If you find this metric as astonishing as I do, consider this: The increase in Bay Area data traffic is actually below the national average–significantly below. According to AT&T (T) CTO John Donovan, 3G data traffic on the company’s wireless network has risen nearly 5,000 percent in the past 12 quarters nationally (see chart below; click to enlarge).

“Today, we’re seeing unprecedented growth in mobile broadband traffic,” Donovan said during his keynote at the Open Mobile Conference on Nov. 5. “This growth has required extensive rethinking of wireless networks as we know them, as well as significant advances in the supporting IP backbone and other infrastructure.”

A 5,000 percent increase in 3G data traffic: That’s an astonishing figure. Seems to me it’s entirely likely that any carrier that had been first with the iPhone–including catcalling rival Verizon (VZ)–would have suffered network troubles similar to those that plague AT&T today.

No other U.S. carrier offers a super-smartphone that has sold as well as the iPhone and that people use much like a laptop. Sure, Android and Palm (PALM) webOS devices are used in this way as well, but there are far fewer of them and they have significantly fewer data-hungry apps.

Research in Motion (RIMM) offers some BlackBerries that are used this way, but only some, and there are only 3,000 or so apps available for them. iPhone owners have 100,000 apps from which to choose. And while it’s obvious that there are more BlackBerries in use than iPhones, some of these rely on AT&T’s network, which only compounds the carrier’s problems.

So, really, any carrier that had been first to market with the iPhone would have seen its network overtaxed, especially after Apple (AAPL) launched the iPhone 3G and the iTunes App Store. Those events effectively upended traditional planning models for network capacity in a way that no one was prepared for.

Perhaps other carriers would have fared a bit better. Verizon’s 3G network, even back in 2007, was much deeper and broader than AT&T’s. But could it really have supported a 5,000 percent increase in data traffic without incident? I’m not so sure.

Which is not to say that AT&T is blameless. Its network has lagged and continues to do so, and the iPhone and the massive surge in data traffic it brought with it are not entirely responsible for that.

But they are obviously a big factor. It will be interesting, then, to see how Verizon’s network holds up in comparison if and when the carrier gets the iPhone.

[Image Credit: Morgan Stanley Managing Director Mary Meeker]

Make no mistake, that surge has been massive. Says AT&T (T): “Since 2008 AT&T’s network in the San Francisco area has experienced a 3G data traffic increase of 2,000 percent.”

Wow. No wonder my calls kept dropping at that last Apple (AAPL) event in San Francisco (yes, an iPhone 3G repeatedly dropping calls at Apple’s Sept. invitation-only music gathering). In any event, the upgrade, which includes the bolstering of backbone infrastructure, should result in better coverage, 3G performance and in-building penetration.

“More than ever before, customers look to wireless communications to stay in touch with family, friends and business colleagues,” said Terry Stenzel, AT&T vice president and general manager for Northern California/Reno. “The additional spectrum helps to enhance the 3G network so that our customers have the best experience when they make a call, check an e-mail, download a video or song, access applications or surf the Internet on their AT&T device.”

“Now we aren’t typically the carrier that comes out and announces what we are going to be selling 12 months from now. Other carriers do that, and the media loves to speculate on what we are bringing to market. But what I will tell you is that over the next six months or so you will see devices like the Palm Pre and the cousin on our network from Palm.”

– Verizon Wireless President and CEO Lowell McAdam

For Palm, 2010 will be a year of channel expansion, with its new webOS handsets coming to more carriers. Top among them, Verizon (VZ), which has been rumored to be getting a device “like the Palm Pre” since Palm (PALM) launched it. In a research note to investors today, Kaufman Bros. analyst Shaw Wu says a Palm smartphone on Verizon is pretty much inevitable.

“Based on our checks with industry and supply chain sources, we have fairly high conviction in Verizon carrying Palm’s webOS-based smart phones sometime in 2010 (potentially as early as 1H),” Wu writes.

“The reason,” Wu explains, “is three-fold: 1) despite heavy promotion and favorable reviews, sales of Android 2.0 smart phones (MOT Droid and HTC Droid Eris) have been somewhat disappointing and below expectations; 2) strong indications point to Palm’s launch exclusive with Sprint ending in 2009; and 3) our checks show high interest in webOS from Verizon including public comments by CEO Lowell McAdam.”

