Here at billmonitor, we constantly keep watch on tariffs. Our recommendations are based not only on contract allowances, but also on all kinds of out-of-allowance charges you might not see.
T-Mobile introduced new tariffs on 1 February, including their famous “Full Monty” plans. How good are these plans? Will you see a significant drop in your phone bill? Let's analyse this in three parts: what is the offer; what are the hidden costs; and a few examples with typical users.
The Full Monty, and some other novelties...
What has changed?
T-Mobile previously sold contracts with a given allowance for voice and texts, plus a booster. This booster was selected from one of unlimited texts, unlimited data, unlimited landline and a few international bundles.
This offer was flexible, with low prices, but was this a true unlimited allowance? As usual, you have to be careful when a network says “unlimited”. For T-Mobile, “unlimited data” meant 500MB allowance for video and music, unlimited for the rest.
With the new contracts data is truly unlimited, and this is good news. The new offers from T-Mobile are more transparent, clearer and the number of different options are reduced. Flexibility is still here, but not for customers with low usage: the free boosters are only available for plans with at least 300 minutes – other customers will pay £5 a month for adding a booster.
So what does T-Mobile really offer now? The classic pay-monthly contract remain quite similar, but the flexible booster choice is now one of unlimited texts, unlimited landline calls and unlimited calls to T-Mobile. If you want more data, you'll have to pay £5 a month for 1.5GB allowance.
The big novelty is the Full Monty plan, with data and texts truly unlimited. You can get unlimited minutes for £41 or 2000 minutes for £36 a month, which would be probably enough for most customers.
The hidden costs
Good news! Transparency, unlimited allowances, for reasonable prices...
But is it that easy? Not really. You'll get big allowances, but what about the other charges? T-Mobile won't tell you this in their next TV ad, but there has been a considerable increase:
- Voice: 30p/min becomes 40p/min
- Text: 12p becomes 15p
- Calling your voicemail: 12p becomes 40p/min !
- International calls: +13% on average (depending on destination)
How good plans fit with typical usages: the billmonitor test
The following prices include everything: the monthly cost, the upfront cost and predicted out-of-allowances costs. They are the best results calculated by billmonitor.
The prices are displayed in green if T-Mobile's offer is the best deal available, black if it is close to the best deal, and red if not (comparing with Vodafone, O2, Orange, Three, Tesco).
The classic smartphone user: 200min / 500 texts / 200 MB
| Handset | Price/month | Comparison |
| Apple iPhone 4S 16 GB |
£38.04 |
£35.38 – Three
|
| Apple iPhone 4 8 GB |
£33.04 |
£30.38 – Three |
| Samsung Galaxy S2 |
£30.17 |
£25.87 – O2 |
| Nokia Lumia 800 |
£28.08 |
£25.87 – O2 |
| Any phone |
£26 |
£8.80 – Tesco |
The texter: 20min / 1500 texts / 0 MB
| Handset | Price/month | Comparison |
| Apple iPhone 4S 16 GB |
£38.04 |
£34.42 – O2
|
| Apple iPhone 4 8 GB |
£32.31 |
£28.17 – O2 |
| Samsung Galaxy S2 |
£26.52 |
£22.87 – O2 |
| Nokia Lumia 800 |
£24.43 |
£22.87 – O2 |
| Any phone |
£12.10 |
£7.50 – Tesco
|
The all you can eat user: 500min/2000 texts/1024 MB
| Handset | Price/month | Comparison |
| Apple iPhone 4S 16 GB |
£40.12 |
£39.12 – Three
|
| Apple iPhone 4 8 GB |
£36 |
£34.12 – Three |
| Samsung Galaxy S2 |
£36 |
£32.40 – Three |
| Nokia Lumia 800 |
£36 |
£30.40 – Three |
| Any phone |
£36 |
£17.40 – Three
|
The talkative user: 1200min / 200 texts / 50 MB
| Handset | Price/month | Comparison |
| Apple iPhone 4S 16 GB |
£40.12 |
£39.12 – Three
|
| Apple iPhone 4 8 GB |
£36 |
£34.12 – Three |
| Samsung Galaxy S2 |
£33.08 |
£35 – Three |
| Nokia Lumia 800 |
£31 |
£34 – Three |
| Any phone |
£31 |
£25 – Three
|
Conclusion
Not brilliant. Three and O2 remain far ahead, and only a few users which are using a lot of voice allowance are likely to save money with T-Mobile.
