This article is why I read the Monday Note.? It is so good.
Let?s rewind the tape. Once upon a time, there was The Way of The Carrier. Verizon, Sprint, AT&T treated handsets makers the way a supermarket chain treats yogurt suppliers: We?ll tell you the flavors and quantities we want to carry, we?ll set the delivery schedule, dictate the marketing/branding arrangements, define the return privileges and, of course, we?ll let you know what we want to pay for your product ? and when we want to pay it.
Then Steve Jobs hypnotized AT&T?s management. He convinced them to let Apple set the terms for iPhone distribution in exchange for AT&T?s ?running the table?. This meant no AT&T fingerprints on Apple?s pristine iPhone, no branding, no independent pricing, no pre-installed crapware ? content and software would be downloaded via iTunes, only.
In this arrangement, the iPhone helped AT&T steal customers from its main competitor, Verizon. When Verizon finally signed up with Apple in 2010, they were in a much weaker position than if they had obliged at the very beginning of the Smartphone 2.0 era.
But on the Monday Note, it isn't enough to make a point.? They go further and make the point relevant to what is happening in the here and now:
Apple is master of the slow-but-steady, surround-from-below approach. First, sign up a weaker player who will accept Apple?s stringent control in exchange for the opportunity to take business away from the dominant player who balks at Cupertino?s terms. After enough customers have switched to the smaller competitor, the market leader changes its mind and signs up with Apple ? on Apple?s terms.
The drill has worked in Japan. The smaller SoftBank signed up with Apple while DoCoMo, Japan?s largest wireless carrier, refused. DoCoMo wanted to install its own software on the iPhone; Apple wouldn?t budge. Subscribers migrated to Softbank in numbers significant enough to change DoCoMo?s mind. The happy ending is DoCoMo and its competitors now appear to sell large numbers of iPhones.
Turning to China, the same maneuver is at work. China Unicom and China Telecom have been selling iPhones with the expected result: They?re taking customers from the giant China Mobile. (There are rumors of an Apple-China Mobile agreement, but it?s unclear when this will happen. We should know soon.)
And of course, now we know, and Apple is trading a few points higher as a result.? The here and now is that this approach of working from the ground up with weaker players until the stronger player capitulates actually works.? Why does it work?? Because Apple produces better products, a better product experience, and a better customer service experience.? Beginning and end of story:
This only works if ? and only if ? the iPhone is a great salesman for the carrier. Apple extracts a higher price for its iPhone for two reasons: strong volumes and higher revenue per subscriber compared to other sets. In Horace Dediu?s felicitous words [emphasis mine]:
?I repeat what I?ve mentioned before: The iPhone is primarily hired as a premium network service salesman. It receives a ?commission? for selling a premium service in the form of a premium price. Because it?s so good at it, the premium is quite high.?
Yes, but what about all these subsidies?!
I don?t know if Stephenson is speaking out of cultural deafness or cynicism, but he?s obscuring the point: There is no subsidy. Carriers extend a loan that users pay back as part of the monthly service payment. Like any loan shark, the carrier likes its subscriber to stay indefinitely in debt, to always come back for more, for a new phone and its ever-revolving payments stream.
In fact, if you pay full-price for your phone, you do not get a price break on your service plan from Verizon (this may change in the future, due to competitive pressure, or it may not). At AT&T and T-Mobile, a $15/month price break is granted.? Sounds like that should cover a $8-15/month "subsidy"...
Jean-Louis Gass?e just knows how to untie the knot and reveal how clear the implications are in the marketplace.? In the same article, he even calls out journalists for "praise to play" approaches to articles.? It is good stuff.