Interesting, especially the comment about Droid sales. If Wu is right, the device may not prove as daunting a competitive challenge as you would think.

“It’s too early to declare game over,” Wu says. “Talking with investors, most have written off Palm as a legitimate competitor and assumed Android will be the platform of choice at Verizon and other carriers. We believe Palm still has sizable advantages with its multitouch capability and vertical integration.”

So begins Verizon’s (VZ) response to AT&T’s (T) complaints about its new ad campaign, and as you can see below, it pulls no punches. For 53 pages–all of them very obviously drafted with publication in mind–the new filing mercilessly thrashes AT&T, proving over and over again that the carrier’s carping over Verizon’s ads has transformed a no-win situation into a horrific PR disaster that only highlights AT&T’s shortcomings.

“In the final analysis, AT&T seeks emergency relief because Verizon’s side-by-side, apples-to-apples comparison of its own 3G coverage with AT&T’s confirms what the marketplace has been saying for months: AT&T failed to invest adequately in the necessary infrastructure to expand its 3G coverage to support its growth in smartphone business and the usefulness of its service to smartphone users has suffered accordingly. AT&T may not like the message that the ads send, but this Court should reject its efforts to silence the messenger.”

Brutal.

As I said earlier this month, if AT&T’s lawsuit over Verizon’s allegedly misleading “there’s a map for that” wasn’t a public relations mistake to begin with, it will be by the time Verizon gets through. And, indeed, the lawsuit already is a mistake. Below, Verizon’s reply in full:

PREVIOUSLY:

• Frosty’s Winter Litigation Wonderland: AT&T Demands Verizon Pull Holiday iPhone Ads [With Full Complaint]
• Verizon Banishes iPhone to Island of Misfit Toys
• Verizon on AT&T Suit: There’s a Word for That. “Junk.”
• Verizon to iPhone Users: “Want Five Times More 3G Coverage? There’s a Map for That.”

verizonresponse –

Once again, AT&T (T) argues that coverage maps featured in Verizon’s (VZ) ad are misleading and falsely suggest that AT&T offers no coverage in areas where it actually does service.

“Contrary to the image presented in the Verizon ads, our wireless network is pervasive,” said an AT&T spokesman. “It covers over 300 million people, or 97 percent of the U.S. population. Our fastest, or 3G, network covers approximately 233 million people, or 75 percent of the U.S. population….[Verizon's] use of white space is misleading.”

While AT&T is deadly serious about this accusation, the fact that it must make it by referencing creatures like the Abominable Snow Monster and a pink spotted elephant makes it, well, hysterical.

“The ‘Island of Misfit Toys’ television advertisement is a parody of the ‘Rudolph the Red Nose Reindeer’ television special that depicts an island to which Rudolph travels after escaping an attack from the Abominable Snow Monster,” AT&T argues in its complaint. “The advertisement begins with outdated, discarded toys expressing surprise at the arrival of an Apple iPhone. The red Charlie-in-the-Box says ‘Hey! Check out the new guy!’ The spotted elephant, in a surprised manner, asks the iPhone ‘What are you doing here? You can download apps and browse the web!’ and a Dolly for Sue asserts that ‘Yeah. People will love you [the iPhone].’”

The complaint continues: “In response, a blue AT&T coverage map depicting large swaths of ‘white’ or ‘blank’ space across the United States appears above the iPhone. All the toys exclaim ‘Oh . . .’ in dismay, while the iPhone wilts and its screen turns dark. The toy airplane then assures the iPhone that ‘you’re going to fit right in here!’”

Finally, as AT&T describes it, “AT&T’s and Verizon’s coverage maps then appear and the announcer states, ‘with five times more 3G coverage than AT&T, Verizon Wireless is your destination for great gifts.’ The image of the sad and wilting iPhone on an island of misfit toys falsely communicates that the iPhone is a broken device because it cannot browse the web or download applications when outside of AT&T’s depicted coverage area. Further, the maps in the advertisement deceive consumers into believing that AT&T’s customers have no coverage whatsoever when they are outside of AT&T’s depicted coverage area and thus cannot use their wireless devices in many parts of the United States.”