Would like to know how good are these deals for your actual usage? Try out bill analysis, and we'll tell you!
What is the biggest hidden cost in mobile contracts? Answer: Roaming data.
You might think the Internet is worldwide, but your allowance isn't! Be careful, and choose the best offer for you.
Tesco and Three won't save you money
Usually the two cheapest networks, both Tesco and Three have very expensive roaming costs.
With Three, you'll pay £1.28/MB from Europe, £3/MB from some countries (including USA) and up to £6/MB from the rest of the world. Some examples to make you realize what this means:
- Watching a youtube video in Europe: £13
- Checking mails in the USA: 30p
Even worse with Tesco : you'll pay £4/MB from Europe, £8/MB from the rest of the world. Think twice before using Internet when you're on holidays:
- Watching a youtube video in Europe: £40 (!)
- Checking mails in the USA: 80p
Unfortunately, both don't offer any bundle that could help you lower these costs.
Limits to avoid a huge disappointment
After complaints from the customers, most of the networks now have limits for roaming data usage. You'll be informed by text that your your limit has been reached. After realizing how much money you've already lost, you'll have to choose between two solutions : call your network to raise your limit, or wait until you come back home!
And the winner is : Vodafone
If you are a regular roaming data consumer, you'll have to choose the best bundle providers can offer.
T-Mobile Euro Internet booster is a fairly good deal, that can be added at any time :
- 3 MB for £1 - to use in a day.
- 20 MB for £5 - to use in a week
- 50 MB for £10 - to use in a month
See more on T-Mobile website
But the best offer for big users is definitely Vodafone Data Traveller. For only £10 a month, you'll have a daily allowance of 25MB! (Europe only)
Even better, if your plan has at least 1200 minutes of voice allowance, this bundle will be free.
See more on Vodafone website
How to know what's the best for me?
Don't hesitate! Use our bill analysis service and we'll find the one that best matches your usage.
One of my jobs is keeping an eye on billmonitor as it scans and analyses our users’ bills. I have a dashboard with graphs showing green for successful cases, blue for people with account problems, and various shades of red for problems that need fixing at our end. The bands of colour are stacked like a layer cake. If all is going well I can glance at the screen and see mostly green with a thin layer of blue icing on top. Today I came in to discover Orange’s chart was mostly blue. Strange!
The first thing to do is see what billmonitor thinks is wrong with these accounts. In this case it reported ONLY_PDFS, which is a code we use for a problem specific to Orange accounts: by default your online bills are summaries in PDF format, not the itemised bills we need (which they call ‘e-bills’). If you are one of our Orange customers, you will be familiar with this problem—and may have had to jump through a few hoops to get e-bills activated.
We don’t normally see an account switch from having e-bills to having only PDFs, let alone for 60% of accounts all at once, so to check we can look at what billmonitor sees when it visits the account. Here’s an example of what billmonitor found:
This confirms that the December and November are without e-bills. What’s more, the headline now says ‘hello customer’ rather than ‘hello Sam’ or ‘hello Max’ or whatever. In other words, it looks as though the Orange billing site has forgotten all its user customisation.
This is a problem for us because we can‘t fix it—billmonitor can’t make changes to your account settings (nor would you want it to). All billmonitor can do is send its usual email message asking this user to call customer services and enable e-bills. Not much fun for them, but there it is.
Do you remember when your mobile phone contract's due for renewal? I don't. And even when I manage to find my first mobile bill or look it up online, I still manage to forget it again and again.
Wouldn't it be great to get reminded (on your own terms), just how long you have left until you get nice, juicy contract upgrade or even have the privilege of switching?
Well - we've gone and made it happen.
Know exactly how long's left on your contract and when you can switch
We're really excited about this feature and we hope you are too. Now you'll be able to make the right decision, on the right contract for you at exactly the right time.
One of the most cited complaints with why users don't take up the recommendations is they're simply not able to switch or, as our users put it, they're "stuck in contract". It's annoying isn't it, getting all these money-saving recommendations from us when there's no way you can do anything about it?
