DS Forums

 
 

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


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-01-2017, 16:33
Thine Wonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,541
But are they competitive? I'm in one of them right now and I can tell you the word cartel springs to mind!
BT is now a cartel all by itself in my opinion thanks to the amount of different communications products it sells in the same market, the amount of spectrum it hogs and the cushy position it has managed to get itself into. They managed to push up beyond inflation price rises last year.

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/new...beat-the-hikes
Thine Wonk is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 01-01-2017, 16:36
omnidirectional
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 10,875
The CMA in Britain was strongly opposed to the O2/Three merger and wrote to the EU urging them to block it. The decision was going to be the same, whether it was made by the CMA or EU.

http://www.choose.net/media/guide/ne...ee-merger.html
omnidirectional is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 16:37
moox
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,633
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.
But there is no overlap. The most major issue is whether BT would abuse its position to give itself (and 3?) ultra cheap backhaul. Others (like me) wonder if BT will use it as an excuse not to invest in wired connectivity - though they still appear to be happy to invest in G.fast/FTTH

BT is in the process of having to comply with new regulations regarding Openreach, including a total restructuring of the way it operates and is accountable to the BT board.

O2 and Three have massive overlap, and it would have been a huge issue for BT and Vodafone since it would affect their network sharing agreements.
moox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 16:39
Thine Wonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,541
The CMA in Britain was strongly opposed to the O2/Three merger and wrote to the EU urging them to block it. The decision was going to be the same, whether it was made by the CMA or EU.

http://www.choose.net/media/guide/ne...ee-merger.html
This is where people's different arguments are being confused as everyone is chipping in with different opinion. I have never claimed that the BT or Three / O2 decisions would be any different with or without the EU. This is something which has come up post the Brexit discussions but coincidentally in the same thread.
Thine Wonk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 16:45
Thine Wonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,541
But there is no overlap. The most major issue is whether BT would abuse its position to give itself (and 3?) ultra cheap backhaul. Others (like me) wonder if BT will use it as an excuse not to invest in wired connectivity - though they still appear to be happy to invest in G.fast/FTTH

BT is in the process of having to comply with new regulations regarding Openreach, including a total restructuring of the way it operates and is accountable to the BT board.

O2 and Three have massive overlap, and it would have been a huge issue for BT and Vodafone since it would affect their network sharing agreements.
Agreed on some points, but BT hasn't pushed out fibre broadband as quickly as people would have liked, in fact they have come under significant government pressure.

Also fibre to the home is probably not the best way forward, the latest view is 5G between the street pole and the home could deliver fibre broadband speeds much more cheaply, an engineer could visit site for repairs and upgrades without having to gain access to every house, no need to or dig up every house for installation, no need for installers any more just ship a 5G router which plugs in and receives broadband wirelessly, but all the benefits of the speeds we need. That is why Google Fiber has been abandoned and why all of the major communications providers are looking to 5G not FTTP for home broadband whilst FTTP could be more realistic for large business (already is).

When 5G comes which market will BT be in then? that's right they'll be right in line for a double whammy again in 2 markets thanks to bad competition regulation and decisions made in 2015/16.
Thine Wonk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 16:47
jonmorris
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: a land filled with trolls
Posts: 12,010
The CMA in Britain was strongly opposed to the O2/Three merger and wrote to the EU urging them to block it. The decision was going to be the same, whether it was made by the CMA or EU.

http://www.choose.net/media/guide/ne...ee-merger.html
It is actually the EU that might have allowed it when the UK on its own definitely wouldn't!
jonmorris is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 16:48
Thine Wonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,541
It is actually the EU that might have allowed it when the UK on its own definitely wouldn't!
At least voters can have their say and write to their MP, have questions tabled in parliament if they don't like decisions made in the UK, a little thing called democracy. Then our MPs could change what we don't like about the UK framework if there is enough demand.

For example Three are encouraging consumers to write to their MPs and for government and Ofcom to put a 30% spectrum cap in place, that is an example of democracy in action.

