Apple Thoughts

Apple Thoughts - News & Reviews on all things Apple

Be sure to register in our forums and post your comments - we want to hear from you!


Android Thoughts

Loading feed...

Laptop Thoughts

Loading feed...

Digital Home Thoughts

Loading feed...




Go Back   Thoughts Media Forums > APPLE THOUGHTS > Apple Talk

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 03-20-2009, 10:00 PM
Executive Editor Emeritus
Vincent Ferrari's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,471
Send a message via AIM to Vincent Ferrari Send a message via Skype™ to Vincent Ferrari
Default Palm's Revenue Collapses

http://www.reuters.com/article/mark...20090319?rpc=44

"Palm Inc (PALM.O) on Thursday said its upcoming Pre phone needs "more polishing" but that it was on track to start selling the high profit device in the first half of the year as it looks to grab back smartphone business from rivals. The company gave the update while it reported a wider loss and revenue that fell 70 percent from a year ago, in line with its recent warning for a weak fiscal third quarter. Its shares fell 4.7 percent after the report as some investors may have hoped for a specific launch date for Pre. The Pre is seen as Palm's best hope to fight rivals such as Apple Inc (AAPL.O) and Research In Motion (RIM.TO), which have hurt Palm's smartphone sales in recent years. It said it is working hard to have Pre ready for a launch before the middle of the year at its exclusive U.S. carrier partner Sprint Nextel (S.N). "There's no showstoppers," said Chief Executive Ed Colligan in a call with analysts. "We plan on delivering on the time frame we said we would."

My apologies for the long quote, but I wanted you all to get a perspective on the kinds of issues Palm is facing because they announced the Pre so far ahead of when it would actually be ready for launch.  I have serious doubts, considering how Palm has continued to falter in recent weeks financially, that even the Pre can drag them up out of the basement.  It's being launched only on one carrier that has exclusivity, mediocre coverage outside of major metro areas, and a history of awful customer service.  That's a lot of pressure.

And before you compare that launch situation to the iPhone's in 2007, remember that the iPhone wasn't necessarily the future of Apple, and if the iPhone failed, Apple was in no danger of going out of business.  The Pre?  Well, I think that's a different story altogether.

__________________
Current Apple Stuff: 24" iMac, iPhone 4, AppleTV (original), 4gb Shuffle, 64gb iPad 2.
 
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 03-20-2009, 10:48 PM
Executive Editor
Jason Dunn's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,135

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent Ferrari View Post
It's being launched only on one carrier that has exclusivity, mediocre coverage outside of major metro areas, and a history of awful customer service.
That sounds exactly like you're describing AT&T and the iPhone.
__________________
Want to contact me personally? Use this. Want to read my personal blog? Check it out. Want to follow me on Twitter? Here you go.
 
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 03-21-2009, 12:35 AM
Editor Emeritus
Tim Williamson's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 865

What's the advantage to launching exclusively on 1 carrier? Does the carrier pay licensing to Palm/Apple so they get revenue up front?

I'm really happy with my iPhone, and am also not willing to switch from T-Mobile because I've had good luck with them in the service and support departments. Plus no one can compete with the cost of their plans.

But if the Pre could be used on T-Mo, I would consider it because it seems like an innovative phone, but since it's exclusive to Sprint, then there's no chance I would even consider the Pre. I'm not switching carriers just to get a specific phone.
 
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 03-21-2009, 12:48 AM
Executive Editor
Jason Dunn's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,135

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Williamson View Post
What's the advantage to launching exclusively on 1 carrier? Does the carrier pay licensing to Palm/Apple so they get revenue up front?
It's probably more a matter of marketing/promotion stuff, and possibly the carrier giving Palm a monthly payment like AT&T did for Apple.
__________________
Want to contact me personally? Use this. Want to read my personal blog? Check it out. Want to follow me on Twitter? Here you go.
 
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 03-21-2009, 12:53 AM
Editor Emeritus
Tim Williamson's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 865

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Dunn View Post
It's probably more a matter of marketing/promotion stuff, and possibly the carrier giving Palm a monthly payment like AT&T did for Apple.
Makes sense, but is kind of short-sighted of Palm. Although, I guess this strategy worked with Apple, but Apple had a TON more hype and positive product recognition before the iPhone. Palm will have to really work to earn back their positive reputation, and I don't know if going with Sprint is the way to accomplish this lol.
 