This way we'll hope we'll get the right message to you at the right time. Even if you decide not to take our recommendation, hopefully you'll still get this helpful knowledge in your inbox every month, giving you a countdown to your renewal date.
When can I switch anyway?
Although you can often upgrade with your own network in advance of your contract end date, you can only typically switch networks freely once you're in your final month. Even then, if you switch before your contract expires (say in the final month), you may end up paying double for several days, so do be careful to wait until you're fully out of contract. In some rare cases, your new network may cover the costs for you leaving early but don't count on it.
Of course, you can switch at any time for a set penalty fee but most people rarely enjoy the prospect. Typically this is at least the number of months you have left multiplied by your monthly tariff - but may be more - always check. It may occasionally make financial sense to switch early - say, if your prospective savings on the new contract exceed your exit fee but it's a difficult balance!
There are plenty of people walking around paying hugely inflated monthly tariff costs when they're already out of contract. To those people we'd say "What are you waiting for?!". There's tons of contracts out there that are likely to save you money. If you still love your phone, consider a SIM-only contract - which will let you keep your handset.
How do I switch when the time comes and how do I keep my number when I do?
When you think of switching, you may think you'll have to give up your old phone number and get a new one. This may well be what you want to do (change can be a good thing!) but it doesn't have to be this way, of course. Switching networks while keeping your number can now be a pretty painfree process.
Here's what you'll need to do in 7 clear steps:
1. Wait until your contract has expired or is at least in final month - otherwise you'll have to pay extra to cover the costs of the remainder of your contract.
2. Do some research and check if you're on the right contract. If it's definitely time to move on to greener (cheaper) pastures, go to step 3.
3. Call your current network, tell them it's been emotional but it's time to call it a day. ASK FOR YOUR PAC CODE. This is a 9-digit code required to port your number from one network to another. They MUST give you this within 2 hours maximum if your request it.
4. They will probably throw a great deal at you to keep you. Listen to them, compare to the options you saw in step 2 and make a decision. If you decide to take their offer - then congratulations, you've probably just saved a lot of money. If you've had enough or the deal isn't good enough then proceed to step 5.
5. Don't cancel your current account yet but make sure you get the PAC code before you end the conversation.
6. With your PAC code in hand, you now have 30 days to use it or lose it (literally, after 30 days, you'll need a new one). Choose to buy your new contract online or in-store and then call the new network to ask for your current number to be transferred via the PAC code.
7. Having bought your new contract and asked to transfer your number, you can expect your account to be transferred from your old to new network within 7 working days.
Seems a lot to remember - will you let me know how it's done when the time comes?
Yup - we're working to make sure this advice gets to you at the exact right time, just when you need it. Look out for more great stuff in the near future!
Got questions about switching or upgrading, when you can do it or how to find out how long you've got left on contract - or just want to uibble with anything we just said? Let us know, we'd love to hear your thoughts below.
We're delighted to announce that we've finally integrated Tesco Mobile contracts into billmonitor's recommendations. After many months of the feed being publicly available (sorry, everyone!), we'll now be able match your usage analysis to some great new deals from Tesco's MVNO for the first time. Enjoy!
Why only now? What took you so long?
I know, I know. It did take too long. "Add Tesco Mobile" has been our most requested user feature related to adding networks for almost a year now - although, to be fair, a reliable and accurate feed has only been available for a few months. We apologise it took so long, however, and hope we're still in time for when you choose your next contract.
What about other MVNOs and smaller networks? Where's giffgaff?!
Quite right! We've still got work to do and we know it. Please do keep letting us know what we've missed - we really value your feedback. You can let us know in the comments below or, better still, use our uservoice forum. Make sure your idea hasn't already been suggested (in which case, just add your vote) and then let us know your thoughts.
As soon as the others get added, you'll be the first to know about it. Rest assured, we have no prejudice or ill-will against the networks we've not yet included. We're only a small team and adding new networks can sometimes be a harder job than expected - especially as billmonitor needs a lot more information & detail (often not available from feeds) to confidently make its recommendations than other price comparison engines.
We hope you understand and bear with us. Don't forget to share you views on what should be next below!
Good deal from Vodafone but don't binge on data - you'll regret it for the rest of your contract!
