Now we know why the Verizon Note 2 is being held back till the end of the month...

Shamrock13

Senior Member
Jun 7, 2010
864
33
0
PA
I think they want to release both phones at the same time. This is out of no where, but..... here's their motto for Christmas... "Large and in charge.."

Am I right?
 

SFBPro

Senior Member
Feb 2, 2010
174
11
0
Troy, AL
I'm guessing it has something to do with them wanting to push the HTC phablet or having some sort of deal with HTC.

http://www.theverge.com/2012/11/6/3...s-invite-us-to-see-their-latest-collaboration
This could be true.

Speculation:
It seems that Verizon is punishing Samsung (and us) for not letting them have their way with the GSIII. In attempt to appease the people that really wanted the Note 2, Verizon threw us a bone by giving us the pre-order. While that is going on, Verizon stalled to let the DNA run through the FCC and get a little exclusive time on the shelves. This pushes average Joe to purchase the only [good] phablet on Verizon at the moment. After the DNA's exclusivity, then they will let Samsung sell its phone.

*EDIT*
I am assuming the DNA does actually get on the shelf before the GN2.
 

SFBPro

Senior Member
Feb 2, 2010
174
11
0
Troy, AL
Yeah, a lot of assumptions. Also, keep in mind Verizon really loves crapping on HTC way more than on Samsung, so there's that.
Curiosity, was there something in specific you were thinking of?

I honestly thing that Verizon dislikes(?) all manufacturers equally. I just believe that HTC is not in a position to resist the demands of Verizon. Look at HTC's earnings and tell me that they can afford to not bow down to the carriers demands. If it turns out there was a deal to shelf the GN2 until after the DNA, then it looks to me like Verizon is punishing Samsung and giving HTC a treat for being a good little doggy.
 

kimdoocheol

Senior Member
Jan 9, 2012
814
97
0
I saw this on Droid life, too

I also find it funny that this phone only has on VZW logo on it on the front, and not on the back. I guess they only brand the crap out of stuff that is available on all carriers, which does make sense from a deluded, out-of-touch, business marketing stand point.

Still though, I hate the fact that they are obviously trying to push their 'exclusive' device, mostly because of even money invested or because of a higher profitability making everyone else suffer.

They also have multiwindow ROM that should be released soon - making the wait for VZW seem even more ridiculous. Locked bootloader, branded home button, and a release date of almost 1 month later than the last company to release the phone.
 

johnchad14

Senior Member
May 1, 2010
398
38
0
Curiosity, was there something in specific you were thinking of?

I honestly thing that Verizon dislikes(?) all manufacturers equally. I just believe that HTC is not in a position to resist the demands of Verizon. Look at HTC's earnings and tell me that they can afford to not bow down to the carriers demands. If it turns out there was a deal to shelf the GN2 until after the DNA, then it looks to me like Verizon is punishing Samsung and giving HTC a treat for being a good little doggy.
Just felt that way traditionally, and probably as you said is mostly due to HTC's inability to really resist their demands. Was disappointed this year when HTC tried to simplify their lineup and got forced to make more carrier branded devices for Verizon. Mostly my feeling that HTC gets pushed around by Verizon too much goes back to wanting a Nexus One back in the day, and having it get delayed on Verizon then never released with HTC getting forced to retool it as the Incredible instead.
 

SFBPro

Senior Member
Feb 2, 2010
174
11
0
Troy, AL
Just felt that way traditionally, and probably as you said is mostly due to HTC's inability to really resist their demands. Was disappointed this year when HTC tried to simplify their lineup and got forced to make more carrier branded devices for Verizon. Mostly my feeling that HTC gets pushed around by Verizon too much goes back to wanting a Nexus One back in the day, and having it get delayed on Verizon then never released with HTC getting forced to retool it as the Incredible instead.
So that is what happened to Verizon's Nexus... I would also like to point out that even Sprint even made HTC brand their One X as the Evo LTE. Personally I wish carriers would but out on the phone marketing and spend the money on beefing the networks. Or, get this, stop charging us an arm and a leg. Anyway, if Verizon choose to hold back the GN2, then I stand by my speculations.
 

bsweetness

Senior Member
Mar 27, 2009
892
239
0
This could be true.

Speculation:
It seems that Verizon is punishing Samsung (and us) for not letting them have their way with the GSIII. In attempt to appease the people that really wanted the Note 2, Verizon threw us a bone by giving us the pre-order. While that is going on, Verizon stalled to let the DNA run through the FCC and get a little exclusive time on the shelves. This pushes average Joe to purchase the only [good] phablet on Verizon at the moment. After the DNA's exclusivity, then they will let Samsung sell its phone.

