Did you jump from the XT NOTwork to Slingshot's "Better Place"?
Random, posted: 29-JUL-2010 12:27
Do you still remember XT's catastrophic failures?
Were you one of those that rushed onto Slingshot mobile's hot offer for:
* A FREE Nokia 2730 3G phone (valued at $199)
* FREE monthly access for 12 months (normally $20/month)
* 20 FREE calling minutes, and 100 FREE TXT messages EVERY month
Were you one of the many customers that instead received:
* A bill for the first (pro-rata) part month from date of joining to the next Slingshot billing cycle?
* A bill for all calls made even though you made less than 20 minutes of calls?
* A bill for TXTs even though you were promised 100 FREE?
I know from personal experience and those of friends, colleagues, and family that joined up to this offer that it was not what it was made out to be. Misleading business practice is frowned upon by the Commerce Commission, who would be interested to hear from affected consumers.
The issues are this:
* People were billed for the first part month and expected to pay this even though the offer clearly stated that you were to receive "FREE monthly access for 12 months" - nowhere in any fine print does it say "free monthly access begins following the first billing cycle period". Some people have had this charge credited back to their accounts on enquiry, but others have had Slingshot Customer Service tell them that the charge stands.
* Some accounts did not have the 20 FREE calling minutes EVERY month correctly applied to the account - this means that these accounts did not receive any free calling minutes as advertised
* Some accounts did not have the 100 FREE TXT messages EVERY month correctly applied to the account - this means that these accounts were charged 20c for every TXT sent, again not as advertised
I know of people that have had problems having these issues resolved with Slingshot despite promises of action. Therefore I have notified the Commerce Commission of my concerns and they are interested to hear your experiences.
There are several ways that you can contact the Commerce Commission and tell them your experiences:
* Use their online complaint form: http://www.comcom.govt.nz/online-complaint-form/
* Phone them during office hours on 0800 94 3600
* Email them at contact@comcom.govt.nz
This complaint may be looked at the next few days in more detail, so the faster you forward your stories to them the better. Ideally by the end of this week or over the weekend.
You may have had your complaints resolved already by Slingshot - that doesn't matter. Think big picture - there are many out there who have not been as fortunate, and may still have credit owing to them from Slingshot. Let's help those that have not had any success resolving what should really be a simple case of keeping to the terms of a promised offer.
Were you one of those that rushed onto Slingshot mobile's hot offer for:
* A FREE Nokia 2730 3G phone (valued at $199)
* FREE monthly access for 12 months (normally $20/month)
* 20 FREE calling minutes, and 100 FREE TXT messages EVERY month
Were you one of the many customers that instead received:
* A bill for the first (pro-rata) part month from date of joining to the next Slingshot billing cycle?
* A bill for all calls made even though you made less than 20 minutes of calls?
* A bill for TXTs even though you were promised 100 FREE?
I know from personal experience and those of friends, colleagues, and family that joined up to this offer that it was not what it was made out to be. Misleading business practice is frowned upon by the Commerce Commission, who would be interested to hear from affected consumers.
The issues are this:
* People were billed for the first part month and expected to pay this even though the offer clearly stated that you were to receive "FREE monthly access for 12 months" - nowhere in any fine print does it say "free monthly access begins following the first billing cycle period". Some people have had this charge credited back to their accounts on enquiry, but others have had Slingshot Customer Service tell them that the charge stands.
* Some accounts did not have the 20 FREE calling minutes EVERY month correctly applied to the account - this means that these accounts did not receive any free calling minutes as advertised
* Some accounts did not have the 100 FREE TXT messages EVERY month correctly applied to the account - this means that these accounts were charged 20c for every TXT sent, again not as advertised
I know of people that have had problems having these issues resolved with Slingshot despite promises of action. Therefore I have notified the Commerce Commission of my concerns and they are interested to hear your experiences.
There are several ways that you can contact the Commerce Commission and tell them your experiences:
* Use their online complaint form: http://www.comcom.govt.nz/online-complaint-form/
* Phone them during office hours on 0800 94 3600
* Email them at contact@comcom.govt.nz
This complaint may be looked at the next few days in more detail, so the faster you forward your stories to them the better. Ideally by the end of this week or over the weekend.
You may have had your complaints resolved already by Slingshot - that doesn't matter. Think big picture - there are many out there who have not been as fortunate, and may still have credit owing to them from Slingshot. Let's help those that have not had any success resolving what should really be a simple case of keeping to the terms of a promised offer.
