Get our Newsletter!
Sign up below, then download the free DCA Desktop agent
to receive notification of new issues and read them at your leisure.
The Wireless Outpost News Issue #7 Vol. 5
Wednesday, April 30, 2003
Another (politically incorrect) issue of the Wireless Outpost News. This publication is produced for the soon to be educated cellular phone user community. If you know of anyone else that may have an interest in our publication, make sure to forward them a copy. Don't worry if you miss an issue of our publication, we archive to cellularphonenews.com for your convenience. Now we move forward at Mach II speed!
[Note: This newsletter is delivered Bi Weekly on Wednesday.]
LATEST HANDSET PROJECTIONS STRAIGHT FROM THE MANUFACTURERS
We are often being asked what we know about the current status of handset manufacturing projections. There is nothing better than getting that kind of information directly
from the horse's mouth. What we are posting here is the latest from four of the top five mobile phone manufactures. Siemens isn't included because they haven't sent out a projection that we could find at the time of this article being written. It is a 50/50 race with two stating they expect to do well and two having to lower their projections. Without further ado, here is the word on the wire.
Nokia Corp. reported a strong quarter for mobile phone sales and offered a rosy outlook for the business, numbers that helped prop up a sagging infrastructure division. The news sent the company's stock up about 6 percent to about $16 per share.
Nokia reported a pro forma operating profit of $1.3 billion, down 8 percent from the same quarter a year ago. Sales in the company's mobile phone business rose by 1 percent from last year, while sales in its gear division dropped 15 percent.
For the coming quarter, Nokia said it expects to increase mobile phone sales between 4 and 12 percent year on year, and that "strong profitability" in its phone business is expected to continue. The company said the market for network infrastructure is not expected to improve.
Motorola, Inc., slightly lowered its mobile phone sales forecast for the coming year, but reported revenues on track for a recovery in its business.
Motorola, Inc., reported sales of $6 billion for its first quarter and net earnings of $169 million. The company's net sales were slightly lower than the $6.2 billion it reported in the same quarter last year, but far above the $449 million net loss it reported in the same quarter last year.
Motorola said it expects to sell 430 million mobile phones, which is at the low end of its previous range of 430 to 440 million. The company's stock was down slightly after the news to about $7.65 per share.
Motorola reported sales in its Personal Communications Segment up 2 percent over the same quarter last year, but a 6 percent decline in orders. The company scored operating earnings of $114 million in the division, up from a loss of $35 million in the year-ago quarter.
In the company's Semiconductor Products Segment, Motorola reported sales up 2 percent over the same quarter last year, but a 16 percent decline in orders. The segment reported an operating loss of $121 million, up from the $238 million loss during the same quarter last year.
Motorola president Mike Zafirovski said the company continues to improve and streamline its business, but that there is little sign of improvement in the industry.
Samsung Electronics announced its first-quarter figures, showing a 4.8-percent increase in mobile-phone sales.
Samsung said it aimed to sell 13 million mobile phones in the second quarter and 52 million for the full year, according to Reuters.
Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications reported a net loss of $114 million for the quarter. The company also said it sold 5.4 million phones in the quarter, 400,000 phones less than the same quarter last year. This indicates that the company may have lost about 3% of
its marketshare in the past year and might be signs of future trouble ahead for the manufacturer.
Sony Corp., which jointly owns the mobile-phone maker with Ericsson, said the poor results are due to increased pricing pressure and new product expenses.
T MOBILE SUES REESE BROTHERS CALL CENTER FOR BILLING IRREGULARITIES
Reese Brothers now known as Reese Teleservices used to be one of the largest telemarketing companies in the US. Today, it has been pushed into the second tier level of call center providers. At one point, the call center was trying to sell off one of their other subsidiary companies which handled a different type of call center campaign. The only problem was that T Mobile was the largest client for this subsidiary and it appears as if T Mobile wasn't very happy with the services the company provided. So the two companies are going to court next month.
Can't say I am surprised on that note as I have spoken to the President of what remains of the telemarketing company on a totally unrelated subject and I was less than impressed myself. I won't go into detail but I will say that I was scratching my head wondering if this guy was really the president of the company. But it was enough of an impression to force me to give T Mobile the benefit of the doubt on this one. Anyhow, the beef between T Mobile and Reese Teleservices unfolds in this situation as such.
Reese Teleservices had a subsidiary called CommComm which T Mobile was the largest client for that company. A computer company in Texas was supposedly going to buy the company for $75 million dollars. They pulled out of the deal after a visit to T Mobile which Reese Teleservices said was due to T Mobile making comments on the service provided by the call center company. Later on, they were able to sell the subsidiary to a company called Teleperformance USA, another call center company but it is not known for how much.
During this time, at some point, T Mobile sued Reese Teleservices for billing errors and irregularities. We found the docket but were unable to get into the details of how much was being asked for in damages and punitive action. In response, Reese Brothers filed a countersuit claiming that T Mobile caused them to lose the deal for $75 million dollars with the computer company due to comments they made to executives of the potential buyer who visited the T Mobile offices as part of their due diligence.
The call center must have been doing some fairly large campaigns for T Mobile because when the carrier pulled out, the call center eventually laid off nearly 1,000 employees in a very short period including nearly half of their corporate staff. We also found a complaint filed by one resident who stated that Reese Brothers violated the Telemarketing Act when they repeatedly called his home to sell AT&T long distance services. It even went so far as to give names of employees and said that the employees refused to confirm the company name to the caller. They heard it being said in the background which is how they found out.
I point this out for one reason. How many of you have contacted customer service only to be told that a manager wasn't available when the supervisor had no authority to resolve your complaint or the agent wouldn't give you any identifiable information other than a first name. In most cases when you run across that situation, you are speaking with a third party call center who has been contracted to handle the calls for that company. That is why a "manager" isn't available.
I may not always trust the motives of a wireless carrier, but I trust the motives of some call centers even less. In light of that, this is what makes this entire article so humorous. A wireless carrier is actually going to court in a battle over billing errors and irregularities. The number two complaint against wireless carriers by consumers nationwide second only to coverage issues. You can't find a more ironic situation than that.
ANOTHER WIRELESS INDUSTRY LAWSUIT IN THE WORKS OVER SIGNAL STRENGTH
The lawsuits in the wireless industry just never end. However, this is one where I may not be so critical as it relates to cell phones being able to place calls to 911 operator services. This one was brought to court by the Wireless Consumers Alliance. I believe we wrote an article on them once if you want to search the archives. Anyhow, here is their complaint and what they are doing about it.
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation said that all of the class-action lawsuits against the mobile-phone industry regarding whether phones comply with the 911 strongest-signal mandate will be heard in Chicago, according to Adam Gonnelli, attorney for the Wireless Consumers Alliance. The WCA filed several lawsuits late last year claiming that none of the 33 phones it tested met the Federal Communications Commission's 911 strongest-signal rules adopted in 1999.
Lawsuits were filed against Sprint Corp. and Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. in the U.S. Court for the Southern District of New York, in federal court in Washington state against AT&T Wireless Services Inc. and Nokia Corp., and in the U.S. Court for the Central District of California against Cingular Wireless L.L.C. and L.M. Ericsson. All of these will now be heard in Chicago. Verizon Wireless and Nextel
Communication, Inc., were not named in any of the lawsuits for some reason.
The FCC gave the carriers and their manufacturer partners several options on how to implement the rules. Under one option, the phone must inform the caller that a 911 call has been placed by both an audible message and a message on the phone screen and the phone must connect to the preferred carrier within 17 seconds or switch to the non-preferred carrier. All phones with an analog mode were required to comply with this rule as of Feb. 13, 2000.
In the meantime, we will try and keep on top of this to see if we can find out which specific models of phones were tested. Otherwise, you can drop by their website for the latest by visiting them at
http://www.wirelessconsumers.org for more information. You should also take a look at their FAQ page. At the bottom is more information for consumers who wish to learn more about the strongest signal issue as it relates to 911 calls.
A WIRELESS CARRIER FINALLY TAKES A STAND ON WIRELESS PHONE RECYCLING
Well now, take a ball bat and smack me down because I never thought I would be writing an article like this one. AT&T Wireless is the first carrier to partner with the EPA in pushing cellular phone recycling efforts! After how many years of harping that the wireless carriers need to take more responsibility for recycling, I think somebody might have actually started listening. Either that or it is just another publicity stunt. But with something like this, who really cares. As long as it gets done.
As part of its commitment to protecting the environment, AT&T Wireless (NYSE: AWE) announced an enhanced recycling program for the disposal of wireless phones, batteries, and accessories in support of the EPA's Plug-In To eCycling, a campaign that encourages Americans to reuse or recycle their used electronics, and Keep America Beautiful, a nationally known nonprofit organization that focuses on community improvement and beautification.
The AT&T Wireless Reuse & Recycle Program invites customers to recycle unwanted wireless phones, accessories, and batteries, regardless of the manufacturer or carrier, at any AT&T Wireless retail store. AT&T Wireless employees will do the same at office locations nationwide. Wireless phones collected through the AT&T Wireless Reuse & Recycle program that cannot be refurbished will be recycled. The wireless phones that can be refurbished will be donated to groups that respond to emergency situations, such as the American Red Cross. Proceeds from the recycled phones will be donated to Keep America Beautiful. In addition, AT&T Wireless volunteers will participate in various Keep America Beautiful clean-up activities throughout the year.
"We are honored to be the first wireless carrier to partner with the EPA and Keep America Beautiful to help protect our environment for the next generation," said Wally Hyer, vice president - AT&T Wireless, who oversees the company's Environment, Health & Safety division. "The AT&T Wireless Reuse & Recycle program offers consumers and our employees a safe way to dispose of used phones, batteries, and accessories. Our employees stand ready to help in this effort by volunteering with their neighbors and friends in Keep America Beautiful's Great American
Cleanup activities nationwide. Together we can protect our environment and keep our communities strong."
"AT&T Wireless deserves a lot of credit for its leadership in recycling old cell phones. We're very glad that they are partnering with EPA on the Plug-In To eCycling Campaign. Through efforts like these, AT&T Wireless is helping EPA and all Americans reduce the electronic waste stream and protect the environment," said EPA Assistant Administrator Marianne Horinko.
"Keep America Beautiful applauds AT&T Wireless for its commitment to product stewardship," said Gail Cunningham, managing director, Great American Cleanup. "We are thrilled to have AT&T Wireless as a National Sponsor of Keep America Beautiful's Great American Cleanup, supporting community improvement efforts nationwide. Together we are engaging individuals in activities that ensure safer, healthier, and more beautiful environments - today and for generations to come."
This is an effort by AT&T Wireless to be applauded. I don't usually give kudos to AT&T Wireless either. But this effort is definitely a step in the right direction and we will continue to hope that other wireless carriers will see the light and get on board. It is a significant step that might actually warrant presenting them with an award from our publication.
DISPOSABLE PHONE CEO OF HOP ON WIRELESS GETS INDICTED AND LEAVES CO.
Those of you who purchased our disposable cellular phone report will find this to be no surprise. Next thing you know, they will be tapping me on the shoulder asking if I would be willing to run the company and helping to get the product launched. Anyhow, the CEO had a past that has caught up to him and his future isn't looking very bright at the moment. Here is what led to the current situation of the CEO getting indicted.
Prior to forming Hop On Wireless, the CEO was also the founder of New Discoveries Publishing Corp. A company that was to offer free internet access, email, stock quotes, etc. if the user billed so much money per month in long distance service through New Discoveries. There was something about targeting surfers with specific ads too.
At some point, they appear to have acquired some type of now defunct online gambling company which is currently under investigation for bilking investors out of millions of dollars. The casino venture was raided by California investigators few years ago and shut down, and investors' shares were converted into shares of Hop-On.
A federal indictment disclosed Thursday accuses Michaels and others of raising $12 million to $18 million for his now-defunct World Wide Web Casinos venture by lying to investors. One allegation specifies that Michaels and others allegedly modified an existing casino software program so it appeared that World Wide Web Casinos had developed its own program.
Michaels also has been accused of improperly using shareholder money to pay personal credit card bills and spend $131,000 on a yacht, according to the indictment. The casino venture also allegedly signed a $500,000 contract with another company that allegedly was controlled secretly by Michaels. Not sure what happened but it looks like none of these former ventures were becoming rising stars which is when the business was transformed into a disposable cell phone company. They were able to pick up 10 million dollars in funding to launch the company.
How he was able to pull that one off is still a mystery but the indictment offers some clues as to how that may have been possible. Outside sources which had close contacts with the company have told us that they are really struggling with the development of the product line. The company now expects to hire an Interim CEO within weeks. The company at one point was doing fairly well with having no product to offer. Today, shares are selling at just under 4 cents each and trading on pink slips.
DC COURT OF APPEALS BLASTS WIRELESS INDUSTRY FILINGS OVER APPEAL OF LNP
The wireless industry and the CTIA just aren't having much fun at trying to overturn the
FCC's authority to require wireless carriers to implement Local Number Portability for consumers. All indications appear to be that Verizon Wireless and the CTIA are going to fail in their efforts to courts to rule against the FCC's jurisdiction. The bumbling by the plaintiff
attorneys probably didn't help their cause either. This is a case that everyone is watching including state regulators.
The plaintiff's attorneys were called on the floor for failing to provide a required glossary of terms and for not filing the lawsuit several years ago when the FCC first approved the mandate. The plaintiff attorneys responded to the latter dressing down with stating that they didn't do it sooner because the FCC granted the industry several extensions on the mandate in the past.
The industry claims that the FCC does not have the authority to mandate wireless LNP until or unless it designates wireless carriers to be local exchange carriers. The FCC has yet to make such a declaration for wireless carriers. The real question was if the FCC has the right to impose regulations that were useful but not essential. The FCC appears to believe they have that authority and the industry is claiming that if it isn't essential, the FCC doesn't have the authority.
The issue in the argument as it is being given by wireless industry representatives is that if Congress should pass a law requiring the FCC to implement LNP and the court accepts the industry's argument, the FCC will be at odds in enforcing an act of Congress. This appears to have raised some concern for the appellate judges.
After the hearing, many parties in favor of the LNP implementation seem to think that the FCC did a good job in presenting their case although they did fail to present an argument on some pieces of the lawsuit that the judges felt were important. However, a decision is not expected to be made until mid to late summer. In addition, the attorney for Verizon Wireless believes there may be room to delay the enforcement of the LNP mandate if it cannot be overturned.
The CTIA continues to claim that LNP among other issues under consideration are bad for the consumer. Although they have failed to provide a convincing argument almost all the way across the board in how these regulations were harmful to consumers. The real reason for the battle against LNP and other regulations is that carriers do not want the expense of having to put them into place. The claims that they are harmful to consumers appear to be nothing more than a thinly veiled smoke screen.
The only unknown factor is what Congress will do with the LNP mandate. If they get the feeling that LNP will be delayed or overturned, will they proceed with passing legislation making it a requirement with a specific deadline? Most of our federal legislators are focusing on the reconstruction of Iraq and the current economy. However, by the time the decision comes about, most of the current issues will be well in progress and leaving plenty of time for Congress to act on this issue.
There is no doubt that the wireless industry is going to try and derail the November 24th deadline for this year. The question is if they are going to be successful in their efforts or not. We have seven months on the calendar to mark off before we will find out for sure. If you are a proponent or opponent to the LNP mandate, now is the time to start reaching out to your legislators. Time is running out.
CTIA CLAIMS GOVERNMENT TAXES RESPONSIBLE FOR HIGHER WIRELESS BILLS
For once, the CTIA actually has a valid point as it relates to consumers. Many of us don't even think to scrutinize our wireless bills to see just how much extra we are paying for wireless service. With my plan, I had one of the more expensive calling plans and I didn't really think about the fact that I was paying an extra $27 a month or so. That is how much the government taxes were coming into play. That is an extra $327 a year going to Uncle Sam for having service.
The CTIA claims that wireless plan pricing has dropped by over 30% in the last five years. That is nearly one third of what we used to pay. But they claim that taxes is what keeps the wireless bills so high. It appears as if what they say is true too. When you add in the federal, state, and local taxes, it starts to add up with each of us paying on average 14% of our wireless phone bill in taxes.
Adding to that, the FCC increased the Universal Service Fund tax on all telecom bills from 15% to 28% which was effective on April 1st. Now some of you are paying higher amounts in taxes than those of us in other states. Here are the top ten states where wireless phone subscribers have to pay the most in taxes. New Yorkers pay on average 20.14 percent in taxes and other fees on wireless service plans.
Illinois customers pay 19.71 percent, followed by Nebraska, 19.23 percent; Washington state, 19.22 percent; Texas, 18.32 percent; Rhode Island, 18.21 percent; Florida, 18.06 percent; California, 17.69 percent; Tennessee, 15.71 percent; and the District of Columbia, 15.28 percent. Start adding that up and you can see why your wireless phone bills don't seem to be so inexpensive as they ought to be.
If you subscribe to a $40 calling plan in New York, you can be paying as much as $8 a month in taxes in addition to the calling plan price. That is about the cost of a pack of cigarettes up there now isn't it? The bottom line is that the government is making a killing on taxes collected from wireless phone use. Where exactly is all that money going to anyhow? That's right. It is all going to taxpayer funded programs so that politicians can
pick up votes for re-election and secure a cushy high paying job in case they don't get re-elected.
That number of 14% is quite significant too. It is how much pork barrel spending on Capitol Hill increases each year. We can expect to see more tax increases to cover those programs too. Give it a few more years and we will probably be paying half of our wireless phone bills to taxes.
LONG DISTANCE SERVICE & UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND MAY CRAMP CARRIERS
Going back to this Universal Service Fund (USF) fee that we pay on our wireless phone bills. This is an issue that the FCC is currently looking at with wireless carriers. The USF fee was designed to help offset the costs of establishing rural communication services. Landline carriers are required to allow customers the option of choosing a long distance carrier to be eligible for these funds. However, it has never been applied to wireless carriers which is now a subject of debate.
The Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service deadlocked when it examined the issue in trying to determine if it should be applied to wireless carriers. In other words, should wireless carriers be forced to allow consumers to select their own long distance company for service as is done with local phone providers. That is what put the question before the FCC to determine. Should wireless carriers be eligible for funds from the USF without being required to adhere to the same requirements as landline companies.
Wireless carriers are saying that it would impede upon their ability to
establish competitive rates in order to offer bundled calling plans. Rural carriers would prefer that wireless companies are not given a larger share of that fund and claim that wireless carriers have already infiltrated the rural areas. That is true and not so true. Wireless carriers have infiltrated the rural area but with great reluctance. They don't want to invest the capital needed to conduct a buildout on a population that isn't as lucrative as in the metro areas.
The requirement for equal access of any long distance carrier to a wireless phone would also cut into international long distance call revenue for wireless carriers. Although a smaller portion of their overall revenue, it is still significant. The National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates believes that wireless carriers should have the same rules applied to them as landline carriers. Representatives of this organization feel that the requirement shouldn't be rejected just because it would make wireless carriers ineligible for the funds if they choose not to allow equal access to long distance service companies.
In this debate, both wireless companies and rural landline carriers are fighting against the requirement but for different reasons. Rural companies get a lion's share of the USF money and wireless carriers are afraid of losing the revenue generated by locking in long distance rates as part of their packages. Consumer advocate groups on the other hand think the requirement will be advantageous for the general wireless subscriber.
This is only a bird's eye view of the overall issue. The FCC released a 1,000 page report on the USF debate and it covers quite a number of areas in understanding the entire issue. We think the consumer groups are correct in that the option for selecting a long distance provider would be better for wireless subscribers. The concerns with lost revenue and dilemmas associated with the requirement are going to be for the carriers on either side of the fence to sort out.
AMERICAN BOYCOTT SURVEY INDICATES A PERMANENT RIFT
We were doing some research to see what the American boycott may have had on wireless companies such as T Mobile USA and Siemens, both owned by German corporations. Although we didn't find anything definitive as it related to wireless, we did find a survey that allowed for a more broader view of the boycott's
effects. The biggest effect that we found in our research so far is that France should expect to take a severe punishing for some time to come. Russia might not have it so bad and Germany will fall in between the two. Adding that 15% of Americans intend to continue the boycott of French products for two or more years. Ouch!
Another interesting trend is that the Anti-French sentiment is reaching a level to rival that of that Anti-Russian sentiment of the Cold War and it looks like it is growing. A survey that we found made a reference to this trend and indicates that some Americans intend to make the boycott permanent if not long term. What is interesting is that the survey claims 30% of respondents wouldn't support the boycott. That coincides with the number of Americans against the war in the first place. However, the undecided are now starting to weigh in and it is going in favor of the American boycott in a big way from what we could tell.
