarks and milestone commitments that include subscriber counts). It will be interesting to see how the established players respond.
Last edited:
