DS Forums

 
 

FT: UK mobile users face return of steep roaming bills after Brexit


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 31-12-2016, 23:44
jonmorris
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: a land filled with trolls
Posts: 12,010
With all the networks offering amazing value on SIMO plans recently (see Vodafone's 20GB for £20 plan), this idea we're paying more is ludicrous. You'd never get 20GB of data at all a few years ago, let alone for £20!

The roaming prices were ridiculous and everyone knew they were ridiculous. How anyone can think it's acceptable for it to cost as much as it did is crazy.
There are now plans with 30-60GB or so, and Three still has AYCE plans. Many plans can now be bad for big discounts if you haggle too.
jonmorris is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 01-01-2017, 00:24
clewsy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,860
Networks have increased prices, that's a fact.

Yes competition at the moment has seen some different plans on offer, but as many have complained about on here, once someone gets a monopoly, it will be back to usual for the main networks on pricing.
clewsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 01:34
jonmorris
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: a land filled with trolls
Posts: 12,010
Let's not allow that to happen then. Don't accept shoddy deals. Shop around. Buy SIM free. Change network. Haggle with retentions.

That will work better than anything else.
jonmorris is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 09:08
swb1964
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,446
When was the last time prices dropped?
Prices have dropped massively in the last 15 years!

You can get unlimited calls for 12 or 15 pounds a month on some deals.
swb1964 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 09:15
moox
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,633
Prices have dropped massively in the last 15 years!

You can get unlimited calls for 12 or 15 pounds a month on some deals.
I'm talking about a far shorter term than that. If I have to wait 15 years for the Brexit price increases to be offset, then something is wrong somewhere...
moox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 09:17
omnidirectional
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 10,875
I'm all for free movement of money, goods and jobs, but not people who come with no job and want to milk the UK tax payers. Things are much more generous here than in other poorer EU countries and that's why we've seen 1M come in over the last 4 years.
.. then surely the problem* is with our welfare system and not the EU.

(* - Not that I believe there to be a problem).
omnidirectional is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 09:30
moox
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,633
.. then surely the problem* is with our welfare system and not the EU.

(* - Not that I believe there to be a problem).
Especially when the EU rules on freedom of movement explicitly allow the UK to turf out people who aren't working and have no means. If the UK is allowing tons of those people people stay and is even giving them benefits, then that is our failing, and not that of Brussels. We can't even get a grip on illegal immigration from non-EU countries, so let's not assume that we're competent at the EU stuff

I suspect Wonk has believed what Vote Leave and Farage told him

But this is getting a bit off topic.
moox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 10:09
d123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,985
It isn't though, it is about democracy and immigration and not liking the OTT EU red tape and interference with it's ever growing reach. What started as a trade union has grown into a monster with future plans which control even more aspects of EU citizens lives and which isn't particularly democratic.

Your grandfather probably fought in the war so that we could have democracy, he (if not him, then others in your family) went through hell to protect what we have, yet people sit and watch it be given away to the less democratic EU, with ever reaching powers.
You really have fallen for the tabloid koolaid...
d123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 10:19
d123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,985
Networks have increased prices, that's a fact.

Yes competition at the moment has seen some different plans on offer, but as many have complained about on here, once someone gets a monopoly, it will be back to usual for the main networks on pricing.
How long have you been using a phone? I can remember the 'revolutionary' tariffs like Precept Max from one2one. 3000 minutes, no texts, no data, £75 a month.

Even the lower end tariffs were thought of as such good value at launch, how about 750 minutes, no texts, no data for £45 a month?

And you still think we're paying more now?
d123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 10:44
clewsy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,860
How long have you been using a phone? I can remember the 'revolutionary' tariffs like Precept Max from one2one. 3000 minutes, no texts, no data, £75 a month.

Even the lower end tariffs were thought of as such good value at launch, how about 750 minutes, no texts, no data for £45 a month?

And you still think we're paying more now?
That's because the technology was new. Strangly in the life cycle of a product you pay more to be an early adopter.

Sorry but you can't make a comparison like that as it's not a fair one. We need to look in similar life cycle stages.

So take the last 3 years where the market is saturated. Then look at the price rises that have taken place and the cutting back on perks. This is more of a fair comparison.
clewsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 11:13
Bircho
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 19
Three offer free roaming that has nothing to do with the EU. I can see operators offering contracts that allow cheap or free roaming in the future whether we leave the EU or not.
Have you ever tried streaming anything with Three when abroad?
Bircho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 11:17
DavidGover
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 68
So take the last 3 years where the market is saturated. Then look at the price rises that have taken place and the cutting back on perks. This is more of a fair comparison.
Examples please, of actual customer affecting price increases?