Permalink to Did you jump from the XT NOTwork to Slingshot's "Better Place"?
| Add a comment
(5 comments)
| Main Index
Telecom XT - Smart Phones; Stupid Plans?
Random, posted: 28-JUL-2010 15:17
As an iPhone user, I have been looking in the past few days at Vodafone NZ's iPhone plans (specifically the iPhone $40 plan), and decided to look at Telecom XT's offerings to make a more informed decision. I have ignored 2 Degrees at this stage simply because their 3G network has not yet formally launched, and also because when they do initially launch, their services are highly unlikely to be available to me in Dunedin.
Vodafone's iPhone $40 plan offers the following for $40 per month on a 24 month contract:
In return for signing on for 24 months, Vodafone offers you a $480 subsidy off the retail price of the iPhone.
How does Telecom compare?
Sadly, even though Telecom offers a selection of "smartphones" to their customers, all of their plans are built on the fundamental component "voice minutes". Instead of offering "packages" to their smartphone users, you are forced to start with a voice plan, then add txts, then add data (with one exception - see below).
I don't know about you, but I don't make a lot of calls on my phone. That's due largely to the high cost of calling, and Telecom's voice minute packages aren't going to encourage that to change.
The very cheapest base "voice minute" plan (compulsary) is One Rate 50, which offers 50 minutes any time for $29.95. You can't choose fewer minutes, nor can you choose not to buy any minutes. Every plan must be customised around a One Rate plan. The next level above is One Rate 100, offering 100 minutes for $49.95 - but this alone is more expensive than Vodafone's $40 plan and does not include ANY data.
After you have chosen a One Rate voice package, you can then add TXT and data packages. Let's assume that you can make do with 150 TXTs (the cheapest TXT package add-on at $6). Bolted onto One Rate 50, we are now at $35.95 for 50 voice minutes and 150 TXTs.
Most smartphone users are going to be looking at using between 120Mb and 250Mb of data ($12 and $18 respectively). Assuming you can make do with "just" 120Mb of data, this is how your plan with XT shapes up at $47.95 per month (open term):
That's significantly more expensive than the Vodafone iPhone $40 plan (20% more), and offers less data, less TXTs, but 50 voice call minutes instead of 30 minutes). And what about handset subsidies? While Vodafone offers $480 for a 24 month contract, Telecom offers a pathetic $80 to sign on for 24 months ($40 for 12 months). It is nice to have the open term option (ironically it wasn't that long ago that Vodafone offered only open term plans while Telecom forced contracted terms), but with the subsidies on offer with Vodafone it is definitely worth consideration.
It would seem that Telecom doesn't really focus their plans at users like me that don't talk much, but instead use the smartphone more for data. Even last year when Telecom offered an enticing $600 credit for bringing an iPhone to XT, that required you to sign up for One Rate 180 offering 180 minutes of calling for $79.95 per month (no data, no TXTs).
Telecom plans will no doubt suit a lot of corporate clients who do a lot of voice calling. But for the average non-business user like me, I don't think Telecom really cares much for our business. At least that's all that I can ascertain in my appraisal of their offerings for iPhone users that are keen on bringing their shiny new devices onto XT.
There is one exception to the "rule" of having to customise XT plans by starting with voice, then bundling TXT, then bundling data. The "Text and Talk 300" plan is available until July 31 for $29.95 per month. With this base plan, you could get the following for $41.95 per month (signup required by July 31, 2010):
By the way, the title of this post is not meant to suggest for a moment that Telecom NZ is "stupid". On the contrary they have already acknowledged this feedback and I have every confidence that Telecom XT will take a look at their plans and consider my points above. Let's hope it happens sooner rather than later so New Zealanders can connect their smart devices to an arguably faster network.
Vodafone's iPhone $40 plan offers the following for $40 per month on a 24 month contract:
- 250Mb mobile data (overage at 25c/Mb)
- 30 minutes anytime calling to any network (overage at 89c/min)
- 300 TXTs to any network (overage at 20c/TXT)
In return for signing on for 24 months, Vodafone offers you a $480 subsidy off the retail price of the iPhone.
How does Telecom compare?
Sadly, even though Telecom offers a selection of "smartphones" to their customers, all of their plans are built on the fundamental component "voice minutes". Instead of offering "packages" to their smartphone users, you are forced to start with a voice plan, then add txts, then add data (with one exception - see below).