The good news is it looks like BT can't buy any more spectrum http://www.mobiletoday.co.uk/news/in...ctrum-cap.aspx

With BT/EE already possessing 291.15MHz (45%), this means they are barred from making any additional 4G purchases.
Good! no 2300 for BT / EE.
Thine Wonk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 16:55
Mark C
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 8,075
It may not be quite as bad as the article makes out, right now roaming in non EU countries such as Norway and Switzerland isn't outrageous, and with some packages the same cost as EU. That's not to say proper vigilance won't be required when roaming in Europe post Brexit of course!
Mark C is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 17:01
moox
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,633
Agreed on some points, but BT hasn't pushed out fibre broadband as quickly as people would have liked, in fact they have come under significant government pressure. .
I'm no fan of BT's strategy, but I think some of the moaning is unjustified - if you live in the literal middle of nowhere you cannot expect BT to fibre you up without you contributing to the cost. They get a certain amount of taxpayer cash and they still have to use it responsibly - that means that it's the villages and hamlets that get wired up first, not the people on massive country piles.

I get the impression that the moaning is a bit like mobile coverage, it's blown out of proportion. "my house has a bad signal so it's bad everywhere, bloody broken Britain"

Not all rollout delays are BT's fault either. The government is now crowing on about a "full fibre" future, and I hope we get there, but they can't really criticise BT for doing VDSL with taxpayer cash, given that this is what the previous government happily signed off on.

Also fibre to the home is probably not the best way forward, the latest view is 5G between the street pole and the home could deliver fibre broadband speeds much more cheaply, an engineer could visit site for repairs and upgrades without having to gain access to every house, no need to or dig up every house for installation, no need for installers any more just ship a 5G router which plugs in and receives broadband wirelessly, but all the benefits of the speeds we need. That is why Google Fiber has been abandoned and why all of the major communications providers are looking to 5G not FTTP for home broadband whilst FTTP could be more realistic for large business (already is).
If you're going to put fibre everywhere to plug 5G small cells into them, you may as well carry on a bit further and either use G.fast or FTTH. 5G doesn't make a whole lot of sense for densely populated areas. Might be good for those houses in the middle of nowhere.

You don't need to dig up everywhere for FTTH either. Places that have overhead wiring or underground ducting will be much easier to roll out. Even G.fast will provide a better experience than 5G ever could.

Google isn't a great example. BT doesn't have any of the barriers that Google has. BT has ducts and poles that every other network operator could only dream of (though now BT will be required to sell access to them).

When 5G comes which market will BT be in then? that's right they'll be right in line for a double whammy again in 2 markets thanks to bad competition regulation and decisions made in 2015/16.
I'd hope that if BT starts selling "home broadband" over 5G, that is the day the infrastructure becomes part of Openreach and subject to all the same regulations
moox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 17:05
Thine Wonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,541
I'm no fan of BT's strategy, but I think some of the moaning is unjustified - if you live in the literal middle of nowhere you cannot expect BT to fibre you up without you contributing to the cost. They get a certain amount of taxpayer cash and they still have to use it responsibly - that means that it's the villages and hamlets that get wired up first, not the people on massive country piles.

I get the impression that the moaning is a bit like mobile coverage, it's blown out of proportion. "my house has a bad signal so it's bad everywhere, bloody broken Britain"

Not all rollout delays are BT's fault either. The government is now crowing on about a "full fibre" future, and I hope we get there, but they can't really criticise BT for doing VDSL with taxpayer cash, given that this is what the previous government happily signed off on.



If you're going to put fibre everywhere to plug 5G small cells into them, you may as well carry on a bit further and either use G.fast or FTTH. 5G doesn't make a whole lot of sense for densely populated areas. Might be good for those houses in the middle of nowhere.

Google isn't a great example. BT doesn't have any of the barriers that Google has. BT has ducts and poles that every other network operator could only dream of (though now BT will be required to sell access to them).



I'd hope that if BT starts selling "home broadband" over 5G, that is the day the infrastructure becomes part of Openreach and subject to all the same regulations
5G makes ALL the sense in the world as the fibre is already at the cabinet and just needs to be fed to lamp posts. Not digging up 20M properties at 50K+ a street makes sense, 5G can provide very fast speeds when served from local cabinet sites which already exist and already have fibre.

Google rolled out FTTP to homes and then pulled the project saying 5G is as better solution, I think you're totally wrong about this point but time will tell.
Thine Wonk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 17:11
clewsy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,860
On the point of selling access to those ducts ...

