Verizon adds subscribers, beats the street in Q2 on account of surging iPhone 4 sales; Lowell McAdam takes over as CEO
1. exidor posted on 22 Jul 2011, 07:42 2 4
Why does it seem most people who write articles about Verizon wireless can't seem to separate Verizon and Verizon wireless. This article sites stock prices. Verizon wireless is a non publicly traded company. Verizon wireless did not loose money last year. They average over the last 3 years of a profit at a 45% rate. This is sloppy journalism at best. Phonearena should be ashamed of passing this along with out obviously reading it.
4. g (unregistered) posted on 22 Jul 2011, 08:14 0 0
Where did you see Verizon Wireless pointed out in the article? I can only see Verizon, which seems like the generic term for the publicly traded company.
8. remixfa posted on 22 Jul 2011, 09:13 1 1
actually, it says verizon communications in the very first sentence and then cites stocks. Exidor is right on the money. Verizon communications is landlines, verizon wireless is cell phones. They are not the same company. VZW is private while VZC is a publicly traded company.
11. remixfa posted on 22 Jul 2011, 09:27 1 1
anyone else notice that "att had "strong" results" with a measily 330k subscribers.. but VZW just "added subscribers" at 1.3 million postpaid?
12. Gawain posted on 22 Jul 2011, 10:01 2 1
VZComm is the parent of VZW. Vodafone is a non-participating minority owner of VZW. This essentially makes VZW is specific business unit of VZComm.
If they were truly "separate" companies, then VZComm would not be including VZW's results in their quarterly and annual reports.
Vodafone keeps their interest because it is a high-growth asset, unlike the rest of the European wireless sector which is saturated.
15. taco50 (banned) posted on 22 Jul 2011, 13:34 0 1
Wrong as usual Verizon Comm owns Verizon Wireless so they're the same company just different divisions.
21. Whateverman posted on 22 Jul 2011, 19:54 0 1
I can understand the confusion with this issue, but Verizon wireless is a joint venture between two different companies. This is a different company from it's parent company.
25. taco50 (banned) posted on 23 Jul 2011, 11:42 0 1
Try reading my links below. Guess you learned something.
32. Whateverman posted on 24 Jul 2011, 00:50 0 0
Let's try and keep it civil taco. Joint ventures are typically are not considered a decision of any one company. Cello partnership is the name of the company and the name that appeared on my W2's. And in the first paragraph of that link, it confirms that Cellco Partnership is doing business as Verizon Wireless. If you talk to any VZW employees, they will tell you it is a separate company partially owned by Verizon and Vodaphone. In fact Vodaphone is one of the "departments" we used to transfer people to when they needed a gsm phone. So we all worked together to help our customers, but it is considered a separate entity. :)
22. remixfa posted on 22 Jul 2011, 22:05 1 1
Taco. Less sour cream and more research. I used to work for vzw. It is a seperately run private untraded company. It is not run by or put in as part of vz landlines quarterly earnings or stock price.
As usual you prove to be an idiot with nothing useful to say.
23. taco50 (banned) posted on 22 Jul 2011, 23:25 2 0
On June 30, 2000, the addition of GTE Wireless' assets, in connection with the merger of Bell Atlantic and GTE to form Verizon Communications, made Verizon Wireless the nation's largest wireless communications provider.
You used to work for VZW. that explains a lot. I guess you got fired and now work for a 2nd rate company.
Here's a link where Verizon communications talks about Q2 results including wireless.
This is almost too easy. You're literally wrong every time you post.
26. remixfa posted on 23 Jul 2011, 12:58 0 1
u really need to learn reading comprehension. OI. Next time I'll put it in a pop up book.
Notice in the post u responded to i said VZWireline and VZWireless, not VZCommunicatons.
Notice how I said it was not part of VZWireline or publically traded as part or like VZWireline.
Im quite aware of who the parent company and partners are.
You try so hard to discredit me you just end up looking dumber and dumber. I really dont know how much worse u could look though. Keep trying.
Maybe u should hold hands with gemini and Miz to get some extra isheep power?
28. taco50 (banned) posted on 23 Jul 2011, 14:10 0 0
Lol so which is it remix? Isn't VZwireline = VZ Communciations? So either VZW is part of them or not. If they're not how come the landline business which is called VZ Comm reported VZW results as part of their results?
Why can't you admit when you're wrong? Everyone can read what you posted above and now you're trying to twist around what you said, but it just makes you look dumber.
29. taco50 (banned) posted on 23 Jul 2011, 14:12 0 0
And lol you said it's not part of Verizon Communications. You never said VZwireline.
"Verizon communications is landlines, verizon wireless is cell phones. They are not the same company."
