iStockphoto | italianestro

Typically, the major carriers, including AT&T, Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile, see some shift in their share but manage to post a cumulative gain in so-called postpaid customers.

This quarter, though, gains at Verizon and AT&T weren’t enough to offset the steep losses at T-Mobile, Sprint and other carriers. T-Mobile alone lost half a million contract customers in the January-to-March quarter, while Sprint lost 192,000 contract customers.

The Associated Press did the math and calculated a drop in the industry of 52,000 contract subscribers at the top seven carriers. That contrasts with the prepaid industry (both from the Big Four carriers and smaller players such as MetroPCS, Cricket and TracFone), which saw gains of two million customers in the quarter.

As brokerage Jefferies & Company noted ahead of the earnings report season, the cellphone industry tends to face a tough few months after the initial bump that follows the introduction of a new iPhone.

(Image courtesy of iStockphoto | italianestro)

The company said it lost $847 million, or 28 cents per share, on revenue of $8.3 billion for the three months ended June 30. That compared to a net loss of $760 million, or 25 cents per share, on revenue of $8 billion in the year-ago quarter.

Shares of Sprint were trading lower in premarket trading, changing hands recently at $4.53, down 63 cents or more than 12 percent.

On the customer side, much of Sprint’s gains were via wholesale and prepaid customers, with the company reporting a loss of about 101,000 net postpaid subscribers during the quarter. Though still losing postpaid customers, Sprint cut the rate by more than half from what it was posted in the second quarter of 2010. The company said its postpaid churn rate for the quarter was a best-ever 1.75 percent, smaller than the 1.85 percent from a year ago, and 1.81 percent in the first quarter of this year. The lower churn came as nine percent of Sprint’s core postpaid customers upgraded their phones during the quarter.

The company reaffirmed its full-year forecast issued in April, saying it expects to add postpaid subscribers for the full year and to add more wireless customers overall this year than it added last year. Capital expenses excluding interest should be about $3 billion, and the company said it expects positive cash flow for the second through fourth quarters and for 2011 as a whole.

As for the LightSquared deal, it’s a 15-year agreement that has each making a number of commitments and giving Sprint additional options when it comes to offering high-speed wireless services to customers. LightSquared will pay Sprint about $9 billion in cash for providing 3G roaming, spectrum hosting and network services, and will give Sprint $4.5 billion in credit for use on LightSquared’s forthcoming satellite and LTE networks.

Sprint has the option of using up to 50 percent of LightSquared’s expected 4G capacity in the so-called “L band.”

With the agreement, LightSquared said it expects to have its first 4G LTE services available in the second half of 2012. Sprint said it will talk more about its 4G plans at an Oct. 7 investor day event.

Dan Hays, a partner at management consulting firm PRTM, said the deal should benefit both companies, as LightSquared can host its 4G network within Sprint’s next-generation cell sites.

“For Sprint, this will defray a significant portion of its planned capital investment and deliver increased cash flow while providing an opportunity to tap into LightSquared’s competitive 4G technology,” Hays said in a statement. “For LightSquared, this deal will dramatically reduce the cost and time required to deploy its nationwide, mobile broadband network to hundreds of millions of Americans.”

Hays also said the 3G roaming piece of the deal should help LightSquared, as it allows the company to offer partners nationwide service from the outset.

LightSquared still faces significant financial and regulatory challenges in building its network, including concerns that it poses interference with GPS systems. LightSquared has said it has a plan that should significantly reduce such interference.

Posting fourth-quarter earnings this morning, Sprint said it added 1.1 million total wireless subscribers, 58,000 of them two-year contract customers. Quite a milestone for a company that hasn’t seen a gain in postpaid subscribers in 13 quarters and a sign that Sprint may finally be turning a corner. Another good sign: Postpaid churn fell to 1.86 percent from 2.11 percent in the third quarter, and prepaid churn fell to 4.93 percent from 5.32 percent. And another: For the quarter, Sprint added almost 1.1 million wireless subscribers, its best showing in nearly five years.