I don't know about you, but I don't make a lot of calls on my phone. That's due largely to the high cost of calling, and Telecom's voice minute packages aren't going to encourage that to change.
The very cheapest base "voice minute" plan (compulsary) is One Rate 50, which offers 50 minutes any time for $29.95. You can't choose fewer minutes, nor can you choose not to buy any minutes. Every plan must be customised around a One Rate plan. The next level above is One Rate 100, offering 100 minutes for $49.95 - but this alone is more expensive than Vodafone's $40 plan and does not include ANY data.
After you have chosen a One Rate voice package, you can then add TXT and data packages. Let's assume that you can make do with 150 TXTs (the cheapest TXT package add-on at $6). Bolted onto One Rate 50, we are now at $35.95 for 50 voice minutes and 150 TXTs.
Most smartphone users are going to be looking at using between 120Mb and 250Mb of data ($12 and $18 respectively). Assuming you can make do with "just" 120Mb of data, this is how your plan with XT shapes up at $47.95 per month (open term):
- 120Mb mobile data (overage at 50c/Mb)
- 50 minute anytime calling to any network (overage at 58c/min)
- 150 TXTs to any network (overage at 20c/TXT)
That's significantly more expensive than the Vodafone iPhone $40 plan (20% more), and offers less data, less TXTs, but 50 voice call minutes instead of 30 minutes). And what about handset subsidies? While Vodafone offers $480 for a 24 month contract, Telecom offers a pathetic $80 to sign on for 24 months ($40 for 12 months). It is nice to have the open term option (ironically it wasn't that long ago that Vodafone offered only open term plans while Telecom forced contracted terms), but with the subsidies on offer with Vodafone it is definitely worth consideration.
It would seem that Telecom doesn't really focus their plans at users like me that don't talk much, but instead use the smartphone more for data. Even last year when Telecom offered an enticing $600 credit for bringing an iPhone to XT, that required you to sign up for One Rate 180 offering 180 minutes of calling for $79.95 per month (no data, no TXTs).
Telecom plans will no doubt suit a lot of corporate clients who do a lot of voice calling. But for the average non-business user like me, I don't think Telecom really cares much for our business. At least that's all that I can ascertain in my appraisal of their offerings for iPhone users that are keen on bringing their shiny new devices onto XT.
There is one exception to the "rule" of having to customise XT plans by starting with voice, then bundling TXT, then bundling data. The "Text and Talk 300" plan is available until July 31 for $29.95 per month. With this base plan, you could get the following for $41.95 per month (signup required by July 31, 2010):
- 120Mb mobile data (overage at 50c/Mb)
- 20 daytime minutes, 300 night & weekend minutes to any network (overage at 75c/min)
- 300 TXTs to any network (overage at 20c/TXT)
By the way, the title of this post is not meant to suggest for a moment that Telecom NZ is "stupid". On the contrary they have already acknowledged this feedback and I have every confidence that Telecom XT will take a look at their plans and consider my points above. Let's hope it happens sooner rather than later so New Zealanders can connect their smart devices to an arguably faster network.
Why the iPhone 4 will still be better on Telecom XT
Random, posted: 8-JUN-2010 15:27
There has been a lot of buzz today about the new 900Mhz UMTS (3G) support in the next revision of the iPhone announced today. Rightfully so. lower frequency bands have a better in-building penetration which means better coverage for users that don't live, work, and play outdoors 24/7 with direct line of sight to the sky.
However, at least in the short term, the iPhone will remain far better on the Telecom XT network in my opinion.
Sure, the introduction of 900Mhz support in the iPhone will reduce the volume of iPhone "defectors" that use their iPhone on any network other than the supported Vodafone network (as the NBR quite correctly points out). This won't be as a result of the iPhone working as well or better on Vodafone though - most of this will result from people simply not being bothered to take anything but the path of least resistance (using the iPhone on XT or 2 Degrees requires an extremely simple process, but will still be seen as some as "fiddly").
Vodafone iPhone 4 users will welcome the introduction of 900Mhz support nonetheless, as rural areas have 900Mhz UMTS coverage. This means that those going off the beaten track won't suddenly drop back to GPRS speeds due to current iPhones having no support for 3G over 900Mhz.
The fact remains though, that Vodafone currently do not have widespread 900Mhz towers in urban areas where the majority of New Zealanders live. In the cities, 2100Mhz will predominate until such time as Vodafone rolls out 900Mhz (plans are under way if I am lead to believe correctly but I am unsure about timeframes).
