Has iPhone really been a transfer of wealth from ATT to Apple? Numbers say no.

Late yesterday, I saw a tweet from Asymco that read:

Nomura Securities analyst Michael McCormack: the iPhone has "really been a wealth transfer from AT&T shareholders to Apple shareholders."

What? You don't believe me? I screen cap'd it and everything!

This struck me as non-sensical. It's not like there's a set amount of wealth. That if Apple gains wealth, or in this case a big whole pile of wealth, that someone else must lose wealth.

Particularly when talking about iPhone which was, we all admit, a revolutionary device that effectively created the worldwide smartphone market. At least, as we now define smartphones.

I was about to forget this statement than realized that Asymco was quoting an "analyst". Meaning, if iPhone really did transfer wealth from ATT to Apple, as plainly and boldly as the analyst emphatically states, it ought to be, you know, verifiable.

Using math!

Only, I'm not so sure it is. Smartphones are but one business line for both Apple and for ATT. ATT could have, in theory, revolutionized the nation's television infrastructure in the four or so years since the iPhone's birth. ATT, which has significant links into and within the government, might have gone through a major change in its financial structure. Or acquired T-Mobile. Or been more severly impacted by a global recession. Or lost money or gained money by offering Android smartphones.

In other words, the analyst statement is mostly bullshit.

But I thought, since ATT has had iPhone from the beginning, and Verizon less than a year, let's simply compare ATT and Verizon. If the immense amount of wealth that iPhone has generated has really been extracted from ATT than there should be a massive difference in the fortunes of the two carriers.

Spoiler alert:

There's not.

From the launch of iPhone with ATT on 29 June 2007 until 6 Jan 2012. Apple is that line that, well, you know. Verizon and ATT are the other lines.