All welcome news, even if Sprint is still losing money. The company reported a fourth-quarter loss of $929 million, or 31 cents a share, on revenue of $8.3 billion, up from $7.9 billion a year ago. Analysts polled by Thomson Reuters most recently forecast a loss of 30 cents a share on $8.15 billion in revenue. Said Bernstein analyst Craig Moffett, “Sprint CEO Dan Hesse might be forgiven for the temptation to hang a “Mission Accomplished” banner on the aircraft carrier that is Sprint. To his credit, he expressly declined to do so. Still, the company has at last achieved post-paid and total subscriber growth, customer service levels have improved, churn rates have been brought under control, and revenues were up.”

At $4.41, Sprint shares are up 1.15 percent in early trading as I write this.

But while it beat revenue and earnings targets, its wireless subscriber growth fell short of forecasts. Verizon added 584,000 new postpaid wireless customers, well below the 625,000 to 665,000 the Street had been hoping for. A bit of a disappointment for the nation’s largest wireless carrier, particularly since archrival AT&T added 745,000 postpaid wireless customers during the same period. That divergence means Verizon ended the quarter with a base of 93.2 million wireless customers–nearly even with AT&T’s base of 92.8 million.

Interesting, since this quarter saw the launch of some high-profile Android handsets on Verizon–the Droid 2 and Droid X, for example. Evidently, while “Droid Does,” it doesn’t do quite enough….

Says Ratcliffe: “Channel checks by our communications equipment and semiconductor research partners give us greater confidence that Verizon will get an iPhone in early 2011, and we are now incorporating that belief into our models for AT&T and Verizon.”

Interestingly, Ratcliffe doesn’t see the end of AT&T’s iPhone-exclusivity deal with Apple (AAPL) heralding a subscriber exodus at the carrier. While he acknowledges that perception issues with AT&T’s network quality will inevitably drive some customers to flee to Verizon, he believes that many will stay put.

All told, the analyst expects approximately 500,000 to one million “switchers,” a relatively small portion of the nine million iPhones he says Verizon will activate in 2011 (click on charts below to enlarge).

“We don’t believe that the addition of a Verizon iPhone will be a seismic event in the wireless competitive environment, although we do expect it to result in a modest spike in AT&T churn, as customers who love their iPhones but have become unhappy with AT&T’s network take advantage of the alternative,” Ratcliffe writes.

“Overall, however, we believe that smartphone customers are relatively sticky, particularly given that (a) 70% of AT&T postpaid customers are on family plans (which would necessitate a group switch), (b) switching cost for customers currently in contract would be $375-525 per handset, (c) approximately 40% of handsets are covered under corporate discount arrangements, many of which may not have VZ equivalents, (d) for many, if not most iPhone customers, the service quality being delivered on the AT&T network is in reality comparable to what they’d receive on Verizon’s network, and (e) switching will likely result in accepting a bandwidth-capped data offering, since (we believe) that Verizon is likely to launch tiered bandwidth pricing prior to the launch of an iPhone.”

So, while the expiration of AT&T’s iPhone-exclusivity deal certainly won’t be good news for the carrier, it’s not going to be a disaster. Ratcliffe figures the carrier will still activate six million iPhones in 2011, which is quite a bit fewer than the 10 million he says it will activate this year, but a sizable number nonetheless.

Riffing on rumors of a Verizon (VZ) iPhone, Morgan Stanley (MS) analyst Katy Huberty theorizes in a research note this morning that given the opportunity, nearly 17 percent of the carrier’s customers would upgrade to an iPhone (see chart below; click charts to enlarge).

“According to our [Alphawise U.S. consumer iPhone survey], there is substantial pent up iPhone demand within the Verizon installed base as 16.8 percent of Verizon subscribers said they are ‘very likely’ to purchase an iPhone if offered on the Verizon Network,” Huberty writes.

“This 16.8 percent is higher than AT&T subscriber’s 14.6 percent extreme interest in the current AT&T iPhone,” Huberty elaborates, “and well above the overall iPhone extreme interest of 7.5 percent.”