Today Vodafone announced a new initiative called "Data Test Drive"; effectively a "try before you buy" data plan for your mobile. If you're a new or upgrading customer with Vodafone, you'll now get unlimited data during the first three months. After that time, Vodafone will give you an assessment of how much data you've really used and suggest a more suitable data allowance for you, but only if what you need turns out to be more than you originally bought (if you use less, you probably won't be allowed to move down).
First impressions: "Wow! What a great deal."
This is quite a startlingly new way of handling customer price plans. Previously, it had always seemed that mobile operators were always willing to profit from customers' ignorance regarding their real usage, whereas here we have a major operator effectively admitting they know we'll probably get it wrong first time - but: never fear! You can change your mind later!
This seems like an ideal win-win for customers and Vodafone. Customers get 3 months unlimited mobile data and an insight into their real usage. They also get the satisfaction of feeling that they have a data plan that suits them.
Vodafone, on the other hand, is basically incentivising maximal data usage in the hope that early exploration will pay off in terms of getting people excited about mobile internet and other data-driven features (apps, streaming etc.), while also hoping that translates into longer-term higher usage/higher spend. At the same time, they are probably banking on the fact they will come across as the "good guys", in that they (genuinely) appear not to want to gouge you for excessive usage.
This all seems very reasonable and generous - but is there a catch?
Well, a few little ones. Vodafone doesn't spell out the obvious strategy to infer from this pricing, which is to start with the lowest data plan possible and only move up if absolutely necessary.
This is, by the way, the best strategy with all usage allowances: smaller is better if you have no idea what you will be using ( - if you've been using mobiles for a while on post-pay, you can do a bill analysis to find out how you're really using your phone and the minimum safety allowance to go for).
It seems an obvious strategy but no-one does it as often as you'd think, because the urge to go for a larger than necessary allowance is too high for most people. We fear those extra charges and forget that moving up is always possible; moving down is not.
The small print doesn't clarify but it seems safe to assume that, if after 3 months you turn out to have used less than your requested data allowance (let's say you chose 500MB to be "safe", but ended up using around 200MB, where a 250MB allowance would have been sufficient), you will probably not be allowed to move down.
To be truly transparent, I'd have liked to have seen this consequence spelled out (or ruled out) by Vodafone - at least in the small print.
There's also the matter of Vodafone trying to "inflate" usage in the first 3-months, which may give an unrealistic picture of your likely usage for the entire duration of your contract and lead you to choose a higher than necessary allowance (though you can return to your original data plan level at any time - but curiously not 1MB lower!). In fact, our data shows it does actually make sense to get a (slightly) higher data allowance than you need, since as customers find new uses for their phones, mobile internet usage trends up over time. This is in contrast to minutes and text usage, which has less obvious trending patterns and where the last 3 months, for any given individual are a better indicator of future usage.
A subtler point to bear in mind is that Vodafone is also framing the entire problem so that customers who have not yet chosen a smartphone probably think that "not having enough data", will be a significant issue for them. This is disingenuous. The opposite is likely true: most customers have more data than they know what to do with and are systemativally paying more than they need to.
What's the verdict then?
So, in a nutshell: this is a good offer from Vodafone but don't get lulled into bingeing on mobile data allowance (either before or after you take the contract), or you'll wake up with an (expensive) hangover, you won't shake off for another 15-21 months!
If you've ever cursed your mobile for having not a single bar of reception when you need it most, you'll know the frustration of unpredictable mobile coverage. The default expectation for most customers is that their mobiles should be "always on", when the reality is they sometimes fail us at the worst possible moments - sometimes even in our own homes or offices.
It is for this reason networks developed their own proprietary "network coverage checkers", to enable customers to assess the reliability of the reception they'll get at a specific postcode (here are the maps for O2, Vodafone, Orange and T-mobile). According to Ofcom, only 30% of us actually know these Google Maps/Silverlight mash-ups exist at all but, more surprisingly, most of us that do (80%-90%) find them very useful.
We agree - they are useful. But they're also misleading.
Again, Ofcom checked the truth of the network's verdicts on their own coverage and found they were "broadly accurate". Although this should put our minds at ease, there are plenty of gripes still outstanding - even if the broad idea of the tools is a good one.