30. remixfa posted on 23 Jul 2011, 18:18 0 0
i corrected myself already. my original post said communications, my second post... which is the one YOU replied to said wireline.
Again, READING COMPREHENSION.
31. taco50 (banned) posted on 23 Jul 2011, 18:53 0 0
where' is this phantom post that I don't see. Also even if you changed the way you worded it you're still wrong.
24. Gawain posted on 23 Jul 2011, 07:27 1 0
Verizon Wireless most certainly is listed as a part of the assets and financial performance of Verizon Communications. In fact, even minority holdings of Verizon around the world are accounted for in their financial performance.
Verizon Communications owns 55% of the "Cellco Partnership LLC" (aka Verizon Wireless). Vodafone owns the other 45%. Vodafone assumes no active management role in Verizon Wireless. In fact, I'm pretty sure that Vodafone does not even get a dividend off their ownership. Verizon Wireless does not have its own Board of Directors.
3. davecann2 posted on 22 Jul 2011, 08:01 4 1
Uggg... another apple article and the Fandroids come out of hibernation to bash it. It’s getting tiresome... give it a rest troll!
5. exidor posted on 22 Jul 2011, 08:22 1 1
Ahh the whole second section about LTE devices while still calling Verizon. Implying its 1 and the same company. Verizon stock price and Verizon releasing 4g LTE devices. Did youjust start reading this year. Your coming off a little slow, you might be a retard.
6. snowgator posted on 22 Jul 2011, 08:45 1 0
It seems like half the story.
1) Was 1.3 million a net gain? Or is that not including what Verizon may have lost? Same question for AT&T's 379,00 new customers.
2) Was most of the 2.3 million of the iPhone's sales from existing (upgrading) Verizon consumers? Or what part of them were new contracts? Again, same question for AT&T's iPhone sales, which were from both the iPhone 4 and the 50.00$ iPhone3GS.
While these numbers may be harder to come by as the carriers don't want to be seen losing customers, some of the really smart people have most likely figured it out. Really curious as to these results.
7. networkdood posted on 22 Jul 2011, 09:08 0 0
Great call on the 3GS sales. That possibly is THE reason AT&T beat Verizon for iphone activations. I am sure somewhere on the net there is more details.
9. ChrisTheTechGuy posted on 22 Jul 2011, 09:14 1 0
I believe in the report I read somewhere on ATT's Q2 information their net churn was 1.14%, or something close to it, which is quite high
10. remixfa posted on 22 Jul 2011, 09:14 1 0
also what were the android sales. they were mysteriously absent from this article. it just cites iphone and LTE. Yea, all LTE phones are androids, but they make a fraction of the total androids.
14. gallitoking posted on 22 Jul 2011, 11:01 0 0
well is simple,.... nobody cares about android phones not being LTE.. .. name a verizon 3G phone other than the recently launch Droid X2 and the Droid 3? that is worth our time...
27. remixfa posted on 23 Jul 2011, 13:00 0 0
other than 2 of its biggest sellers? lol.
Tech geeks forget, a lot of consumers dont buy the biggest and most expencive. Not everyone has or cares about 4G.
16. taco50 (banned) posted on 22 Jul 2011, 13:36 0 0
No one cares about android and that's why it's not reported. iPhone crushed LTE in sales. You take all of LTE including internet devices and it was only half of the iPhone sales. iPhone outsold all LTE android phones probably 3 to 1. Massacre.
17. Beast Malone (unregistered) posted on 22 Jul 2011, 16:15 0 0
Friend, my question to you is this:
How often or how many times a day do you have intimate relations with your Apple device(s) directly and how do you make this possible? Do you have a case with a built-in "pocketpussy"?
19. derp (unregistered) posted on 22 Jul 2011, 17:26 0 0
that same question could be asked to the inbred android fanatics on this site.
13. tgolds (unregistered) posted on 22 Jul 2011, 10:58 0 0
Verizon Communications Inc. provides communication services. The company operates through two segments, Domestic Wireless and Wireline. The Domestic Wireless segment offers wireless voice and data services; and sells equipment in the United States
18. G-reg (unregistered) posted on 22 Jul 2011, 16:50 0 0
Yay, tards rehashing the same stuff we all know.
1. Phonearena isnt the sharpest when writing articles.
2. Taco is obsessed with is**ts and cant see that your fanboyism doesnt make your phone any better or worse than anyone elses.
20. droidlova (unregistered) posted on 22 Jul 2011, 18:10 0 0
Plus i love it how PA mentions ATT adding 1.1 million wireless subscribers while never notating VZW added 2.2 million. I dont mind it at all. Im just pointing a bias. Also for those notating that vzw and vz are 2 different divisions is plain funny. No need trying to make understand.