According to an analyst, the nation's second largest wireless carrier, popular for the Apple iPhone, has been shortchanged in the budget department in favor of the company's wired division.  As such, AT&T would have to spend $5 billion on their wireless network to catch up with the coverage currently offered by Verizon Wireless.  In research conducted by TownHall Investment Research, AT&T receives 57 percent of its operating income from wireless and 35 percent from wired services, but the wireless division only receives 34 percent of the capital expenditures.  The wired division, on the other hand, receives a whopping 65 percent.

What's more, AT&T's capital expenditures on the wireless network from 2006 to 2009 totaled approximately $21.6 billion.  In the same time frame, Verizon Wireless and Sprint spent $25.4 million and $16 billion, respectively.  In the three year period, Verizon Wireless has spent $353 per subscriber, while Sprint has spent $310 per subscriber.  Coming in last place is AT&T, with $308 per wireless subscriber.  The public's perception of AT&T's network is poor and declining, apparently because of real network challenges when compared with Verizon Wireless and Sprint, said Gerard Hallaren, director of research at TownHall Investment Research.

AT&T's network performance has been heavily criticized in various online publications, magazines, and newspapers across the United States.  AT&T's network potential isn't the problem.  The company's 3G network operates on HSPA, with a theoretical cap of 7.2 Mbps.  As a comparison, Verizon Wireless utilizes EVDO, which has been said to reach 1.4 Mbps in real-world testing.  AT&T's network reliability is the concern.  In a test conducted by PC World last year, AT&T came in last place for reliability in all 13 test cities.

I understand that AT&T has a poor reputation across parts of the United States (particularly in larger cities), but with 81 million subscribers, the company must be doing something right.  Is it the iPhone?

Via ITWorld