*EDIT*
I am assuming the DNA does actually get on the shelf before the GN2.
I don't think Verizon is "punishing" Samsung for anything. There's a far more obvious, and business-oriented answer. When it comes to Android devices, Verizon likes to advertise their Droid line over non-Droid branded devices. With the Note 2, like the Galaxy S III, the device isn't a part of the Droid line, and more importantly it's not a Verizon exclusive. The Note 2, like the S III, is available (or will be available) on all major U.S. carriers. Verizon would rather market exclusive devices, because by marketing those, they're also marketing the fact that you have to be a Verizon customer. The same doesn't hold true if they heavily advertise or put a lot of emphasis behind devices that are available on every carrier.

So, is Verizon holding back the Note 2's release because of the DNA? That's very likely a part of it. But it's not because they're trying to punish anyone. They want to give their exclusive devices most of the exposure, along with a head start, because if someone wants of those, they have to be on Verizon. It just makes more business sense to put an emphasis on exclusive devices when it comes to marketing and release, especially when Samsung is already doing more marketing for the Note 2 than Verizon does for pretty much any device (as they also did with the S III).
 
Last edited:

kimdoocheol

Senior Member
Jan 9, 2012
814
97
0
I don't think Verizon is "punishing" Samsung for anything. There's a far more obvious, and business-oriented answer. When it comes to Android devices, Verizon likes to advertise their Droid line over non-Droid branded devices. With the Note 2, like the Galaxy S III, the device isn't a part of the Droid line, and more importantly it's not a Verizon exclusive. Most importantly, the Note 2, like the S III, is available (or will be available) on all major U.S. carriers. Verizon would rather market exclusive devices, because by marketing those, they're also marketing the fact that you have to be a Verizon customer. The same doesn't hold true if they heavily advertise or put a lot of emphasis behind devices that are available on every carrier.

So, is Verizon holding back the Note 2's release because of the DNA? That's very likely a part of it. But it's not because they're trying to punish anyone. They want to give their exclusive devices most of the exposure, along with a head start, because if someone wants of those, they have to be on Verizon. It just makes more business sense to put an emphasis on exclusive devices when it comes to marketing and release, especially when Samsung is already doing more marketing for the Note 2 than Verizon does for pretty much any device (as they also did with the S III).
Seems logical as since it is a 'exclusive' device I'm guessing they pay some sort of premium too, so my bet is they try harder to make sure these devices are profitable.

My guess is VZW is holding back Note2 for two reasons, the home button and the DNA. It seems like there has been a low stock in regards to the note 2, so I'm wondering if that was an issue with the delay too.

Anyways, this marketing approach sucks for us, as this type of marketing works on on consumers who really have no interest in a specific device. Those who know exactly what they want, are likely not to sway, mostly all of us on this board.

I also think that the commercials for the Note II are targeting the wrong demographic as well. Should be more of a high-end device that can be used for every day calendar things showing off the S pen. Basically it has a kid drawing on the damn phone. I know that is ATT/Samsung, but still. I wonder how VZW commercials will be.

I'm still praying the device will ship early, but I really doubt it. I was reading old posts and a few people were claiming after thanksgiving, maybe a week after... from an "insider." way before oct. 24th.
 

SFBPro

Senior Member
Feb 2, 2010
174
11
0
Troy, AL
I don't think Verizon is "punishing" Samsung for anything. There's a far more obvious, and business-oriented answer. When it comes to Android devices, Verizon likes to advertise their Droid line over non-Droid branded devices. With the Note 2, like the Galaxy S III, the device isn't a part of the Droid line, and more importantly it's not a Verizon exclusive. Most importantly, the Note 2, like the S III, is available (or will be available) on all major U.S. carriers. Verizon would rather market exclusive devices, because by marketing those, they're also marketing the fact that you have to be a Verizon customer. The same doesn't hold true if they heavily advertise or put a lot of emphasis behind devices that are available on every carrier.

So, is Verizon holding back the Note 2's release because of the DNA? That's very likely a part of it. But it's not because they're trying to punish anyone. They want to give their exclusive devices most of the exposure, along with a head start, because if someone wants of those, they have to be on Verizon. It just makes more business sense to put an emphasis on exclusive devices when it comes to marketing and release, especially when Samsung is already doing more marketing for the Note 2 than Verizon does for pretty much any device (as they also did with the S III).
Your right, it is good business sense for Verizon to push their advertised Droids. I am not drawing my conclusions on Samsung being punished from this one incident. I believe this was Verizon's move in a power war between carriers and manufacturers. Like you said, the Droids are Verizon exclusives. Samsung started to build their brand with the Galaxy line and Verizon does not need competition to their exclusive. Since Verizon was not able to twist the widely popular GSIII to their liking, they choose to send Samsung a message through a popular but not "make you or break you" phone.