Verizon’s attorneys are probably doubled over with laughter at this very moment.

Below, AT&T’s amended complaint in its entirety:

VerizonAmendComp _3_ –

Judging by Orange’s first-day sales, the debut was quite a success. The iPhone went on sale at 7 am Tuesday and by 4 pm, Orange had sold more than 30,000. Not bad. In fact, according to Orange, it’s a new record. Said a spokesperson for the carrier: “Orange is delighted to reveal, that as of 4 PM yesterday, it…sold more than 30,000 iPhones across the UK–smashing what we believe is the previously published first-day sales record for a handset in the UK.”

Orange also claims to have registered roughly 250,000 iPhone presubscriptions, of which only a fraction have been fulfilled. If that is the case, the carrier will end up with a million iPhone users by the end of 2010.

Indeed, Broadpoint AmTech analyst Mark McKechnie estimates Verizon (VZ) sold about 100,000 Droids in its first weekend. McKechnie believes the carrier had about 200,000 units on-hand at launch, and most stores he surveyed had sold at least half of their stock over the weekend.

That’s not nearly the one million iPhones Apple (AAPL) sold during the first weekend of its latest model debut, but it’s impressive nonetheless. Certainly, Motorola (MOT) hasn’t moved that many handsets in so short a period in a very long time–if ever.

“I see the first few days as encouraging,” McKechnie told Bloomberg. “There seems to be pretty good demand–they’ve taken the right steps and picked a good partner with Google on the Android side.”

Citigroup (C) analyst Jim Suva agreed, noting that Droid doesn’t require iPhone-like sales to be successful. Said Suva: “Although the press is stating the Droid launch was not as successful as the iPhone launch, we don’t believe investors expected an iPhone-like launch, but rather a first step in a cadence of products that will help bring Motorola’s handsets out of the death spiral experienced during the past three years.”

Then there was this from RBC’s Mark Sue, who declared that anyone expecting a launch reminiscent of the iPhone’s was expecting too much: “Motorola’s Droid landed at Verizon and while the new device is not the be all and end all for Motorola it’s an important beginning for a company that sorely missed out of a growing market,” he wrote. “There were no around-the-block lines of consumers waiting to get their hands on a Motorola Droid, yet investors shouldn’t expect them either. We’re looking for a steady ramp instead towards our estimate of approximately 1M units in 4Q09.”

All of the new commercials are Christmas-themed and all feature Apple’s (AAPL) iPhone, though they are careful to leave it unscathed by Verizon’s criticism of AT&T (T). The standout among the three, this re-creation of the “Island of Misfit Toys” scene from the 1964 Rankin/Bass stop-motion animated Christmas television special, “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer.” Note that the conceit of the ad is that iPhone has been banished to the Island of Misfit Toys not because of its quality but because of of AT&T’s 3G network.

A pretty brilliant escalation of Verizon’s marketing battle with AT&T and one that suggests through its deference to the iPhone that there may be more to these Verizon iPhone rumors than previously thought.

Below, Verizon’s other two ads.

“The cost of smart phones is considerably higher than feature phones for which the early termination fees were created years ago at $175,” said Verizon spokesman Jim Gerace. He added that the new $350 ETF declines by $10 per month through the life of the contract and customers can avoid it by buying their devices off contract and paying full retail price.

An interesting move for Verizon (VZ), which just last year agreed to pay $21 million to settle a class-action lawsuit filed by California consumers over the very early-termination fees it is now increasing. The plaintiffs in the suit alleged that Verizon’s ETFs were illegal under California law and that they were designed to unfairly lock consumers into long-term contracts and prevent them from switching carriers. When Verizon settled the suit, it denied any wrongdoing, insisting that early-termination fees are simply a means of recovering legitimate costs. And to some extent Verizon does have a point.

Full retail price for the Motorola’s (MOT) new Droid is $559.99. With a two-year contract, Verizon sells the handset for $199.99. Theoretically, that’s a $359.99 subsidy (I have no idea at what price Verizon purchases Droid from Motorola). So if Verizon allowed subscribers to break their contract after a month without paying an early-termination fee, the company would stand to lose money. And subscribers who did so could subsequently sell the device online and potentially make a profit, though a small one.