I have used the iPhone for extended periods of time on both the XT and Vodafone networks. I have no affiliation to either company, and have had my fair share of reasons for disliking each company equally in the past. However my experiences using the iPhone have been far more positive on the XT network - and I live south of Taupo.
I ran speed tests for XT vs. Vodafone in August 2009, followed up by a repeat test in March 2010. Both these tests showed a significantly better performance for XT compared to Vodafone 3G.
Sure, XT has had some well documented CATASTROPHIC failures, don't get me wrong. But outside of these failures, XT has provided me with near 100% up-time on the network. Vodafone? I have outages on a daily basis - ever time I enter a lift in a building, for example. Even entering some buildings in the central city is enough for me to drop out. 900Mhz UMTS support isn't going to change that until Vodafone rolls it out into (my) urban area.
All this said though, I'm happy that the iPhone has expanded its network support. It will certainly encourage competition. In the mean time could Telecom XT please do something about the horrendous 89c/min calls on prepaid? It is criminal.
Permalink to Why the iPhone 4 will still be better on Telecom XT
| Add a comment
(40 comments)
| Main Index
SUCCESS! Open Letter to Fair Go on Story Format U-Turn
Random, posted: 26-MAY-2010 20:31
Dear Fair Go editorial team and reporters,
THANK YOU!
Thank you for listening to your loyal viewers and giving the boot (at least tonight) to the story-splitting format. Your investigation and reporting team do a fantastic job with their stories, and the new format was demeaning to their work. Well researched and presented stories deserve to be given our full attention, and I am so happy that the show has returned to the traditional format.
Story-splitting regularly occurs on other TVNZ shows such as Border Patrol and Police Ten 7, and it works for these shows (and doesn't annoy us) because it is selling us the illusion that the intertwined stories are happening in real time and simultaneously. Issues tackled by Fair Go aren't happening all at the same time and it is disruptive to have the "meanwhile on the other side of town" style of cutting between stories.
Thank you once again for considering the thoughts of your viewers and being bold enough to revert to the past format. Your loyal viewers (and their brains) thank you!
Yours sincerely,
Ahmad
THANK YOU!
Thank you for listening to your loyal viewers and giving the boot (at least tonight) to the story-splitting format. Your investigation and reporting team do a fantastic job with their stories, and the new format was demeaning to their work. Well researched and presented stories deserve to be given our full attention, and I am so happy that the show has returned to the traditional format.
Story-splitting regularly occurs on other TVNZ shows such as Border Patrol and Police Ten 7, and it works for these shows (and doesn't annoy us) because it is selling us the illusion that the intertwined stories are happening in real time and simultaneously. Issues tackled by Fair Go aren't happening all at the same time and it is disruptive to have the "meanwhile on the other side of town" style of cutting between stories.
Thank you once again for considering the thoughts of your viewers and being bold enough to revert to the past format. Your loyal viewers (and their brains) thank you!
Yours sincerely,
Ahmad
Fair Go New Format a Lemon (online petition/Facebook campaign)
Random, posted: 14-MAY-2010 22:45
Fair Go returned to our screens two weeks ago after a longer than usual off-season, being unceremoniously displaced by Masterchef NZ. It returned with a brand new chic look, and new presenter Ali Mau, but aside from the cosmetic changes the new season has sadly brought with it a fundamental change in the way stories are presented. And frankly, it’s a lemon.
Fair Go is one of the longest running TV show on our screens, and for good reason. It presents the quintessential Kiwi battle of right against wrong, the little guy standing up against the giant corporate. The quirky brand of humour balanced perfectly with the serious (and not so serious) nature of the issues raised by Kevin Milne and the team has been a recipe for great success. It takes years to build the credibility and following that Fair Go has built for itself – and this could all come tumbling down with one poor editorial decision.
Those that have followed the show for any length of time will be familiar with the tried and true format. Each 8 minute block of the show deals with one important issue. Shorter segments will be complemented by a shorter piece; more in-depth articles are continued “after the break”.
Fair Go has decided to adopt the ADHD format of starting a story, then abruptly returning to the studio to be told “more on that story later in the show”. The constant redirects and detours have this young viewer in a tangle, and I’m sure older viewers (with due respect) will also be having problems following the confusing new format.
I’m sure the producers of the show realise this, as evidenced by Ru’s mouthful of a recap when returning to her story about the phonebook artist this week. The long-winded reminder summary of the first half of the story meant you didn’t even have to tune in for the first half of the show. In fact, I’m pretty sure that tuning in at 7:40pm every week would still get you the “juice” in only 20 minutes.