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 03-21-2009, 07:09 AM
Editor Emeritus
Janak Parekh's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,171

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Dunn View Post
It's probably more a matter of marketing/promotion stuff, and possibly the carrier giving Palm a monthly payment like AT&T did for Apple.
Several points:

1. True, but AT&T no longer pays Apple since the iPhone 3G (where Apple has gone back to a traditional carrier-subsidy model).

2. In the iPhone's case, it's also worth pointing out that Visual Voicemail required carrier cooperation. (On the other hand, not all iPhone 3G carriers support Visual Voicemail, so Apple also backed off on this requirement to go global.)

3. AT&T is a significantly larger carrier than Sprint with greater footprint. They're also GSM/GPRS/EDGE/HSDPA, so one iPhone model can scale globally. Sprint, of course, is CDMA 1xEVDO, so Palm has to manufacture and support two different devices.

4. Vinny's last paragraph is worth repeating here. Apple could afford to take the exclusivity risk. Palm has much a smaller margin in which to succeed. (I hope they do.)

--janak
 
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 03-21-2009, 07:40 AM
Executive Editor
Jason Dunn's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,135

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Williamson View Post
Makes sense, but is kind of short-sighted of Palm. Although, I guess this strategy worked with Apple, but Apple had a TON more hype and positive product recognition before the iPhone. Palm will have to really work to earn back their positive reputation, and I don't know if going with Sprint is the way to accomplish this lol.
But what makes you think that Palm had any choice in the matter? For all we know, Palm went around begging for someone to take their product, and Spring said "Sure, we'll take it, but we want the exclusive". Remember that Palm hasn't had a winning device in a long while, and while geeks are excited about the Pre, it's entirely possible Sprint didn't realize the potential of what they were getting...
__________________
Want to contact me personally? Use this. Want to read my personal blog? Check it out. Want to follow me on Twitter? Here you go.
 
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 03-21-2009, 07:43 AM
Executive Editor
Jason Dunn's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,135

Quote:
Originally Posted by Janak Parekh View Post
1. True, but AT&T no longer pays Apple since the iPhone 3G (where Apple has gone back to a traditional carrier-subsidy model).
That's why I said "did" not "does". Past tense. There was certainly more hype around the iPhone than around the Pre (by a factor of 10x at least), so I imagine that's why AT&T was willing to give Apple big $$$ to get it. Is the same true of Sprint? Possibly...hopefully we'll see some details in the coming months about what each of them are getting from this.
__________________
Want to contact me personally? Use this. Want to read my personal blog? Check it out. Want to follow me on Twitter? Here you go.
 
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 03-21-2009, 11:57 PM
Mystic
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,520

I think the early Pre annoucement was an attempt to get some cash from investors. And if I remember correctly it did. Surely the Pre may not be enough to save them, but with out those investors it may have been a wrap before the Pre ever arrived.

I think the Pre is a Palm "hail mary". But it just might make it into the in zone.
__________________

Phone: Nexus one Backup Phone: AT&T Samsung Jack; Future Phone: I'm Watching WP7; Media Player: Platinum Zune HD 32GB; Home Server: HP MediaSmart Server LX195 Console: XBox 360, PS3, Wii
 
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 03-23-2009, 04:25 PM
Pupil
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 11

I think it's just another sad indicator of the fall of a once great company. Palm made the decision to ax the Foleo and all other PDA's in favor of smartphones, when carriers have limited ability (or desire) to support different hardware manufacturers. If they'd kept the PDA's, at least they'd have that market segment, as there are precious few PDA manufacturers these days. Jeff Hawkins must either be laughing himself silly or have ulcers, but it's truly too bad that Palm failed to follow his vision.

I blame Ed Colligan and the bean counters at Palm. Appeasing investors may make business sense, but in the case of Palm, they put all their eggs in that [smartphone] basket and a bebbeda bebbeda, that's all folks!

Tony
 
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:34 PM.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0