So it’s certainly understandable that Verizon and other carriers want to protect the subsidies they dole out for these new smart phones. And as noted earlier, Verizon’s new ETF drops by $10 each month a subscriber remains under contract. But at this rate, subscribers are still bound to pay a $110 termination fee in the 23rd month of a two-year contract. The contract is nearly over, the subscriber obligation to Verizon almost fulfilled, yet the company can still slap its customers with nearly a third of the full ETF if they break it at that time.

By month 23 of a two-year contract, does Verizon really stand to lose $110 if subscribers decide to switch carriers? Doesn’t seem likely if subscribers can walk away just a month later without consequence, taking their handsets with them.

Since Verizon is pro-rating the ETF, why isn’t it doing so in such a way that it zeroes out by the end of the contract?

And isn’t the fast pace of innovation in the smart-phone sector such that prices–for both component and device–are dropping so quickly that high ETFs aren’t really justified? Remember, you can get Apple’s (AAPL) iPhone for $99 today. When the iPhone debuted in 2007, it commanded a price of $499/$599, depending on model.

I’ve put those same questions to Verizon and will update here when I hear back. In the meantime, here’s what Consumers Union policy analyst Joel Kelsey has to say on the matter: “When people want to switch wireless services, the biggest cost they face is early termination fees. These fees are designed to lock people into long-term contracts and stop them from getting better deals. Early-termination fees make the marketplace less competitive. Verizon’s move is painful proof that it’s time for lawmakers to crack down on these fees.”

UPDATE: Verizon Wireless spokesperson Nancy Stark offers the following answers to the questions I posed above:

Your first question regarding the balance at month 23 or 24 assumes that, at that point, we have recovered all of our subsidy and up-front costs for every device. That simply is not so.

On your second question, while the pace of innovation plays a role in prices coming down somewhat, it also plays a role in driving up costs as more and more complexity that customers want is added to phones–from premium HTML browsers to high-resolution MP cameras with optical zoom; videoplayers; music players; dual processor chipsets; WiFi; very high display resolution, operating systems such as BlackBerry, Windows Mobile, Palm, Android–ALL with the added value (vs a desktop) of mobility, and ALL in one tiny device that ALSO allows you to talk to anyone from anywhere. phew! (by comparison, I recently paid $200 for a camera and all it can do is take pictures, and it has only middle of the road capabilities.)

But getting back to ETFs specifically. The most important point is that Verizon Wireless customers do not have to have an ETF at all if they do not want to. ETFs allow customers to have it either way: They can have no ETF and pay full retail for their device. OR, they can get a greatly discounted device by having an ETF.

“Verizon is displaying maps of the United States that purport to show each carrier’s ‘3G’ coverage. The maps use color to depict the areas of the country in which each carrier has ‘3G’ coverage and blank or white space in the areas of the country where ‘3G’ coverage is not available. Consumers are interpreting the white or blank space on the maps to mean that AT&T customers who are not in an AT&T ‘3G’ coverage area have no wireless coverage whatsoever, and therefore have no ability to use their wireless devices for any purposes in vast areas of the country. This interpretation is not surprising as Verizon, in its own coverage maps, uses white space to inform customers that no coverage of any kind exists. Contrary to the misleading message conveyed by Verizon’s advertisements, AT&T customers can fully use their wireless devices outside of a ‘3G’ coverage area and undisputedly have coverage in areas depicted by the white or blank spaces on the maps used in Verizon’s advertisements.”

– Excerpt from AT&T’s complaint against Verizon

If AT&T’s lawsuit over Verizon’s allegedly misleading “there’s a map for that” wasn’t a public relations mistake to begin with, it will be by the time Verizon gets through with it. Responding to the suit today, Verizon (VZ) rep Jeffrey Nelson used it to stoke public perception that AT&T’s (T) network is inferior to Verizon’s.

“This is a junk lawsuit. It has no merit,” Nelson told Adweek. “It’s surprising that rather than defend the ‘blue’ hot spots on their 3G map, our competitor instead focuses on their white spaces. The maps clearly note that the comparisons are of 3G service, and further note that voice and data services are available in other places.”