Assuming Verizon does add the iPhone to its smartphone lineup and that most of its subscribers who said they were “very likely” to purchase the device do so over a two-year period, Huberty figures Verizon stands to sell about seven million to eight million iPhones annually.

Interestingly, Huberty’s forecast for Phone demand at Verizon does not assume sizable subscriber losses at AT&T. In her view, the end of the carrier’s iPhone-exclusivity deal won’t be the blow some observers claim. AT&T (T) and Apple (AAPL) will obviously remain partners, she says.

In markets where the iPhone has gone from single-carrier to multiple-carrier distribution–France, for example–the carrier that lost exclusivity hasn’t suffered much at all. Beyond this, there’s the issue of early-termination fees, which will make it difficult for current AT&T iPhone users to flee. Says Huberty:

• 60 percent of the iPhone base is locked until 2H11/1Q12. An iPhone refresh could bring a new wave of subs to AT&T and extend the lock-down of those who upgrade. 80 percent of AT&T’s postpaid subs are sticky customers (70 percent are on a Family Plan (FP); 40 percent on business discounts).
• For current subs, the Early Termination Fee (ETF) is $175 falling $5/mo for the term of the contract; for new smartphone subs it’s $325, falling by $10/mo. Every line on a FP has a contract/ETF of its own. In addition, customers would have to pay for a new device if switching carriers.

One final point: Huberty sees Apple shares hitting $400 sometime in 2011. Why? “The market underestimates the earnings power of Apple’s mobile Internet devices,” she wrote. “We view the combination of new product launches, broader distribution [carrier, international, enterprise], more attractive pricing and strong upgrade rates as the key demand drivers over the next two years.”

This was a marked improvement from the third quarter, when Sprint (S) lost a net 545,000 subscribers. So Sprint, while clearly not taking market share away from Verizon (VZ) and AT&T (T), is at least it’s doing a better job of holding on to the market share it has–or is at least losing share less quickly than previously (see charts; click to enlarge).

Not that this effort is helping the company’s bottom line all that much. For the quarter, Sprint posted a loss of $980 million, or 34 cents per share, compared with a loss of $1.6 billion, or 57 cents per share a year earlier. Excluding charges, that loss was 23 cents per share–quite a bit worse than the loss of 19 cents analysts had been expecting. Revenue was disappointed as well, falling to $7.87 billion from $8.43 billion. Analysts had been expecting $8.01 billion.

So when can we expect Sprint to return to subscriber and revenue growth? On a conference call with analysts this morning CEO Dan Hesse declined to say.

Recent price cuts by AT&T (T) and Verizon (VZ) in the post-paid market, and Metro PCS (PCS) in the pre-paid market, “tighten a vise that leases Sprint once again stuck in the middle,” he writes in a research note. He notes that the company’s cost structure “is poorly suited for the current round of wireless price wars,” with “a huge gap between Sprint’s per-subscriber monthly costs versus those of its peers.” He says the company’s steady-state per-subscriber monthly cost is close to $36, compared with $32 at T-Mobile, $29 at AT&T and $28 at Verizon, with Leap (LEAP) and Metro PCs lower still.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Verizon.

This according to Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster, who says there’s a 70 percent chance that the carrier will add Apple’s super-smartphone to its lineup by the middle of 2010.

With AT&T’s (T) exclusive deal to carry the iPhone in the U.S. expiring next year, Apple (AAPL) has certainly considered such a move. It would be silly not to. Verizon’s (VZ) postpaid subscriber base is not only larger than AT&T’s, it’s untapped.

That’s an important differentiating factor given that Apple has an diminishing opportunity to attract new iPhone users from AT&T’s subscriber base. Says Munster: “Currently, the iPhone is available to 82 million AT&T subs in the U.S.; adding Verizon would more than double the addressable market, adding 89 million U.S. consumers.”

That’s certainly a compelling argument for signing Verizon up as an iPhone carrier, though whether Apple will do so remains to be seen. As Munster himself concedes, there’s a 30 percent chance that the company won’t ink a deal with Verizon.