Below is only one of the surveys that we found in our research. It is included because it offers a more broad view of the American reaction to the boycott and those countries who opposed the war. But keep in mind, those who are now in favor of the boycott appear to be doing so because of the alleged UN Sanction violations by these countries rather than their opposition to the war.
WASHINGTON, -- The second in a series of comprehensive surveys exploring American attitudes toward international products and companies since the start of the war with Iraq indicates that consumer sentiment is divided on the question of whether to boycott or purchase substitutes for products associated with countries which publicly opposed U.S. policy in Iraq. Released today, the "Trade Winds II" telephone survey of 1,000 adult Americans was conducted April 8-12 by Wirthlin Worldwide, a research and consulting company, and Fleishman-Hillard International Communications.
"Attitudes of many Americans toward French, German, and Canadian brands have hardened in the three weeks since the first Trade Winds survey," said Philip Diehl, co-chair of Fleishman-Hillard's Global Public Affairs Practice. "Despite the progress we've seen in the war over the past three weeks, the number of Americans who say they are more likely to boycott these products has grown while the number who say they'll seek substitute products has remained steady."
"At the same time, many Americans seem to be adopting a 'let bygones be bygones' attitude toward French, German, and Canadian companies," said Dee Allsop, CEO of Wirthlin Worldwide, which conducted the survey. "In the first Trade Winds survey, about 30 percent of Americans expressed skepticism about punishing these companies by saying they are actually "less likely" to boycott French, German, or Canadian products. Only three weeks later, about 45 percent of Americans adopt this view."
-- Good News For French And German Companies?
While French and German companies may be tempted to take solace in the fact that a growing number of Americans now say they are less likely to participate in boycotts, there is less comfort here than meets the eye. The survey also found the number of boycott-inclined consumers to be increasing. Moreover, the French and German brands, in particular, tend to be luxury brands, and the Trade Winds surveys indicate that boycott-inclined consumers tend to be white, mid- to upper-income, more highly educated, GOP, and conservative. This profile is similar to the profile of higher-income luxury brand buyers.
-- Consumer Sentiments Are Also Affecting Investment Decisions
Trade Winds II covered new ground, asking Americans "if you were buying stocks now, how much influence would the fact that a company is French, German, or Canadian have on your decision whether or not to purchase that stock?" A majority (55 percent) says "a great deal" or "some" influence, split evenly between the two choices, while 25 percent say "no influence at all."
-- Is Marketplace Behavior Changing?
Trade Winds II also explored the extent to which consumers have actually purchased substitutes for French, German, or Canadian products. Almost 10 percent of Americans say they have found substitutes for a German or Canadian product they previously had purchased; 15 percent say the same of French products. The depth of sentiment against these countries' products is suggested by the fact that 63 percent of those who say they have purchased substitutes also say they expect to continue to do so for "two years or more." Only 3 percent answered "less than three months." For these consumers, the selection of alternative products appears to be permanent.
-- How Brand-Savvy Are American Consumers?
The first Trade Winds survey, which asked respondents to volunteer the names of French and German brands they knew to be in the U.S. market, found Americans' awareness of these brands to be limited. The Trade Winds II survey presented a list of brands and asked Americans to name the country they identify with each brand. Asking the question in this way demonstrated that Americans have much greater awareness of brand "nationality" than the first survey indicated, although there is still a good deal of confusion with some brands. For example:
French brands
* 80 percent recognize Perrier as French
* As did 62 percent for Christian Dior
* 60 percent for Evian
* 48 percent for Peugeot
* 41 percent for Lancome
* 45 percent say Yoplait is French (but it's actually owned by
General Mills)
* 64 percent say Grey Poupon is French (it's U.S.) and 29 percent say
French's mustard is French (it's also U.S.)