Way to draw attention away from Verizon’s claim of a superior network coverage, AT&T.

That’s nowhere near the one million iPhone 3Gs Apple (AAPL) sold in the first three days of the device’s launch in 2008. Nor is it the 13,500-a-day Apple sold during the first 74 days of the original iPhone’s debut. Disappointing to say the least — even if there are already an estimated 1.5 million to two million gray-market iPhones in use in China.

“We view the 5k units as soft,” Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster said in a note to clients this morning. “Using the Jun-07 U.S. launch as a comparison we would have expected about 30k units….We originally thought China would contribute about 1-2m iPhones to our 36m unit estimate for 2010. The launch runrate of about 1,500 units per day would suggest 550k units per year.”

Nonetheless, Munster is maintaining expectations. “We are maintaining our overall numbers,” the analyst notes, “despite the soft China launch based on our belief that other wild cards remain for upside to our iPhone units in CY10 including the rollout to new carriers. We believe that eventually China will emerge as a major market for iPhone sales but it could take a year or two to gain meaningful unit traction as it did in the U.S.”

[Image credit: Mobile163.com]

There is “no sign of the sort of sellout reception that greeted the smart phone at its introduction in other countries,” The Wall Street Journal reported, adding that there were no lines for the iPhone at the Apple store in Beijing, the company’s only location in China.

Sounds like a lackluster launch, and with Apple (AAPL) and China Unicom, the only carrier authorized to sell the device in the country, declining to disclose sales figures, it’s difficult to argue that it was otherwise. It clearly wasn’t the rousing success to which we’ve become accustomed. That said, it probably wasn’t quite the bust it’s been made out to be, either.

Why? Well, consider this: There were launch ceremonies in 30 provinces. To date, we’ve heard anecdotal reports from–as best I can tell–one of them. And while it’s admittedly concerning to learn that a China Unicom store in Beijing sold just 10 iPhones last Saturday, that’s just one store. The device was on sale in many, many others (1000, according to Apple COO Tim Cook) across 30 provinces and 285 Chinese cities in a nation with 710 million mobile-phone subscribers.

Finally, while it’s true that the prices Apple and China Unicom are charging for the iPhone are heady, they’re not quite as bad as we’ve been led to believe. “I think the western media has misconstrued the iPhone pricing in China,” Dan Butterfield, editor of iPhonAsia told me.

“Nine out of 10 reports that I’ve seen have simply repeated the ‘too expensive’ mantra,” Butterfield explained. “They then quote the contract free price point–4,999 yuan ($730) to 6,999 yuan ($1,025) for the iPhone 3GS. They argue that you can buy a gray-market iPhone cheaper and it has WiFi….The truth…the gray-market price is marginally cheaper for those who want to go ‘prepaid.’ But when you examine the full matrix of China Unicom price/plans, you quickly realize that you can save big by going on contract vs. prepaid (pay as you go). There are even four price/plans where your iPhone if free. The iPhone subsidy increases for those who opt for more expensive monthly plans.”

Butterfield elaborates: “Moreover, if you want to access ‘3G,’ there is no good carrier option other than China Unicom. You can run at 2G speeds on China Mobile or China Telecom. But neither of these two networks support the chipset in iPhone. China Mobile runs TDSCDMA 3G and China Telecom runs CDMA2000 3G. So you are left with China Unicom’s WCDMA 3G–a world-standard 3G protocol fully supported by iPhone 3G/3GS. Why not go on contract and get a subsidized iPhone that is well below the ‘too expensive’ (contract free) prices that the media is shouting about?”

And in the end, does it even matter? As Butterfield noted, an iPhone sale is an iPhone sale–whether it’s made by a gray-market vendor or an authorized one. And either way, it’s good for Apple.

So was the iPhone’s launch in China really a bust? “Probably not,” said Butterfield. “Was it a rousing success? Probably not. The truth is somewhere in the middle.”

UPDATE: Well what do you know: China Unicom just coughed up some first weekend sales numbers for the iPhone and … well, they’re not much to look. The carrier sold just 5,000.