Experts suggest wholesale costs will increase as BT charge for maintenance and upgrading of them.

If as a result of this, it happens. Who picks up the end tab ..The consumer! So that's a lose from the increased regulation.

In fairness to BT since aquring EE they have fibred up some rural old sites. Can only assume this is partly linked to the fact the ones I know about had BT fibre running to to far away from them for residential customers.
clewsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 17:15
moox
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,633
5G makes ALL the sense in the world as the fibre is already at the cabinet and just needs to be fed to lamp posts. Not digging up 20M properties at 50K+ a street makes sense, 5G can provide very fast speeds when served from local cabinet sites which already exist and already have fibre.
Okay. Here's an example. I don't have line of sight to my fibre cabinet. If they put the 5G cell there I can imagine having a very bad experience. Especially if they use a frequency in the 2-3GHz range.

So BT will have to extend the fibre a bit further out to get to me. They might as well plonk an FTTP splitter or G.fast node on the end of the fibre instead, and give me a proper internet service.

And again, because you didn't read my post, you don't have to dig up every property to do FTTH, and you certainly don't have to do it for G.fast.

Google rolled out FTTP to homes and then pulled the project saying 5G is as better solution, I think you're totally wrong about this point but time will tell.
Aside from the fallacy you're committing here, once again, the problems Google faces are not problems that BT has. Google had regulatory issues, they had to deal with legal challenges from incumbent operators, they had to build everything from scratch. BT does not.

Google's equivalent in the UK would be Cityfibre. BT are AT&T or Verizon, who for what it's worth, are still building FTTH networks.
moox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 17:24
Thine Wonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,541
Okay. Here's an example. I don't have line of sight to my fibre cabinet. If they put the 5G cell there I can imagine having a very bad experience. Especially if they use a frequency in the 2-3GHz range.

So BT will have to extend the fibre a bit further out to get to me. They might as well plonk an FTTP splitter or G.fast node on the end of the fibre instead, and give me a proper internet service.

And again, because you didn't read my post, you don't have to dig up every property to do FTTH, and you certainly don't have to do it for G.fast.



Aside from the fallacy you're committing here, once again, the problems Google faces are not problems that BT has. Google had regulatory issues, they had to deal with legal challenges from incumbent operators, they had to build everything from scratch. BT does not.

Google's equivalent in the UK would be Cityfibre. BT are AT&T or Verizon, who for what it's worth, are still building FTTH networks.
Putting 1 lot of fibre to a new cabinet for 50 properties is a hell of a lot cheaper than putting fibre to 50 properties, arranging to get in with the account holders cutting off service whilst the work is done etc

You're also in a unique situation, most would be within line of sight of a cabinet, even if more cabinets are needed in some cases. I can't see why BT would multiply the cost of rollout by several times and waste billions unnecessarily, rather than make use of the emerging wireless technology which gives super fast speeds wirelessly, with no need to do property installs or troubleshooting.
Thine Wonk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 17:35
Gigabit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,875
clewsy and Thine almost sound like the same person.

Out of bundle charges are fairly irrelevant when most plans include unlimited minutes and texts.
Gigabit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 17:38
DavidGover
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 68
most would be within line of sight of a cabinet
Are you using a different definition of line of sight?

If most people live in line of sight of a cabinet, then the average FTTC/VDSL speed would be much higher than it is!

I have full 80/20 at home but do not have line of sight to my cabinet.
DavidGover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 17:38
Thine Wonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,541
clewsy and Thine almost sound like the same person.

Out of bundle charges are fairly irrelevant when most plans include unlimited minutes and texts.
If people go over they get billed them though, also making and receiving calls abroad (non EU) went up significantly and 087 numbers and some others aren't included in price plans, but they went up up a lot, MMS pricing went up, heck even late fees went up.

Some light users just use per minute billing too, it was a way for the networks to make up for the costs of EU roaming by putting up prices elsewhere, and they couldn't put up contracts as that is now protected.

