Verizon Says FiOS Rate Hikes Coming > Stockholders are their real customers

reply to SHoTTa35

Re: Stockholders are their real customers

Apparently you missed the point - I wasn't saying Verizon was making 20% profit per quarter/year. I was saying even IF they were they that would be great till next quarter/year came around then it's no longer "good enough" to "only" make 20% profit. It now has to be 25% or 30% or anything that's HIGHER.

reply to Linklist
Your numbers are also wrong as they continuously siphon money from wireline to wireless. The profit margin is higher than 2.4% but they cant very well come out and say that now can they. Not when they are trying to justify cutting back from wireline.

Gaming the books? I don't claim they are illegally reporting incorrect numbers to the SEC... I am claiming they shift money from wireline to wireless to make it look like wireline is less profitable.

Since you inquired about 'proof', here is an example... many VZ employees get company cellphones, Blackberrys, data for company laptops, etc which are serviced through VZW (duh). Now, you would think that since VZ is the controlling parent of VZW, we would get free plans... after all, they are just paying themselves. But no, VZ gets billed by VZW for each and every device just as another company would. Pretty crafty way to shift funds! But here is the icing on the cake... every one of those accounts is BASIC SERVICE that pays extra for overages!! Over your minutes, bill is higher... you sent texts, bill is higher, blew out your data cap (and who wouldn't when you have to access the VZ network to do your work all day long!) ummm, thats extra. You would think that they would be smart enough to buy unlimited plans!! When I asked why they don't, of course it was explained that 'It really doesn't matter since we are only paying ourselves.'

I saw the bill for my company phone once... it was over $500 for just one month and I barely use it. Would you like to take a guess how many company cell phones, smartphones, data modems there are out there on basic plans? Would you like to calculate how much money gets shifted over to wireless every month?

This is just one example... I will be happy to post others if you like

Your post is strangely contradictory. You claim that they must treat each other as separate companies (which I am not disagreeing with) so VZW must bill VZ but then you claim that it is illegal for them to do so. Personally, I would be all for forcing VZ to use AT&T or Sprint and not allowing them to use VZW at all but I assure you they do and (despite your claim that it is illegal) they get charged the maximum possible charges.

Here is another potential conflict... If VZ leases space to VZW for cell sites, can VZ legally refuse to lease space to AT&T or Sprint? I have seen VZW sites on VZ owned buildings but never any other carrier's. Of course... letting them slide on the rent would be illegal and we all know that big corporations never break the law.

reply to CXM_Splicer

reply to CXM_Splicer
BTW they don't have to rent to everyone, however the rent they charge must be within industry standard rates and when they do rent they must charge others the same rate for equvelante property.
because everyone does rent to everyone else, and many/most sites are owned by others (non telcos) and it effects roaming and other costs it would be very counter productive and expensive to start a tower price war.
As well as draw huge fines and prison if it was a widespread practice.
again VZ doesn't profit by GIVING money to VZW.
In fact paying Vodaphone more/making them a larger worldwide competitor is not really good for VZ in the long run.

Well, I can't speak from experience about actual rents charged, only that I haven't noticed other carriers on VZ buildings. It certainly seems legit that they can't be forced to allow other carriers (and therefore wouldn't).

you have to realize how small VZW is in comparison to the rest of Vodaphone operations. Vodaphone doesn't need verizon to launder money, IF they even needed to, sucessful companies rarely are willing to risk everything, it's the ones built on a house of cards that try that to stay afloat
Verizon ended up with Vodaphone as a partner because they had the cash.
verizon got the job as managing partner, so they do all the work and only get 55% of the income.
each would love to buy the other out but for vodaphone it's to sweet a deal to let go, and VZ is too highly leveraged to force it.
VZW does gereate lots of income but much of that goes right out the door as dividends to pay for the vast investment in the network realize also the switch to LTE means they are replacing a great deal of equipment, and will eventually have to scrap existing stuff.
that means another big round of debt just to stay current.

People wrong assume that because the cost of tech goods is high that they are being cheated, but you have to realize that the product cycle for these good is VERY compressed, and any given product line is a boom/bust of months or even weeks before it is over. (iPhone is a rare exception)
BTW with public companies it's easy to look up where the money goes »quotes.wsj.com/VZ/financials (follow the links to EDGAR)