T-Mobile announces Q4 results, down 23 000 customers
posted by Daniel P. / Feb 25, 2011, 3:07 AM
Despite that T-Mobile lost some customers, it achieved 25% higher data ARPU (Average Revenue per User), compared to the same quarter the previous year, due to people moving into smartphones. The capital expenditures for the whole 2010 were $0.9 billion less than 2009, but in Q4 in particular they were $828 million vs $697 for Q4 2009, due to the rush to finish "America's largest 4G network", which now covers 200 million people with HSPA+ goodness. This contributed to the lower net income in the quarter, compared to the same period of 2009.
The CCPU (Cash Cost per User) increased from $22 to $24 year-on-year, due to more than doubling the number of people switching to smartphones, with the associated increased subsidy loss for T-Mobile from such handsets. We found a gem in T-Mobile's Q4 financial report: "Year-on-year contract ARPU increased as data revenue growth and handset insurance revenues more than offset lower voice revenue." It seems that the wireless data service revolution is finally picking up steam, hopefully we will achieve our dream of faster wireless broadband for a lower price sooner rather than later.
T-Mobile is already fighting hard against the loss of customers - it was rumored to lower the Even More plans prices, increase the 5GB soft data cap, and now these are happening. Their Even More 1500 plan now includes unlimited texting and data for only $79.99 per month. That plan of course still includes unlimited calls between T-Mobile customers, unlimited nights and weekends, free domestic long distance, and no digital roaming charges within the U.S. Big Magenta is stepping it up in the value for money proposition, so we'll see how that will affect the next quarterly results.
Posts: 518; Member since: Dec 20, 2009
If they weren't starting lies (like "4G") they wouldn't loose customers. There are other factors but the 4G claim made me dislike them even more.
posted on Feb 25, 2011, 6:02 AM 2
Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008
noone cares about the 4g claim. and 4g was rewritten to include "advanced 3g" which is hspa+, so a lie it is not. since the 4g moniker originally meant 100mb/s, can you tell me who is 4g, because right now tmobile is the fastest of the 4g markets at least until vzw has national LTE coverage. Even then they are only marginally slower until this summer when they retake the speed crown with the 44mb/s update to the network. tre-nitty, Tmobile consistantly wins the customer service crown, tying and beating verizon nearly every year... hell, they just won it again.... soooo whatcha talkin bout?
posted on Feb 25, 2011, 7:53 AM 4
Alright, I'll come to some kind of defense on this. People do care about G's. They care about those G's a lot even though they have no clue what it means or how it effects their service. But by God, they want those G's. They see it as some kind of advancement in their service and if you don't have these 4G's they see you as less than. I mean hell, when Sprint of all carriers got WiMAX, all three companies were pushed with questions of when their 4G networks would launch. So yes, people care. And you're right, the standard for 4G has changed. What it originally was meant that none of the carriers actually had 4G...but carriers decided to continue to deceive their customers...so the definition changed. The thing that T-Mobile needs to do is lose that notion that they are a poor man's carrier. People care about status so much, it's to the point where they could have a sweet phone and be shameful of who the provider is. I think it's incredibly stupid, but whatevs. For T-Mobile to change that thought, they are going to have to offer more, but also convince people their network is strong. Hell, their parent company has all kinds of money, why not invest into making a killer network?
posted on Feb 26, 2011, 11:31 AM 1
I think I'm going to go to Tmobile. Their phones uploads are faster than att on "4g." Buy hey, I am tired of waiting to upgrade my Storm to The never going to launch Thunderbolt. Verizon is pissing me off with all the rumor BS. Plus - tiered data rates? I would like Sprint due to plan-pricing - but their phones are a little light in the specs department. I think I'm going to just get the galaxy s 4g and then get the galaxy s2 when it comes out later in a few months.
posted on Feb 25, 2011, 7:13 AM 0
Posts: 3621; Member since: Jan 19, 2011
I have only one person I know with T-Mobile- My sister in Atlanta area. That pretty much sums up T-Mobile's problems. Best phones, good/bad customer service, decently priced plans- who ares? You are bleeding customers, are a distant 4th in tower coverage, and anyone who would be interested is unable to give em a chance.
posted on Feb 25, 2011, 11:15 AM 1
Posts: 108; Member since: Aug 31, 2009
You clearly have little experience with wireless companies.
posted on Feb 25, 2011, 12:38 PM 0
Posts: 3621; Member since: Jan 19, 2011
No, I live in one of the many, many, many areas T-Mobile doesn't bother to do buisness. So, I have little experience with T-Mobile, just like all the other people I know in the many, many, many areas they do not do buisness. I would love to let them earn my money. They are not interested.
posted on Feb 25, 2011, 2:17 PM 1
I have been to many "major" cities in many states, such as Atlanta, Dallas, Nashville, and my coverage is fine. I would understand it if you live in a back water area, (which is highly likely), but the same can be said for comcast not providing service to these areas. they don't because its not economically sound. they look at the amount of people in those particular areas, and cost of tower building,maintenance,etc. every carrier does not provide coverage across 100% of the US due to this fact.
posted on Feb 27, 2011, 2:24 AM 0
If cheapest was best then T-Mo should be the #1 carrier, but their #4. 2G, 3G, 4G...who really cares? All I care about is getting my data fast... They don't deliver on this well either. In building coverage is by far the worst of all 4 national carriers. My last point... Those who have to publicly put others down have very little moral character. The marketing team really needs come up with a more unique campaign. Those are just some of the reasons why 23,000 customers decided to FIRE T-mobile as their wireless carrier.