According to other observers, that’s a conservative estimate. Kaufman Bros. analyst Shaw Wu said recently that 2010 is an unrealistic ETA for a Verizon iPhone. 2012 is far more likely, according to Wu.

“While we believe VZ is likely inevitable at some point when 4G technology rolls out in 2012 or so, we believe Sprint and/or T-Mobile are more willing partners for Apple in helping maintain margins and customer controls,” the analyst wrote in a note to clients. “From a technology perspective, we believe T-Mobile may have an advantage with a similar 3G UMTS/WCDMA network as AT&T.”

To hear that AT&T (T) ranked dead last in customer satisfaction in high-profile markets like New York and San Francisco isn’t all that surprising. New Yorkers often carp about dropped AT&T calls, and complaints about lousy service in the Bay Area are legion.

But to find that the carrier placed last in 17 other cities as well suggests that AT&T’s shortcomings are more widespread than the carrier would have us believe and not simply the product of a high concentration of iPhones in the country’s larger cities.

As Pali analyst Walter Piecyk wrote in an investor note this morning, “We believe it has been an elitist investor view that only a few high profile AT&T markets are having problems on the theory that only ‘tech savvy’ residents of coastal cities would find enough use in the iPhone to impact the quality of AT&T’s network.”

It certainly would appear that way. With low marks for several key indicators of customer satisfaction–including service availability, circuit capacity, dropped-call frequency and voice service–across 73 percent of the markets Consumer Reports surveyed, it’s pretty clear that AT&T has become overextended by the popularity of the iPhone. Which is bad news for the carrier and, of course, for iPhone owners as well.

As Consumer reports notes, “Apple’s iPhones are the top smart phones in our Ratings–actually, among the best of all phones we tested, period–but their exclusive carrier, AT&T, was middling at best in satisfaction….If you’re readying to buy Apple’s phone, prepare for possible disappointment with its service and expect to love the phone anyway. Despite the network problems, a staggering 98 percent of iPhone users in our cell-phone-buying survey were satisfied enough to say they would definitely or probably buy the phone again. Only 79 percent of respondents who bought other cell phones said the same.”

Verizon (VZ), which has been mercilessly slamming AT&T’s service in a recent ad campaign, is going to have a field day with this. And somehow, I don’t think a hurriedly cobbled together Luke Wilson ad will undo the damage.

UPDATE: Reached for comment, AT&T had this to say about Consumer Reports’ findings, which, the company stressed, were based on anecdotal feedback from a self-selected group of subscribers: “We appreciate and value all customer feedback. We learn from it and it helps us serve our customers better. Without question the surest indication of customer satisfaction is churn, or turnover. For the last quarter, our postpaid churn was just 1.17 percent.”

In its second quarter–the first with the Pre in its lineup–Sprint (S) lost 991,000 postpaid subscribers. And in its third, reported yesterday, its lost 801,000. So subscriber loss, while unquestionably gruesome, is diminishing.

How much of this is due to Palm’s (PALM) Pre? Not that much, says CL King & Associates analyst Lawrence Harris, who believes the Pre had only a moderate impact on Sprint’s postpaid subscriber base.

“Within postpaid, the number of CDMA-only subscriber losses was about 100,000 in the September quarter, compared to the 200,000 in the June quarter,” Harris wrote in a research note to clients. “At Sprint, the Palm Pre is a CDMA-only postpaid device. The number of Sprint postpaid subscribers upgrading their handsets was slightly higher in the September quarter than in the June quarter at just over 2.0 million.”

According to Harris, “This number provides some indication of the available market for all high-end devices at Sprint. In Palm’s August quarter, 85% of the company’s sales went to Sprint. Given the absence of growth in Sprint’s CDMA postpaid category, it appears likely that most of the Palm Pre sales went to existing Sprint subscribers as opposed to winning customers from other carriers.”

That would seem to be the case. Sprint rivals AT&T (T) and Verizon Wireless (VZ) each added subscribers during the second quarter–1.4 million and 1.1 million, respectively. So if the Pre did anything for Sprint, it helped to stem CDMA postpaid losses a bit.