1. There is no nationwide, comprehensive, independent coverage verification of the networks' coverage. Yes, Ofcom checked in one county - but what's true in one place will not necessarily be accurate in another. As the networks do not make their network coverage information available as a feed, it's difficult to systematically compare their results against independent results. The BBC's "3G Survey" crowd-sourced app and OpenSignalMaps's app go some way to improving the independent verification but in reality these project needs hundreds of thousands of users to provide a reality-based coverage map to test against the networks' computer-simulated maps. Or else an independent body needs to be set up to monitor this - something that is unlikely to be justifed due to the "generally" accurate nature of the current results.
2. The maps are based on computer extrapolation ('Propagation models') not customer experiences. Again, Ofcom has deemed that the computer models used to simulate actual reception quality are "reasonably accurate" but is this enough? It's the customers in outlier locations or with unpredictable factors affecting their reception that draw the short straw with this system. If this outlier customer happens to be you, the fact that it's "reasonably accurate" for most people, is likely to be small comfort indeed. If the networks were serious about providing reception-quality maps from the customer perspective, they could easily provide some kind of customer viewpoint-based questionnaire or even an app and begin integrating real customer feedback with technical data and their computer models to increase their accuracy.
3. The network maps are very tricky to compare against one another. As Ofcom rightly points out, some have voice/2G reception only, some include 3G coverage as well. But in addition, each coverage checker uses its own rating system of either 2,3 or 5 levels - how would a customer or third party interpret the comparison of "moderate" reception vs. "good outdoors" - are they the same? Without standardisation to a certain degree, you'd have a hard time saying these are truly intercomparable. What's needed is a standard, agreed output that can be easily compared by any individual or company.
4. Postcode areas may be too large to allow an accurate verdict for your specific location. Postcode areas vary hugely in geographic scale from very precise to a very wide area. Some coverage checkers take this into account, others don't. Speaking from personal experience, my parents' house in Kent is supposed to have "good indoors and outdoors" reception in principle but in reality I may as well leave my phone turned off for all the reception I get - either indoors or out! Again, these hidden "not-spots" will not be picked up without customer feedback - see point 2.
5. Giving a verdict for indoors reception - or even outdoors in some cases - is meaningless as it depends on the specific building materials, structural build, proximity to outside etc. The networks themselves flag this up as a limitation but it's a pretty big one if you live in the "wrong" kind of building as far as your mobile network's signal strength is concerned. Giving a "one-size-fits-all" verdict may work for most but not for all...This is, to be fair, a very difficult factor to control or account for - but it makes it difficult to be accurate in any verdict and provide the customer with a 100% accurate verdict.
6. Reception varies according to multiple factors such as population density, which in itself is affected by time of day, seasonality etc., making a "one-off" verdict highly misleading. It's no secret that you can have great reception one moment, only to have it fall off a cliff the next, without you having moved an inch. Mobile signal strength is affected by how many people are accessing the same signal from a given cell tower at a given time and more people, all on the same network on their mobile, means worse quality for all. This is also an important factor as to why some networks restrict certain kinds of 3G mobile traffic at certain times (or all the time) - to enable all customers to have sufficiently high quality reception and not let one guy ruin the reception for everyone else. Networks should consider how they manage customer expectations for reception quality variation throughout the day at peak vs. low traffic levels.
7. A reception map is only half the story - surely it should tell me where I need to walk to to get better reception any moment? It's all well and good providing postcode based advice as to my home and office locations when I'm first choosing my netowrk provider but what about when I'm a subscriber already - I'm on the move and want to know why I don't have reception? Could there not be a pre-installed app on my mobile that tells me where the nearest place with better reception might be?
Why does billmonitor care?
Well - aside from the fact you've probably guessed that we've each personally experienced reception problems in the past and want to be rid of them for good - we're also keen to provide an overview of mobile network reception quality within our own results. This is something we've wanted to provide for a long time but have felt the networks' maps were a) probably inaccurate and b) difficult to extract usable, intercomparable data from.
What Ofcom's recent report shows though is that there may be increasing pressure on networks to provide an more usable, comparable feed for third parties, like ourselves, to analyse. This will only improve the accuracy and usefulness of our own results, as our own verdicts will also flawed if we're telling you the "right contract for you" is with a network that you know, from your own experience, has poor reception in places you visit often.