* 43 percent say Michelin is a U.S. firm (23 percent are correct that
it's French)
* 78 percent say Universal Pictures is a U.S. company (it's owned by
the French firm Vivendi)
German brands
* 87 percent recognize Volkswagen as German
* As do 76 percent for Mercedes Benz
* 70 percent for BMW
* 58 percent for Audi (16 percent say it is French)
* 56 percent for Krupp
* 47 percent for Braun
* 31 percent say Siemens is U.S. (24 percent are correct that
it's German)
* 42 percent say Saab is German (it's formerly Swedish now owned by
General Motors)
* 55 percent say Bayer is U.S. (20 percent are correct that
it's German)
* 70 percent say Heineken is German (it's Dutch)
Canadian brands
* 79 percent took the hint and say that Canadian Club is Canadian (it's
distilled and bottled in Canada but U.K.-owned)
* 68 percent did likewise and say Canada Dry is Canadian (it's
also U.K.-owned)
* 49 percent recognize Moosehead as a Canadian beer but only 30 percent
say Molson is Canadian (25 percent say it is German) and 37 percent
say Labatt's is French (24 percent identify it correctly as Canadian)
* Bombardier (manufacturer of LearJet and Ski-doo) is recognized by
only 12 percent as Canadian (25 percent say French, 15 percent say
U.S. and 14 percent say German)
TWO NEW REPORTS COMING OUT WITHIN 60 DAYS TIME FROM CPN
As we mentioned previously, we would be making reports available that may or may not be related to the wireless industry. When we do that, they will be geared more to the small business owner and entrepreneur type of individuals. We are doing it because we have piles of research material that
complements the various experiences that we have accumulated over the years. No academia type of reports with failing to add real life experience here!
OK. So we have to pay for this publication too. But that doesn't make it a lower quality. In fact, we are going to strive to provide our readers with the highest quality of material in our reports that we will stand by because we won't write on anything that we do not have an expertise. Which is pretty limited to wireless, telecom, advertising and marketing, and call centers. So we will probably stick to those unless we hire somebody that has a strong expertise elsewhere.
Now the two reports that we will be presenting are on two different subjects. The first is a report or mini book if you will on how to launch your marketing and advertising campaign as a small business. This report focuses on the small business with a limited budget but walks you through the steps to be taken when you reach a point that your budget increases. The majority of it shows you how to manage your advertising and marketing campaign for under $100 including do's and don'ts.
It is written based on our own experiences walking through each and every step. The best part is that you won't have to throw away thousands upon thousands of dollars in mistakes as we did over time. We will tell you what works and what doesn't and why. It is a no frills, no fluff, no filler report that gets right to the point so you can get started immediately. With this report you should be able to cut your marketing expenses in half and double your annual revenue at the same time.
Next, we will be creating a report on how to select and/or start your own call center. It will cover both domestic and off shore call center services for inbound, outbound, and Interactive Voice Response (IVR) services. What to look out for, how to select a call center or service bureau, and where you have room to negotiate for the best deal. Once again, it is going to be a nitty-gritty report that gets straight to the point. Both small businesses and large corporations considering outsourcing their call center operations will probably find this report useful.
To ensure that you are given an opportunity to get maximum advantage out of these reports, we will also be setting up a fee based phone consultation service for questions that you would like to have specifically addressed to your business. If you have an immediate need for this type of consultation, shoot us an email with a time and date as well as your contact information for the consultation. We will confirm it with a toll free number to contact us. We would consult by phone on wireless industry related trends as well but we can't because we have an exclusive arrangement with a client company for that purpose.
However, if it is related to consulting on advertising and marketing strategies and activities or call center operations, we can do that. We will also provide referrals to potential vendors for these services as appropriate on phone consultations. If we do that, we will give you at least three referrals if possible so that you can do some comparison shopping. Look at it this way, you won't have to pay for benefits and you won't have to shell out any payroll taxes either.
PLEASE TELL YOUR FRIENDS, FAMILY, AND ASSOCIATES ABOUT OUR NEWSLETTER. WE APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT AND ASSISTANCE IN MAKING OUR NEWSLETTER A SUCCESS.
If you want your name to vanish from our list because our newsletter is just too boring or someone else signed you up, let us know. We will reluctantly take you off of our newsletter list. And we still reserve the right to make faces at you when you aren't looking. Copyright notice: Information contained on this website may not be reprinted or distributed in full or in part without the express permission of EarthVision Communications Inc. or Cellular Phone News.