I've given it some thought and can come up with the following:

1. Yearly price increases in line with RPI. These are generally very small, can be overcome by taking out a new contract, possibly moving to another network. I'm not convinced these have anything to do with roaming regulations.

2. Out of bundle costs. With these days of unlimited minutes and massive data bundles (and all networks now able to stop you overspending if I remember correctly?) then I see no reason that these will have much effect. This is one that people claim is the result of roaming regulations, which it may well be. If very few people actually incur these charges though, then what does it matter?

3. Costs to 084/087 numbers. This was due to the access/service charge system short-sightedly implemented by Ofcom. Nothing to do with roaming regulations in my opinion, just typical mobile network greed. Plus there is very little need to call these numbers now. The networks knew this was coming and it may have influenced their decision to have high access charges. Vodafone and EE offer bundles for a few pounds per month which can make calling 084/087 numbers very cheap.

4. Out of bundle MMS costs. Considering that MMS never really did take off in a big way and that we now have e.g WhatsApp, it's hardly surprising. Proving the MMS service costs money in equipment space, network resources and technical staff, so the less it it used the more expensive it is going to become.

5. International minutes & texts. Vodafone at least has increased international costs to £1.50 per minute and 35p per text. Both come be overcome by adding a bundle which is cost effective for all but the lightest users. This *may* be a response to the loss of roaming revenue but other networks don't seem to have followed.

6. Monthly price increases by Three. Three are the only network that I can think of that has actually increases prices in recent times. The reason for this is of course unknown to us and has often been assumed to be either to fund the 4G roll-out or to raise money for their parent company's failed purchase of O2.

Now on reflection, the cost of things which people actually use, e.g minutes text and data in the UK have fallen drastically. You can now get so much for so little. Even on EE, which used to be notoriously expensive.

So where have prices increased in real terms and why are the EU roaming regulations to blame?
DavidGover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 11:33
Gigabit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,875
Networks have increased prices, that's a fact.
Can we have some evidence for your statement, please?
Gigabit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 12:17
Thine Wonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,541
To start with the same quarter the EU put in place price caps on per minute rates networks put their out of bundle rates up, examples below are from the EU price cap in 2014, all 3 networks below increased their prices to account for the cap in spring 2014. This wasn't the only instances of it happening as the caps came in stages.

Vodafone
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showt...php?p=72809934

45% increase in 0845, 0800 and 0870 calls
20% increase to out of bundle texts
12.5% increase in out of bundle calls
16% increase to send an international texts

EE same time
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/new...ce-rise-in-may

O2 same time
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/new...t-penalty-free
O2 also raised call costs from 35p a minute to 40p a minute, with texts up from 12p to 15p.

Again in 2016 as further EU caps came in EE & O2 massive international call increases and out of bundle rates again.
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/b...ide-plans.html
Thine Wonk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 13:09
d123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,985
That's because the technology was new. Strangly in the life cycle of a product you pay more to be an early adopter.
.
The Precept plans were launched around 9 years after one2one launched.

So someone buying an iPhone 7 now must be considered an early adopter?

You have a strange concept of early adopters...
d123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 13:39
clewsy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,860
It's not the phone that were talking about its the proprietary technology that drove those prices.

As people who defend Three keep pointing out building a network isn't cheap and the advantage that the "established" networks had was they could charge a premium for the service they provided. Now the sites are in place things are cheaper to operate, that capital outlay has gone and the ROI is positive.

There are so many factors that influence pricing, however to just think that the EU has given consumers something for free is foolish. These organisations have so long to prepare for this legislation so they can adapt their business models to suit.

However all of this is from a remoaners scare story. Typical remoaner tactic to try and scare people about something that hasnt happend and may never happen. No one knows.
clewsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 14:04
Thine Wonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,541
The Precept plans were launched around 9 years after one2one launched.

So someone buying an iPhone 7 now must be considered an early adopter?

You have a strange concept of early adopters...
Yet with a much smaller user base the costs per user and economies of scale are very different, denied a merger, yet a monster like BT is allowed to acquire the largest network which was already the result of a previous merger and in a privileged incumbent landline, broadband spectrum and fibre position. I think that's the point people make, not the ROI on the initial investment, that's a different topic to the EU discussion though.
Thine Wonk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 14:23
DavidGover
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 68
Yet with a much smaller user base the costs per user and economies of scale are very different, denied a merger, yet a monster like BT is allowed to acquire the largest network which was already the result of a previous merger and in a privileged incumbent landline, broadband spectrum and fibre position. I think that's the point people make, not the ROI on the initial investment, that's a different topic to the EU discussion though.
Without the merger of T-Mobile and Orange into EE the UK probably wouldn't have even had a single decent 4G network, at least until very recently. Also as has been said before many many times, BT buying EE didn't reduce the number of players in any market.