So - this is something we're looking at. Watch this space and, if you feel like giving us some advice how we should implement this within our service, how to improve the accuracy of these services (allow users to give their own feedback on reception quality via billmonitor?) or how to get the networks to provide better maps themselves (or at least make more people aware they exist), I'd love to hear it. We're open and ready to listen.
Ofcom just released their latest
Communications Market report, which is chock full of interesting facts and analysis - so you should definitely go check it out. Personally, although I can understand why the media love the "nation addicted to smartphones" angle that is making headlines today, I found there were many more surprising and counterintuitive findings to be discovered with a bit of deeper digging.
The wider picture: some real surprises
For me, the report presents a simultaneously awe-inspiring and humbling depiction of the present day mobile market - and the communications market in general.
One moment we’re given to marvel at the fact that the communications landscape has changed so vastly as to be unrecognisable from what it was only a decade ago. Addicted to smartphones? We had only just barely started using mobiles in 2000!
The next, we are reminded that the industry revenue for communications in 2010 was the same as it was in 2000 – essentially proving the old adage: plus ca change, plus la meme chose. All this new technology but no more money being made now compared to 10 years ago.
It’s equally humbling, as well as surprising, to realise that fixed line calling minutes still outnumber mobile minutes despite the fact that a) fixed lines have been declining each year throughout the past decade, b) 93% of the UK has a mobile and c) 1 in 5 of us freely admits to being “addicted” to our mobiles – a number that reaches 37% for smartphone owners and over 60% for teens (that's right - the majority of teens are addicted).
It's especially remarkable if, like me, you're in one of the 15% of UK households who now don't own a landline any more and have gone "mobile only". Why would you need one, honestly?
The rise and rise of contracts and the decline of pay-as-you-go
As billmonitor's bill analysis service is currently only available for contract customers, it’s fascinating to see Britons increasingly flocking to grab a contract and turn their backs on "topping up" via pay-as-you-go. Almost half the market is now post-pay, whereas it was 41% only a year ago. That's astonishing growth.
This trend is only likely to accelerate as pre-pay handset subsidies get removed and call costs skyrocket for PAYG customers – which in itself was a response by the networks to Ofcom’s own regulation to lower mobile termination rates.
It will come as a surprise to no-one that the networks will be happy about this migration as post-pay customers are worth more than 3 times as much as PAYG customers, are more than twice as likely to own an expensive smartphone (smartphone users make more calls, send more texts and generally use their phone far more frequently) and are much more likely to be lifetime customers. But subscribers themselves are also clearly benefiting from this migration with lower tariff costs, better customer service (ratings for satisfaction in mobile are at an all-time high and outrank all other communication services) and improved handsets.
Of course, as customers move to contracts, it becomes enormously important to choose well and use services like billmonitor to help make that choice. On average, customers on post-pay contracts spend almost £200 more than they need to for how they use their mobile. Due to the extended contract lengths that are now standard and the lower tariff flexibility during the minimum contract term, choosing the right contract first time could save customers on average £400 over the course of a 24-month contract - which would otherwise be like tossing money down the drain.
Our involvement in the report
Full disclosure: Ofcom approached bilmonitor asking for a number of data points to support and inform their argument that they could not source from anywhere else and we were happy to oblige. You will find our stats cited throughout the report at various points. billmonitor is a mobile price comparison site based on analysis of customers' actual bills, which gives us unprecedented detail and accuracy in supplying this kind of data and we had already done extensive analysis to go into our National billmonitor mobile report earlier this year.
Although Ofcom have caveated the data we provided as potentially skewed, we ourselves have critically evaluated our own data with other publicly available information and alternative sources and have found it highly representative of the overall market.
What do you make of the report? Do you find anything interesting there? Are you addicted to your smartphone? Do you remember what having a mobile was like back in 2000? I want to hear your thoughts! Let me know.
"Ladies and gentlemen, a mobile should be mobile."
Never truer words spoken by Neelie Kroes in her Wednesday announcement about the shake-up of EU roaming rules. Why should it be that we all switch our mobiles off or use them much, much less when we go abroad?
They still work. It doesn't usually cost the operators much more to supply the service than at home. The whole situation is, as Kroes suggests a "raw deal" for customers and one where "operators enjoy outrageous margins, particularly on data downloads".
