Beginning in 2005, Verizon Communications Inc has been losing land line customers at a rate of over 1.0 million a quarter. Other telecoms have seen a similar trend. Personally, I made this change in 2001 when I traded in my fee-and-tax-bloated land line bill of $32 for a cell phone contract of $39 a month and the convenience of mobility. I haven’t paid for a land-line since.
News Flash… People are dropping their land-lines for wireless and internet-based services.
So why doesn’t Verizon get this? Given their ultra-successful marketing campaigns (“Can you hear me now?” and “the nations largest wireless network”), they seem to have their business plan in line with customer trends. But yesterday, they announced they are going to spend money on an advertising campaign designed to bring back the land-line customer! What??
They are considering a $5 a month plan which would only allow for incoming calls or outgoing calls to 911. I’ll pass, I’d still have to buy a phone. They have also discussed the option of a $10 plan that will only allow for some limited local calls. Since that eliminates all of my family and even those in the neighboring zip code, I’ll pass again.
This announcement just reinforces my feeling that Verizon is purposely not pushing forward with infrastructure advances, although they have the capital to do so. My dream is when the US will catch up with Seoul, Korea where everyone has fiber-optic or Tokyo where you can buy soda with credits on your cell phone.
If Verizon is lost, can someone direct them my way? I have another oldie that needs a new marketing campaign, called a telegraph. J
Last 3 posts by Eric B.
- Nassim Taleb on the Economy - June 25th, 2010
- Full Circle - May 3rd, 2010
- The Dark Side :) - April 5th, 2010
The telcos seem so lost. On TV they portray a contemporary, Budweiser image yet their business practices show they couldn’t care less about innovative infrastructure. In their defense, it is much more costly to roll out fiber-optic to the United States than it is a small Asian country. In their offense, they could be doing much more than they are now. Here in the states we are landlocked. Even though we know that Europe and Asia have better cell and data networks, there’s nothing we can do about it. Move there or work with what you’ve got. No one has been able to push them around.
Which is why I think Apple’s iPhone is so important. For the first time, a handset manufacturer was able to demand revenue sharing from a telco. Before Apple came along, the telcos dictated which devices could run on their networks and which features were allowed. For example, the RAZR on Cingular’s network allowed users to transfer files to and from their home computer using Bluetooth, whereas Verizon had Motorola lock this feature for their network, requiring users to purchase a $20 adapter to do the data transfer. Now that Apple has come along and changed the game, we’re seeing more innovative headsets coming out:BlackBerry Storm, Palm Pre, LG Voyager. Telcos are starting to give up some freedom because they are being forced.
As for land lines. Those new Verizon plans sound ridiculous. I hope they fail miserably. How on earth do they think they can rollback innovation while new VOIP phone companies push the limits with unlimited plans and improving phone quality?
As a common commentator, I feel I owe it to Eric to let him understand that as the land-line industry in total is in decline, there are significant margins as the competition continues to consolidate and efficiencies improve. Although, Verizon may be losing 1 million customers a quarter, these are not all moving to VOIP services.
Second, Verizon does understand the value in the Wireless Industry and advancing their infrastructure where it really counts. Not only did they buy the largest portion of the 3G auctions, but they are the first to be investing in the 4G LTE technology.
http://news.vzw.com/news/2009/02/pr2009-02-18.html
Please Eric, don’t try to lecture me on the cell-phone industry. I taught you everything you know!!!