This was 2016

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/new...s-by-up-to-60-

Standard calls 40p/min 50p/min
Access charge – to 084/087/09/118 nos. 44p/min 50p/min
Picture messages (incl when roaming) 40p/message 50p/message

Calls to Zone 3 – Canada, US, Virgin Islands £1/min £1.60/min
Calls to Zone 4 – Australia, New Zealand £1/min £1.60/min
Calls to Zone 5 – rest of the world £1/min £1.60/min
Texts to all international numbers 25p/text 35p/text

Late bill payment fee £5 £7.50

In 2014 when the first round of EU caps came in the operators also increased pricing:

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.
Thine Wonk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 17:39
jchamier
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: This forum
Posts: 3,388
Especially if they use a frequency in the 2-3GHz range
5G talk is in the 30+ GHz range. We are already using 2.6GHz for LTE in the UK, and the next auction is expected to be for 3.4 GHz.

You're also in a unique situation, most would be within line of sight of a cabinet
No, most properties are within 500m to 600m of a cabinet in terms of copper wire. There is no expectation that is within line of sight. Mine is around two corners, and the other side of a large school.
jchamier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 17:41
DavidGover
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 68
and they couldn't put up contracts as that is now protected.
That's rubbish. They are free to charge what they like to new customers, that's how the free market works. They can't increase existing customer prices without allowing the customers out of contract if it's detrimental.
DavidGover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 17:46
Thine Wonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,541
That's rubbish. They are free to charge what they like to new customers, that's how the free market works. They can't increase existing customer prices without allowing the customers out of contract if it's detrimental.
The per minute rates for whatever reason have been the subject of doubling in price, massive rises in 2014 when the 1st tier of the cap came in and then again massive increases in 2016. You can try and detract from the point or muddy the waters if you like just to make side points, but the fact is we've seen big price increases at the same time the EU caps came in.
Thine Wonk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 17:47
omnidirectional
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 10,875
At least voters can have their say and write to their MP, have questions tabled in parliament if they don't like decisions made in the UK, a little thing called democracy.
You can also contact the EU via your local MEPs, or contacting a department/commissioner (eg. competition commissioner) directly. I know The Express/Mail etc would like you to believe it's an unelected dictatorship but that's not actually the case.
omnidirectional is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 17:48
Thine Wonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,541
You can also contact the EU via your local MEPs, or contacting a department/commissioner (eg. competition comissioner) directly. I know The Express/Mail etc would like you to believe it's an unelected dictatorship but that's not actually the case.
Good luck with that compared to the more direct UK political system.
Thine Wonk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 17:48
DavidGover
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 68
The per minute rates for whatever reason have been the subject of doubling in price, massive rises in 2014 when the 1st tier of the cap came in
The first price caps were in 2007 I seem to recall.
DavidGover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 17:51
Thine Wonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,541
The first price caps were in 2007 I seem to recall.
It isn't really possible to go back a decade and make sense of price rises, and even then the caps were at 50p a minute etc, again you can make side arguments or keep expanding the requests and try to fish for your argument so you can go "There! told you so, in 2007 this happened", that wasn't even the original claim anyway.

However in answer to gigabit's question YES we've seen price increases.


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.

Can we have some evidence for your statement, please?

This was 2016

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/new...s-by-up-to-60-

Standard calls 40p/min 50p/min
Access charge – to 084/087/09/118 nos. 44p/min 50p/min
Picture messages (incl when roaming) 40p/message 50p/message

Calls to Zone 3 – Canada, US, Virgin Islands £1/min £1.60/min
Calls to Zone 4 – Australia, New Zealand £1/min £1.60/min
Calls to Zone 5 – rest of the world £1/min £1.60/min
Texts to all international numbers 25p/text 35p/text

Late bill payment fee £5 £7.50

In 2014 when the earlier round of EU caps came in the operators also increased pricing:

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.
Thine Wonk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 17:55
Gigabit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,875
If people go over they get billed them though, also making and receiving calls abroad (non EU) went up significantly and 087 numbers and some others aren't included in price plans, but they went up up a lot, MMS pricing went up, heck even late fees went up.
Go over what? That's the point of an unlimited plan.

Nearly all the SIMO plans available now and within the last year have given you unlimited minutes and texts.

Who uses MMS?

Late fees?
Gigabit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 17:58
Gigabit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,875
You can also contact the EU via your local MEPs, or contacting a department/commissioner (eg. competition commissioner) directly. I know The Express/Mail etc would like you to believe it's an unelected dictatorship but that's not actually the case.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USTypBKEd8Y

This video nicely explains how the EU actually works.
Gigabit is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:58.