Seems logical as since it is a 'exclusive' device I'm guessing they pay some sort of premium too, so my bet is they try harder to make sure these devices are profitable.

My guess is VZW is holding back Note2 for two reasons, the home button and the DNA. It seems like there has been a low stock in regards to the note 2, so I'm wondering if that was an issue with the delay too.

Anyways, this marketing approach sucks for us, as this type of marketing works on on consumers who really have no interest in a specific device. Those who know exactly what they want, are likely not to sway, mostly all of us on this board.

I also think that the commercials for the Note II are targeting the wrong demographic as well. Should be more of a high-end device that can be used for every day calendar things showing off the S pen. Basically it has a kid drawing on the damn phone. I know that is ATT/Samsung, but still. I wonder how VZW commercials will be.

I'm still praying the device will ship early, but I really doubt it. I was reading old posts and a few people were claiming after thanksgiving, maybe a week after... from an "insider." way before oct. 24th.
I actually know plenty of people at my old job who let their kids draw on the device to keep them occupied. While I don't know which demographic would generate higher sales, I can say that their target exists.
 

johnchad14

Senior Member
May 1, 2010
398
38
0
Hopefully the whole exclusive devices idea will go the way of the dinosaur soon enough. I'm glad Samsung got their foot in the door this year on that one and hopefully it expands to other manufacturers. They're really only hurting themselves by raising costs, delaying releases, not carrying wanted devices...ah well.
 

kimdoocheol

Senior Member
Jan 9, 2012
814
97
0
Your right, it is good business sense for Verizon to push their advertised Droids. I am not drawing my conclusions on Samsung being punished from this one incident. I believe this was Verizon's move in a power war between carriers and manufacturers. Like you said, the Droids are Verizon exclusives. Samsung started to build their brand with the Galaxy line and Verizon does not need competition to their exclusive. Since Verizon was not able to twist the widely popular GSIII to their liking, they choose to send Samsung a message through a popular but not "make you or break you" phone.

I actually know plenty of people at my old job who let their kids draw on the device to keep them occupied. While I don't know which demographic would generate higher sales, I can say that their target exists.
Meh, it was more of a hit against getting an A-list celebrity to endorse the phone rather than show off the features of the phone. From the commercial all you really get is you can draw on pictures (who knows if this is an app or built-in? <-- saying from a potential viewer who has NO idea what the Note 2 is), it has a stylus, you can watch videos on it, and take phone calls. I really thought nothing of the Note 2 until I saw the review on youtube and features like multiwindow, etc. I think Samsung did great with the S3 commercials in comparison, that really took a hit at Apple and spouted off their features such as s-beam. I don't think you need A-list celebrities for these phones, rather just show off the features and why they are superior to other phones on the market, such as iP5. Like I said, I just think it shows how off marketing companies can be sometimes.
 

SFBPro

Senior Member
Feb 2, 2010
174
11
0
Troy, AL
Meh, it was more of a hit against getting an A-list celebrity to endorse the phone rather than show off the features of the phone. From the commercial all you really get is you can draw on pictures (who knows if this is an app or built-in? <-- saying from a potential viewer who has NO idea what the Note 2 is), it has a stylus, you can watch videos on it, and take phone calls. I really thought nothing of the Note 2 until I saw the review on youtube and features like multiwindow, etc. I think Samsung did great with the S3 commercials in comparison, that really took a hit at Apple and spouted off their features such as s-beam. I don't think you need A-list celebrities for these phones, rather just show off the features and why they are superior to other phones on the market, such as iP5. Like I said, I just think it shows how off marketing companies can be sometimes.
Ah, gotcha. I do know that the SIII commercials worked because I heard people actually talk about them. Which I can't say that about Apple.
 

kimdoocheol

Senior Member
Jan 9, 2012
814
97
0
Ah, gotcha. I do know that the SIII commercials worked because I heard people actually talk about them. Which I can't say that about Apple.
Yeah, they should advertise how the phone won't dim when you are looking at it, and stuff like that. I got sold on the features... or the fact that is quite literally the fastest phone on the market with a huge battery. Maybe this type of marketing will work on a few people, but I think people are into this phone are going to buy it for the features and not because LeBron has the phone. This isn't a "cutesy" phone that someone like Justin Bieber will use and all the teens will buy because of that,