10-27-2012, 05:52 PM #2
- 786 Posts
Due to exclusive deal meaning that AT&T subsidizies (sp?) the entire price of the phone, making it a very good deal for Nokia. One could only theorycraft on whether ATT + Verizon with Nokia paying for the phones too would've brought in more money though.. hard to say
10-27-2012, 06:28 PM #5
- 44 Posts
Because Nokia could care less about a CDMA heavy US market. I hope their mentality change soon otherwise they will eventually would not want to deal with a US Market their Lumia line of WP8 phones fail to sell as their WP7 devices failed to even reach one million units.
- 10-27-2012, 07:28 PM #6
Again, CDMA is irrelevant. Verizon is phasing it out, Sprint has plans to abandon it too. CDMA is today's iDEN. VZW is scrambling to get VoLTE up and running so it can start to close down EVDO and 1xRTT.
That said, Nokia should deliver a CDMA handset to VZW with specs better than the 822.
10-27-2012, 10:08 PM #9
- 598 Posts
Updated: Verizon Wireless to sunset 2G and 3G CDMA networks by 2021 - FierceWireless
Regarding the exclusivity deal, I'm not thrilled about it either, and you can blame who you want, but honestly the carriers in the US have more power than the OEMs so I would bet it's more like Verizon not wanting to give them a better deal than AT&T and instead, planned for another device a little up the road instead that was more on their terms.
- 10-27-2012, 10:31 PM #10
I'm disappointed Verizon won't be carrying the 920, but I think it's unfair to blame Nokia because we really don't know what went on behind the scenes. I will say I don't think Nokia will get anywhere close to Apple or Samsung status without having their top phone on all major carriers.
- 10-27-2012, 10:48 PM #11
Marketing and support.
It's better to be in one of the big carriers with a full commitment of marketing from them. They will likely push Nokia handsets in the stores.
Being in both, but without the marketing support and without the salespeople acting as advocates doesn't help a company with low mindshare.
Carriers want to put their money and influence behind handsets that are only available through them.
Calling the strategy "stupid" shows a lack of understanding of business and the marketplace. You can disagree with the strategy, but calling it stupid shows a severe lack of understanding and perspective.Talk to me about Windows Phone, Windows 8, XBOX, art, animation, design, or anything! Be sure to follow me on Twitter and friend me on Facebook (say you're from here or I may not accept)
- 10-27-2012, 11:31 PM #12
Now HTC has my money, followed by thousands and thousands of others because that is the best WP8 phone on VZW.
Sorry, edit: "Exclusivity never works in the US."
- 10-27-2012, 11:54 PM #13
Who said exclusivity never works?
AT&T promoted the L900, but the reps still were hesitant because of the lack of functionality in WP7.
This time around, there is a more powerful OS along with greater marketing of the OS coming.
But to differentiate yourself, you need advocates in the store. And you get that with exclusivity.
You may be upset that it's not coming to your carrier, but outside of WP fans, most people have no idea these phones exist. They'll gravitate the direction the salesperson leads them.
I think you severely underestimate the importance of mindshare, and how Nokia's strategy needs to be different from HTC and Samsung because they've been absent from the American smartphone market.
I haven't heard an argument that clearly explains why Nokia's strategy is "stupid". Instead I hear people who are justifiably upset that they don't have access to the handset they want.Talk to me about Windows Phone, Windows 8, XBOX, art, animation, design, or anything! Be sure to follow me on Twitter and friend me on Facebook (say you're from here or I may not accept)
- 10-28-2012, 02:45 AM #15
10-28-2012, 02:53 AM #16
- 775 Posts
To be fair, HTC may be on all carriers. Hasn't helped than sell wp7 devices has it. Even with "stupid exclusives" Nokia are selling more WP devices than everyone else.
I bet Nokia will sell more wp8 devices than HTC or Samsung.
Sent from my HD7 T9292 using Board Express
10-28-2012, 03:13 AM #18
- 377 Posts
It is dumb. But Nokia's rationale looks to be based on the idea that the L900 is actually a success for a company with no presence in the US till the June announcement making the L900 a legacy device.
The fact that Verizon isn't getting the L920 immediately will hurt, no doubt about that. But L920 might just be the tip of the iceberg from Nokia.
10-28-2012, 07:18 AM #20
- 44 Posts
There is no excuse from Nokia not offering the Lumia devices on all major US carriers. Someone screwed up at the CDMA carrier relations department and got the axe for it. How are you expecting to convince carriers (other than Verizon) outside the GSM world (which is a smaller share in the US market) to carry your devices and you decide to go with N exclusive on AT&T for your most high end device. How do you expect to have Sprint, MetroPCS, US Cellular, nTelos, Credo, Premier, and most of the prepaid market on board with Windows Phone devices when the most important OEM happens to have no interest to cater to the dominant cell phone technology in the US. I still think there is some hidden agenda by Microsoft when it comes to dealing with CDMA carriers, and if it is to make them change to GSM is NOT going to work.
And please don't say CDMA is irrelevant in the US market because it has the BULK of the lines. Two thirds of the US market is not irrelevant, and when your OS has a shrinking share you need to figure out how to get more devices on more carriers, and end this lack of CDMA devices nonsense (perhaps Sprint knows something.....)
10-28-2012, 07:49 AM #21
- 60 Posts
10-28-2012, 10:30 AM #22
- 21 Posts
Right now we just don't know. We don't know when or if Verizon will get a "922". We don't know if or when they will get another high end model from Nokia or another manufacturer.
I actually feel lucky to be due for a discount in July of 2013. I'll sit back and see what else comes out.
Sent from my HTC Trophy using Board Express
- 10-28-2012, 04:57 PM #25
Nokia could have put it on all carriers. They made a strategic choice not to. That choice was likely because of promotions and commitments that AT&T would be willing to make if the device was exclusive.
HTC is in a different situation. They have an established and known smartphone brand in the US. Their need for carrier promotion is less than Nokia's need.Talk to me about Windows Phone, Windows 8, XBOX, art, animation, design, or anything! Be sure to follow me on Twitter and friend me on Facebook (say you're from here or I may not accept)