"Verizon Wireless and RadioShack are moving in opposite directions as it relates to wireless-communications sales," said Lowell McAdam, chief operating officer of Verizon Wireless, in a written statement Monday. "It no longer made sense to continue the relationship given the high cost of this channel relative to other distribution channels and our insistence that growth and profit be balanced."
Note that it's from about 6 months ago. The comments on Verizon and Radio shack revenue is interesting. (Note the optimistic outlook sections). RS split with Verizon because they could get a better piece of the action from Sprint and Cingular.
So that sounds like VZW dropped RS as a channel partner. It sounds like VZW was willing to pay the higher costs of using RS as a channel until they grew enough that it was no longer worth the cost for the added growth?
Verizon was one of Radio Shacks products. As such, it would be more appropriate to say in a headline that Radio Shack dumped one of it's products, rather than the product dumped Radio Shack. I doubt if Verizon wanted to reduce it's in-store presence, but I can see that Verizon might have gotten greedy (or Radio Shack could have gotten greedy) regarding the markup they would allow Radio Shack (and keep Radio Shack competitive selling Verizon in the marketplace - or in other words make the shelf space in Radio Shack worth it to Radio Shack to keep selling Verizon).
So saying that Radio Shack dumped Verizon in a headline may not tell the real story.
While I haven't heard anything definitive, I think it's a good bet that Cingular will be renamed to (the new) at&t if and when the merger is completed.
Since the industry magazines were talking about the advantages the brand recognition factor of AT&T over Cingular, its a pretty good bet the name and orange jumping jack guy will go.
Have you noticed on the AT&T website, the harsh look of the their "Deathstar" (Star Wars) logo was replaced by a more friendly jumping jack ball logo?
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
Shows how dumb 20-something marketing "experts" can be, trading the value of strong and well-established branding for a trendy new look that will look dated in no time.
How do you know it was a 20-something marketeer who decided on the logo change? Do you have any evidence to support that claim or is it just "gut feel"?
You mean they aren't going back to the blue bell?!?!? I think maybe I should plan to attend the next shareholders meeting (wonder if you can get inside if your own one lot ).
I can't imagine Verizon cares one way or 'ther what happens to Radio Shack. What I wonder is if AT&T when the bellsouth aquisition is complete will set eyes on the last baby of significance. Also this one would be a parlay into Europe.
Remember that much of Radio Shacks business was in contract renewal, not in new sales. And even when it was in new sales, the customer had already decided which carrier to go with, and was simply looking for the best deal, or the most convenient location at which to buy.
The sales that Verizon lost are the ones where the Radio Shack sales person is able to convince the customer to change carriers away from Verizon, over to Sprint or Cingular, or the rare new wireless customer.
No doubt that Verizon would have more net additions with Radio Shack than without it. But the cost of these additions was not worth acceding to Radio Shacks demands.
Furthermore, as Radio Shack continues to close stores, their value as channel decreases. They're closing 480 stores this year, a little less than 10% of their company-owned stores.
It seemed that when I visited the Radio Shack store nearest to my house, I was the only one buying non-cellular phone products. The rest were milling about the cell phone displays, asking questions about cell phones, buying cellphones and calling plans, buying cellphone accessories, etc.
What do people buy at The Shack these days? I used to go for parts, tools, browse their sometimes interesting books on electronics projects, etc.
Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.