Why has this "outrageous" situation persisted so long?
The best reason I've seen far this so far was given by Paul Lambert, Senior Analyst at Informa Telecoms & Media:
"European operators have been reluctant to stimulate the market for consumer roaming in the EU largely to protect the rates they charge their corporate customers, which, unlike the consumer, are much less price sensitive as they have a much greater need to stay connected when they travel abroad."
It certainly makes sense - but I think there are other factors at play.
After all, we know 39% of UK subscribers use their phones for roaming at some point or another during the year and they can't all be business customers. Why are they not choosing alternatives that are available? VoIP services like Skype, Jajah or Rebtel, local SIMs, Global SIMs, calling cards, apps that reduce your data usage - there are many possible ways to cut costs today, why are they not being used.
One reason: convenience. Or more precisely: Inconvenience.
They require the customer to have identified the problem, researched alternatives, chosen something, set it up and then actually used it. Their use is often conditional or circumscribed in ways that are frankly a hassle to most people (eg. got to use Wifi, can't keep your phone number or contacts, must unlock your phone, separate billing etc.). So they're not used as often as they could be - even though they'd save a lot of people a lot of money.
So what's the solution? Two contracts: one for home, one for abroad
This is why the idea of an independent roaming contract market where the problem is assumed as a given and the customer is almost forced to choose for their own good is such a game-changer. As laid out by the EU proposals, by 2014, all customers will have to be offered alternative roaming solutions from other providers at the point at which they purchase their new "local" tariff and mobile contract - the default will still be their local network operator (who is unfortunately likely to persist in charging the maximum possible, which, by 2014, will still be considerably less than today) but it gives room for a whole host of other players to enter the roaming market as MVNOs (mobile virtual network operators).
You will basically have two mobile contracts from 2014; one for home and one for abroad. You'll automatically switch from one to the other when travelling and you won't need to switch SIMs, mobile numbers or handsets.
billmonitor will help you to choose the right roaming contract as soon as the freedom exists - we're already the only site giving roaming bundle recommendations
Of course, at billmonitor, we're already gearing up for what this means in terms of not only providing you the right local contract but also the right roaming contract. It's also worth bearing in mind that billmonitor is currently the ONLY mobile price comparison site that a) analyses your roaming & international calls and b) actually provides you with the relevant details of the network bundle you'd need to buy to match your needs. No-one else is providing you details on these bundles when recommending new contracts.
In fact, it's a measure of how difficult this process is that this is based on our own manual research right now and you can't often buy these bundles without calling your network. Even ones you get for free often have to be activated by customers rather than being switched on by default.
Given all this, we're incredibly excited by the implications of this change and you can be sure that as soon as these market structures develop, we'll be the first to offer you the best service for your situation.
But it's not here yet - so watch out!
None of this should encourage immediate celebration. The full impact of this legislation won't be carried through until 2014 - unless the networks decide to speed it up further. Until then, the usual roaming rules apply:
- Switch off data roaming unless absolutely necessary
- Use your phone as little as possible abroad
- Text don't call where possible - texts are free to receive (and it's free for others to text you too) and cost less to send than a call
- If you really need a mobile more regularly, investigate the alternatives (mentioned above - look out for future blog posts too)
- Make sure you have all the righ roaming bundles, bolt-ons or add-ons available from your network. They're not always helpful but they could be just the right thing. Call your network to ask for options.
Seen the right way, this is a huge opportunity for the first network to make the changes
From our perspective, we'd like to see the networks really rise to the occasion and introduce these changes as fast as possible. The market for roaming is potentially much bigger than it is today and high prices have curtailed the number of people using the services and the amount they use them.
It stands to reason there's a lot of money to be made by being first with lower prices and encouraging people to opt for your roaming rates not a competitor's (ie. basically steal customers for the holiday season - as well as regular roamers). Frankly, all the networks will have to cut their prices anyway, so why not look to grow the market aggressively in response?
The problem is of course that everyone will want to take other networks' customers but no-one will want to open their own customer base to being snatched. I'd still like to think that some innovative, aggressive, below-price-cap price cuts to roaming rates combined with opening up to roaming competitors and a well-publicised awareness campaign that names and shames other networks who aren't quite so forthcoming, would ultimately work in favour of whoever tries it first. We can but dream...