And that’s something, right? After all, there’s no panacea for Sprint’s affliction–well, perhaps there is, but it’s locked up in an exclusivity agreement with AT&T (T). Still, when Sprint last reported earnings, CEO Dan Hesse said the carrier expected to sign up more new customers as the Pre gained wider distribution through retail outlets like Best Buy (BBY) and RadioShack. And that doesn’t really seemed to have happened. Perhaps next quarter after Sprint launches the Pre’s not-quite-cheaper sibling, the Pixi.

UPDATE: A quick addendum. In a research note this morning, Bernstein Research analyst Craig Moffett notes that while Sprint has reduced subscriber losses a bit, the cost of doing so has been worrisomely high.

“Yes, net subscriber losses were better,” Moffet explains. “But the cost was very high. Post-paid equipment subsidies soared to $139 per subsidized subscriber in Q3 (up 39 percent from last year), as the company recovered just 36 percent of their equipment costs….Yesterday’s results illustrate why it may not be possible for Sprint to have its cake and eat it too. After all the drastic cost cutting, after all the efforts to refresh the product line, after all the price cuts and new pricing plans, Sprint was able to manage only a modest improvement. Not growth, just a slightly slower rate of decline. And that Herculean effort almost broke the bank. The huge costs of even marginally improving gross additions (and the rate of net subscriber loss) crushed margins.”

In its second quarter–the first with the Pre in its lineup–Sprint (S) lost 991,000 postpaid subscribers. And in its third, reported yesterday, its lost 801,000. So subscriber loss, while unquestionably gruesome, is diminishing.

How much of this is due to Palm’s (PALM) Pre? Not that much, says CL King & Associates analyst Lawrence Harris, who believes the Pre had only a moderate impact on Sprint’s postpaid subscriber base.

“Within postpaid, the number of CDMA-only subscriber losses was about 100,000 in the September quarter, compared to the 200,000 in the June quarter,” Harris wrote in a research note to clients. “At Sprint, the Palm Pre is a CDMA-only postpaid device. The number of Sprint postpaid subscribers upgrading their handsets was slightly higher in the September quarter than in the June quarter at just over 2.0 million.”

According to Harris, “This number provides some indication of the available market for all high-end devices at Sprint. In Palm’s August quarter, 85% of the company’s sales went to Sprint. Given the absence of growth in Sprint’s CDMA postpaid category, it appears likely that most of the Palm Pre sales went to existing Sprint subscribers as opposed to winning customers from other carriers.”

That would seem to be the case. Sprint rivals AT&T (T) and Verizon Wireless (VZ) each added subscribers during the second quarter–1.4 million and 1.1 million, respectively. So if the Pre did anything for Sprint, it helped to stem CDMA postpaid losses a bit.

And that’s something, right? After all, there’s no panacea for Sprint’s affliction–well, perhaps there is, but it’s locked up in an exclusivity agreement with AT&T (T). Still, when Sprint last reported earnings, CEO Dan Hesse said the carrier expected to sign up more new customers as the Pre gained wider distribution through retail outlets like Best Buy (BBY) and RadioShack. And that doesn’t really seemed to have happened. Perhaps next quarter after Sprint launches the Pre’s not-quite-cheaper sibling, the Pixi.

UPDATE: A quick addendum. In a research note this morning, Bernstein Research analyst Craig Moffett notes that while Sprint has reduced subscriber losses a bit, the cost of doing so has been worrisomely high.

“Yes, net subscriber losses were better,” Moffet explains. “But the cost was very high. Post-paid equipment subsidies soared to $139 per subsidized subscriber in Q3 (up 39 percent from last year), as the company recovered just 36 percent of their equipment costs….Yesterday’s results illustrate why it may not be possible for Sprint to have its cake and eat it too. After all the drastic cost cutting, after all the efforts to refresh the product line, after all the price cuts and new pricing plans, Sprint was able to manage only a modest improvement. Not growth, just a slightly slower rate of decline. And that Herculean effort almost broke the bank. The huge costs of even marginally improving gross additions (and the rate of net subscriber loss) crushed margins.”