Perhaps that’s what the intention of the producers is – they are looking after those of us that are running 10 minutes late and making sure we don’t miss anything vital. As much as I'd like to believe that, the cynic in me feels that the terrible new format is simply one intended to persuade viewers not to reach for the remote and switch channels. I’m sorry to say that the new format is one which makes me feel more inclined to reach for said remote compared to the tried and true format of old.
I’m not against change per se, but this one is a terrible lemon. It cheapens the show and it’s almost insulting that the producers don’t think that the quality of the show is enough to keep us tuned in – we have week after week for over 30 years haven’t we?
It wouldn’t be right to just sit back and let this happen. The Fair Go “attitude” would be to fight back so let’s make it clear to Fair Go that we don’t appreciate the change. The editor of Fair Go has already indicated that due to viewer feedback the floating bubbles will be looked at for closeup shots in the new studio, so let’s put the pressure on for this change to be reversed.
I’ve started a Facebook campaign page where you can lend your support and comments:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=103125599734454
If you don't have Facebook, then you can still "sign on" your support by simply leaving a comment below with your thoughts - Fair Go will be directed to this page to see your feedback, which they will hopefully take on board.
And Graeme if you are reading this, which I think you will be, I really am a true fan of the show. I’m sure you would appreciate that I wouldn’t have taken all this effort otherwise. We love the show, and while not all changes you make are always going to be popular, I think this is a serious failing of the new-look show and implore you to carefully re-consider.
Fair Go Forever.
Fair Go is one of the longest running TV show on our screens, and for good reason. It presents the quintessential Kiwi battle of right against wrong, the little guy standing up against the giant corporate. The quirky brand of humour balanced perfectly with the serious (and not so serious) nature of the issues raised by Kevin Milne and the team has been a recipe for great success. It takes years to build the credibility and following that Fair Go has built for itself – and this could all come tumbling down with one poor editorial decision.
Those that have followed the show for any length of time will be familiar with the tried and true format. Each 8 minute block of the show deals with one important issue. Shorter segments will be complemented by a shorter piece; more in-depth articles are continued “after the break”.
Fair Go has decided to adopt the ADHD format of starting a story, then abruptly returning to the studio to be told “more on that story later in the show”. The constant redirects and detours have this young viewer in a tangle, and I’m sure older viewers (with due respect) will also be having problems following the confusing new format.
I’m sure the producers of the show realise this, as evidenced by Ru’s mouthful of a recap when returning to her story about the phonebook artist this week. The long-winded reminder summary of the first half of the story meant you didn’t even have to tune in for the first half of the show. In fact, I’m pretty sure that tuning in at 7:40pm every week would still get you the “juice” in only 20 minutes.
Perhaps that’s what the intention of the producers is – they are looking after those of us that are running 10 minutes late and making sure we don’t miss anything vital. As much as I'd like to believe that, the cynic in me feels that the terrible new format is simply one intended to persuade viewers not to reach for the remote and switch channels. I’m sorry to say that the new format is one which makes me feel more inclined to reach for said remote compared to the tried and true format of old.
I’m not against change per se, but this one is a terrible lemon. It cheapens the show and it’s almost insulting that the producers don’t think that the quality of the show is enough to keep us tuned in – we have week after week for over 30 years haven’t we?
It wouldn’t be right to just sit back and let this happen. The Fair Go “attitude” would be to fight back so let’s make it clear to Fair Go that we don’t appreciate the change. The editor of Fair Go has already indicated that due to viewer feedback the floating bubbles will be looked at for closeup shots in the new studio, so let’s put the pressure on for this change to be reversed.
I’ve started a Facebook campaign page where you can lend your support and comments:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=103125599734454
If you don't have Facebook, then you can still "sign on" your support by simply leaving a comment below with your thoughts - Fair Go will be directed to this page to see your feedback, which they will hopefully take on board.
And Graeme if you are reading this, which I think you will be, I really am a true fan of the show. I’m sure you would appreciate that I wouldn’t have taken all this effort otherwise. We love the show, and while not all changes you make are always going to be popular, I think this is a serious failing of the new-look show and implore you to carefully re-consider.
Fair Go Forever.
Permalink to Fair Go New Format a Lemon (online petition/Facebook campaign)
| Add a comment
(16 comments)
| Main Index