That the other networks are finding it difficult to compete says more about their approach to business (e.g not investing in their networks, not buying adequate spectrum etc) than it does about anything else.

We have a very competitive mobile market in the UK but quality has always taken a back-seat.
DavidGover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 14:27
Thine Wonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,541
Without the merger of T-Mobile and Orange into EE the UK probably wouldn't have even had a single decent 4G network, at least until very recently. Also as has been said before many many times, BT buying EE didn't reduce the number of players in any market.

That the other networks are finding it difficult to compete says more about their approach to business (e.g not investing in their networks, not buying adequate spectrum etc) than it does about anything else.

We have a very competitive mobile market in the UK but quality has always taken a back-seat.
A different point though, I'm not complaining about Orange / T-mobile, I'm talking about allowing BT to acquire EE, but not allowing Three O2 as Three O2 wouldn't have had any broadband, TV, Fibre, Spectrum concerns and it would finally have sorted out the issue of Three being tiny and O2 being under invested in by a company who was in financial trouble for years. We would have ended up with 3 large players, O2 and Three would have been more equal, but wouldn't have been a massive threat to BT or Vodafone as they are still huge players with other interests. It would have heated up competition if anything.
Thine Wonk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 14:30
Thine Wonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,541
You really have fallen for the tabloid koolaid...
Remainders often use lines like that to dismiss the views of others, but lines like that contribute nothing to the discussion, and are just cheap non intellectual insults.
Thine Wonk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 15:29
DavidGover
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 68
A different point though, I'm not complaining about Orange / T-mobile, I'm talking about allowing BT to acquire EE, but not allowing Three O2 as Three O2 wouldn't have had any broadband, TV, Fibre, Spectrum concerns and it would finally have sorted out the issue of Three being tiny and O2 being under invested in by a company who was in financial trouble for years. We would have ended up with 3 large players, O2 and Three would have been more equal, but wouldn't have been a massive threat to BT or Vodafone as they are still huge players with other interests. It would have heated up competition if anything.
It's quite simple.

Orange and T-Mobile were allowed to merge into EE as it still left 4 players in the mobile market.

BT was allowed to buy EE as it didn't reduce the number of players in any market.

Evidence shows that where a European market has been reduced to 3 mobile operators, prices have risen. Not only that but if O2 and Three find themselves unable to compete, then whose fault is that?

You also said that the merged entity wouldn't be a massive threat to BT and Vodafone, in which case, what's the point? Either they would be able to compete effectively or they wouldn't. Which is it? Besides, not every player in a market needs to be massive to compete. Tesco Mobile and Virgin mobile have successful businesses even though they are small and do not own their own networks.

There is no harm having two big players and two smaller players to keep them honest.
DavidGover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 15:48
Thine Wonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,541
Tesco and Virgin don't operate infrastructure, there are many countries with 3 networks in Europe, I made a list previously for another thread. I haven't yet seen evidence that it lead to higher prices and I think we'll have to agree to disagree. The uniqueness of the UK market and the situation with BT wasn't properly considered in my view.
Thine Wonk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 16:02
DavidGover
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 68
there are many countries with 3 networks in Europe
But are they competitive? I'm in one of them right now and I can tell you the word cartel springs to mind!
DavidGover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 16:03
d123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,985
I'm talking about allowing BT to acquire EE, but not allowing Three O2
I still struggle to believe that anyone with knowledge and interest in the mobile industry can be so ignorant of the basic facts that differentiate the purchase of a network by an external company and the merger of 2 networks.

Especially when they harp on and on at every opportunity even though the differences between that acquisition and the proposed merger are repeated ad nauseam...
d123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 16:28
Thine Wonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,541
I still struggle to believe that anyone with knowledge and interest in the mobile industry can be so ignorant of the basic facts that differentiate the purchase of a network by an external company and the merger of 2 networks.

Especially when they harp on and on at every opportunity even though the differences between that acquisition and the proposed merger are repeated ad nauseam...
They both required competition approval though right? I also think the non mobile communication fibre, broadband and landline components should form part of the decision making for approval. There have been calls for BT to be broken up as it was too large and dominant, yet they let them acquire what was 2 merged networks (the biggest network) and add that to their portfolio of already existing huge communications assets.
Thine Wonk is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:47.