And what will be the knock-on effect? Will we see higher tariffs, out-of-allowance costs, or international calling costs?
With the networks likely to lose a previously guaranteed revenue stream (unless they innovate aggressively and proactively as suggested above), what will be the likely knock-on effects for UK mobile phone users? Well - no network will raise prices before they have to and in fact they don't like raising them anyway (higher prices mean fewer customers).
However, even if they choose the aggressive market growth route (which we recommend), they will likely need to combine this with a more defensive price raising strategy. They have a number of options:
1. Raise prices for customers who exceed their allowance on local calls, texts or data - this is traditionally the obvious outlet as it can be billed as the "customer's fault" and the numbers who exceed their tariff are reasonably predictable
2. Raise tariff prices - networks avoid this like the plague unless they see significant movement from other competitors. I would expect this to be a move of last resort.
3. Raise prices for international calls - this seems the most likely outlet. After the last roaming price caps, international call charges from mobiles increased - to the extent that it's now less than half the cost to call a Spanish or French number from Spain or France than it is to do so from the UK! There is a strong correlation with people who use international services and roaming services, so they'd be passing the costs on to the same section of the population.
In my view, this would be a mistake though - international calls have so many alternatives and the prices are already so high, that a further substantial price increase might mean customers NEVER again use their mobiles to call abroad.
4. Raise prices for roaming outside EU - the EU can only legislate within its member states. This means that operators are free to increase roaming charges elsewhere like the US or Asia. Ideally, the roaming operator/contract you choose should cover ANY trip abroad but it's as yet unclear if networks will allow this or not. Unfortunately, this is very likely to happen as an immediate consequence and for those who travel further afield than Europe this could be the worst direct impact of the EU's legislation.
On balance, the worst case scenario might be a combination of all four approaches. Expect the market to look very different by next summer! And by 2014 it will be unrecognisable.
What are your thoughts on the EU roaming rules? Will it work out well for customer or not? Are these measures long overdue or are they too disruptive? I want to know your thoughts - please share your comments below.
After my Friday post condemning the EU for its lack of bold action on roaming data price caps, it seems Kroes had been saving the best for las. Today, the Financial Times exclusively revealed that there will be roaming data price caps after all. Roaming data will in fact be ruthlessly slashed from its current effective cost of £2/MB to 81p/MB by 2012 (a 60% cut) and then cut further to 45p/MB by 2014 (less than a quarter of its current cost).
Wow - what a surprise!
We had previously heard Neelie Kroes admit her frustration that competition in the mobile roaming market had not led to the satisfactory outcomes in terms of lower consumer prices but last week's announced wholesale price caps were hardly going to make a difference. So these changes are a very welcome step. The only shame is that customers wont' enjoy these changes until next year (unlike the roaming call charge price cuts which were effective last week).
In fact, I'd literally call this a game changer.
Instead of either slightly tweaking their roaming strategies or raising local tariffs or per minute prices for customers to make up the shortfall (roaming data is currently responsbile for around £443 million in annual revenue for the networks), networks should be looking to massively expand their market penetration amongst customers using mobile data abroad.
As prices reach roughly £6 per hour of normal (non-streaming) mobile internet usage, smartphones will become viable and much more convenient alternatives to using internet cafés or free Wifi areas (the current best alternatives). I would expect that, with a price drop of this magnitude, customers will believe the cost to be worth acceptable and networks should see both the number and the amount of data usage go up exponentially. Even though their ARPU is limited to £45 per month, I'd wager that very few are hitting that cap today and even if usage increases would likely be far from reaching it.
The real benefit for networks would be that customers who'd never considered smartphone data use abroad begin doing so, leading to incrementail revenue they may otherwise not have had. In addition, by 2014, when smartphone penetration will be much further along, there will also be many more potential customers able to avail themselves of the service. I would expect the current 24% of susbcribers using roaming data to be much closer to the 39% who already use their phone for roaming calls.
Finally, Kroes directly indicated that there would be further shake-ups to the roaming market - possibly introducing more viable competitiveness into a market where customers are currently too locked in. We eagerly await the full announcement due this Wednesday.
pascalbriet
Nick Wright
Comments [0]