posted on Feb 25, 2011, 11:45 AM 6
Posts: 108; Member since: Aug 31, 2009
Your a fool, you pay more to cover people in the middle of no where or the desert. Congrats, to you for talking about moral character because At&t and Verizon both have been rude to one another for so many years you just expect digs at one another. T-Mobile know it does not cover as far as Verizon but you know that they still cover a majority of the population. They offer more service for less money and do deliver data faster than Verizon and At&t. I don't care about the 4g 5g or 6g network personalty what i do acre about is that we offer many more tools to our customers and in general act as a much nicer company. Verizon is an evil giant of a company that is greedy down to the penny. We used to price phones in a way that cost the company one penny on many transactions they started to write up employees and on this. If you think that one penny times thousands of transactions per year is a lot of money then take also into consideration that they gross over 50% of revenue as profits.
posted on Feb 25, 2011, 12:37 PM 0
Posts: 275; Member since: Dec 15, 2010
T-mobile may have good customer service, but they do lack in network. they may have 4G coverage but when your network is not back hauled It's pointless. you may be able to see 6mbps but the majority of people only see 1.5mbps. I have, and work for ATT and back haul is important, being able to have consistent download and upload speeds is what is important now. ATT customer service is not the best I'll be the first to tell you that, but I can get 4mbps on my iPhone 4 all day long annoyware I go. I agree they need to focus on the network not bashing ATT and Verizon.
posted on Feb 25, 2011, 12:56 PM 1
The largest problem with the network is the map which is misleading. It shows coverage so people buy phones, they get home and bam no or minimal coverage. Or they see they have 3G and when they get to where they live or work there is no 3G. I had service with T-mobile for my primary line and I "was covered" under 3G but not once ever got a 3G signal. Did the cost of the data plan decrease? NO. Did the reps on the phone put in any tickets to get the map corrected or the service running? NO. My area of town is not the only place that 3G is shown as working and I do not get a signal. Its bad when I go out to eat in one of the most populated areas of the city and I can not get a signal but everyone including cricket customers (who pay half of my cost) are talking on their phones.
posted on Feb 25, 2011, 7:25 PM 1
Posts: 31; Member since: Jan 17, 2011
I'm sorry but this is what T-Mobile deserves I live In a place called Wilton California this is 5-10 miles out of Elk Grove one of the fastest growing cities in the U.S., Elk Grove is about 10mins away from Sacramento the Capital of California. Now why is it I don't get any service where I live an its clearly located in a "metropolitian" area. My biggest complaint with T-Mobile thus far has to be their service If they got that right I would but a G2 an be happy with my wireless company, until that happends i'm buying a iPhone with Verizon
posted on Feb 25, 2011, 7:35 PM 1
15. jay unregistered
I wish they would get some 3G coverage where I am. T-Mo is pushing 4G, but I cant even get past EDGE. had 3 lines with T-Mo, now down to one. EDGE just does not cut it. All the other Carriers of the Big 4 have at least 3G in 08641, but T-Mo is still pushing EDGE, come on T-mobile, if you want to keep customers, give us what we need
posted on Feb 25, 2011, 10:06 PM 2
Posts: 137; Member since: Jan 04, 2011
As an indirect for Sprint, we get the most portovers from Tmo then any other carrier 3 to 1.
posted on Feb 26, 2011, 10:10 AM 0
Posts: 65; Member since: Oct 27, 2009
As a direct for T-Mobile we port most from Sprint 3 to 1 :) Next Verizon then AT&T last.
posted on Feb 26, 2011, 2:27 PM 0
i dont understand how everyone is complaining about coverage. i get great coverage, and majority of the time im on hspa+. I travel , and still have no issues. maybe its not the service, but the phones you have. could be defective radios, or very cheaply made. for others , it could possibly be the towers. and of the carriers, Sprint is the worst followed closely by ATT. Verizon has a great phone lineup along with a good network. T-Mo, although cheaper than Verizon, doesnt have the phones. its the only thing that keeps them in 4th
posted on Feb 27, 2011, 2:38 AM 0
Key example: 8. sanfrangurl (unregistered) posted on 2 days ago, 17:50 Dam i really want this phone :'(. Its too bad i live in san fransisco. At&t service sucks over here no matter what type of phone u have. I know because i have a bb torch and nd boyfriend a htc inspire 4G. And were going to cancel out service this saturday :(. No its not our phones its not our sim card because we switched our phones 3 times already for new ones its att service that sucks over here . We drop calls like crazy even when standing outside with full reception Data edge or 3G doesnt work half of the time. Even when u are outside and the phones have full reception it just loads web pages halfways it cant finish loading the other half its really frustating picture messages never come in on time they come in like 3 hours later I just dont know why at&t service doesnt work in san fran i mean it works fine in fresno and texas because i used it there . But for sum reason san fransisco is an at&t deathzone. :((( Report Reply 9. DJLegacy2k5 posted on 2 days ago, 18:02 It happens, MARYLAND as a whole is a VERIZON DEADZONE! So yeah it sucks when you want nice phones but cant get service. Ive been using Sprint for YEARS with no problem, my mom, dad, grandfather and girlfriend are all still on my sprint account, I still have my Epic but I just got the ATRIX because its such a nice device. Report Reply 11. saneok posted on 2 days ago, 21:32 is it just in a certain region that you have all these problems or throughout the whole city? My friend has ATT and he gets very good bars in my apartment. and other people I know say they get pretty good coverage in the city but not in all areas. Im considering switching to ATT because Im sick with Verizon. I get ok voice coverage but data coverage is horrible in SF and in other places too. If I switch and then find out that I get even worse coverage than Verizon I'll be pissed.
posted on Feb 27, 2011, 2:50 AM 0
Send a warning to post author
Send a warning to Selected user.
The user has 0 warnings currently.
Next warning will result in ban!
Ban user and delete all posts
Message to PhoneArena moderator (optional):