Verizon iPhone 4G: New Release Date in 2011? AT&T Extends

By Alan Ng - May 7, 2010

We have some fresh details on the Verizon iPhone rumors to bring you now, and it is not particularly good news for Verizon customers looking to get hold of the iPhone this year.

As reported from BGR, new rumors have indictated that AT&T has extended its exclusive agreement with Apple for the iPhone, meaning that a possible release date for the iPhone on Verizon would not be happening until 2011 at the least.

That is according to analyst Brian Marshall of BroadPoint AmTech, who believes that this is due to the current pricing of data plans for the iPad 3G on AT&T. He thinks that AT&T would not have agreed to no long term contract plans for the iPad, without ‘getting something in return from Apple’.

This of course, would be the extention of the iPhone contract they have with Apple. Seems logical to us – we have not heard anything from Verizon since those comments from the CEO a few months ago.

What are your thoughts on this? Do you think it is true or not?

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter or Google Plus.

Also See: Verizon iPhone iOS 5 Update via Wireless, Top of Your Wishlist?

  • This is not a worlds English best grammer contest Geeks don't need to be offended they are what we are. Anyway Im looking forward to get the Iphone 4 next month.

  • EmilywantsaniPhone

    Okay, the grammar comments are killing me so I'm going to make an attempt to clear things up. There is nothing wrong with the phrase "AT&T would not have agreed to no long term contract plans for the iPad". Maybe not the best wording, but it's concise, grammatically correct, and means exactly what the author intended. There are no long term contract plans for the iPad, and AT&T would not have agreed to this without getting something in return, i.e. a renewal of the iPhone contract. Removing "no" from the sentence in question would mean that the iPad requires a contract, and if this were the case, the author's argument wouldn't make any sense.

    That said, I agree but have some ponderings. I'm no expert and don't have much interest in the iPad personally, but I wonder if the motive behind the no contract thing is more an effort to get people to try it without committing. People are used to paying monthly fees for cell phones and home internet, and most of us are somewhat socially and/or financially dependent on these things. Since the iPad serves mostly as an entertainment device, committing to 1 – 2 years worth of payments for the mobile wireless option that is already so prevalent in other devices would seem to me to be low priority. Eliminating the long term contract could work to pull people in so that they do become somewhat dependent.

    • Why thank you, Emily 🙂

  • proven22

    Why don't we quit nit-picking over stupid crap, WHO CARES???? Just put your opinion in regarding the article!!!

  • Swing-an-a-Miss

    Ignore the grammar nazis.

    Don't forget that AT&T has worse call drop rates too:
    http://www.ozcarguide.com/technology/cellphone-pd

  • sml175

    Really, we knew what he meant. Are you THAT perfect?

  • Now you know better to proofread your articles before someone corrects your grammatical errors and mistakes. It's an embarassment to your website and to your readers. For those who think its excusable—-please send yourself back to English 101 or better yet—–Elementary school.

  • Ale

    haha ur such a square dude.. give the guy a break! 😛

  • Squire

    OMG do you speak English?

    "would not of agreed to no long term contract plans"

    Fix that, will you? It should be

    "would not HAVE agreed to ANY long term contract plans"

    Dear oh dear. And I bet you make more money than me.

  • Squire

    OMG do you speak English?

    "would not of agreed to no long term contract plans"

    Fix that, will you? It should be

    "would not HAVE agreed to ANY long term contract plans"

    Dear oh dear. And I bet you make more money than me.