Vodafone Red Network Customers being charged more

Forums › One New Zealand (including Vodafone, WxC, Farmside) › Vodafone Red Network Customers being charged more

pctek

807 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#62613 10-Jun-2010 17:27

I saw the recent news article about this:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10650933

I checked and discovered I should be on the Red Network plan and wasn't. I only recently moved to this address (and exchange) so would have thought I'd be asked. I rang and got an argument from the CSR that I was on Wholesale, I repeated I should be on the RN and eventually she went to check after I told her Vodafones website said I should be.

I was not even asked if I wanted to be on it when I put through my request to have services transferred to this address.

I had to bump it up a level to get
A) an apology
B)moved to the Red Network.

Matthew B was most helpful getting it sorted finally, pity I had to whinge first.

quickymart

13968 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#340390 10-Jun-2010 19:55

Where was the CSR based?

VFNZPaulBrislen

970 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#340411 10-Jun-2010 20:34

Yes, and how tall were they?

Paul Brislen
Head of Corporate Communications
Vodafone

http://forum.vodafone.co.nz

quickymart

13968 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#340426 10-Jun-2010 21:09

I'm just curious as to whether they were in Egypt or not.

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#340430 10-Jun-2010 21:15

This particular "problem" is something that goes far deeper.

In all honestly I believe ULL providers in Auckland did nothing but sham customers who moved over to ULL circuits, knowing that when cabinetisation occured that they would be forced to move back to Telecom Wholesale because of the well documented issues of midpoint injection.

For all the bad things people can say about TelstraClear they will not connect anybody to a ULL circuit who is or will be cabinetised. This should have been the exact same approach that other ULL providers took - instead they but $ before the customers wellbeing.

VFNZPaulBrislen

970 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#340433 10-Jun-2010 21:21

@quickymart, No.

@sbiddle, not exactly right. In fact, not right at all I'm afraid.

We launched unbundling in the knowledge that Telecom was talking about cabinets. My view, before joining the company and at launch of its unbundled services, was that Telecom would cabinetise long-run copper lines (eg Pt Chev) and leave short run lines alone. Instead, Telecom chose to cabinetise the whole lot.

We put customers on LLU where we can but only if their line won't be cabinetised for the next 12 months. I know of other providers who put their customers on LLU lines with as little as three months' remaining before cabinetisation. Personally I don't have a problem with it, so long as the customers are aware of the situation.

@pctek, my apologies for your situation. I hope we got it sorted in the end.

The Herald reporter didn't have all the facts when he wrote his piece - We're yet to get back to him with what happened to his customer.

Paul

Paul Brislen
Head of Corporate Communications
Vodafone

http://forum.vodafone.co.nz

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#340438 10-Jun-2010 21:43

PaulBrislen:

We launched unbundling in the knowledge that Telecom was talking about cabinets. My view, before joining the company and at launch of its unbundled services, was that Telecom would cabinetise long-run copper lines (eg Pt Chev) and leave short run lines alone. Instead, Telecom chose to cabinetise the whole lot.

And this is the area that is open to debate. What some operators believed Telecom were doing and what Telecom's actual plans were were totally different. It seems there were big telcos out there who chose to actually ignore what Telecom were planning and running briefings on and and instead focus on the short term goal of the delivery of ULL services while totally ignoring the risks of midpoint injection.

Telecom never planned to only cabinetise long runs. There network was always going to be a fully cabinetised network dating back to ~2002 when the first proposals occured. Initial plans were also for a significant number of exchanges to go as well (since they would be obsolete), but this has not occured due to the (very) delayed launch of NGN voice services.

Telecom's intentions were certainly well know to anybody who asked. I was writing stuff on here detailing Telecom's plans and the risks of midpoint injection and ULL long before your network was even deployed.

Maybe somebody should have read my posts!

hellonearthisman

1819 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#340499 11-Jun-2010 01:00

@PaulBrislen you said "We put customers on LLU where we can but only if their line won't be cabinetised for the next 12 months."

Does that include customers on the Red Network at the wholesale level, like Slingshot?

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

NonprayingMantis

6434 posts

Uber Geek

#340541 11-Jun-2010 10:22

PaulBrislen: @quickymart, No.

@sbiddle, not exactly right. In fact, not right at all I'm afraid.

We launched unbundling in the knowledge that Telecom was talking about cabinets. My view, before joining the company and at launch of its unbundled services, was that Telecom would cabinetise long-run copper lines (eg Pt Chev) and leave short run lines alone. Instead, Telecom chose to cabinetise the whole lot.

We put customers on LLU where we can but only if their line won't be cabinetised for the next 12 months. I know of other providers who put their customers on LLU lines with as little as three months' remaining before cabinetisation. Personally I don't have a problem with it, so long as the customers are aware of the situation.

@pctek, my apologies for your situation. I hope we got it sorted in the end.

The Herald reporter didn't have all the facts when he wrote his piece - We're yet to get back to him with what happened to his customer.

Paul

yeah, he even quoted you as saying that telecom have been closing exchanges down to be replaced by caninets, which is blatantly false.

VFNZPaulBrislen

970 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#340577 11-Jun-2010 11:54

Yes, not quite a quote - more an attribution (no quote marks) but still, not accurate. Have told him that - I believe he's doing a follow-up.

Paul

Paul Brislen
Head of Corporate Communications
Vodafone

http://forum.vodafone.co.nz

VFNZPaulBrislen

970 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#340602 11-Jun-2010 12:48

Righto, as an update:

we've identified a problem with the web-site tool that tells you whether you're in zone or out. It's using out of date info, so that's being fixed even as we speak.

Those that have been affected (that is, offered one price for LLU but put on the Wholesale price) will be contacted and have that problem fixed.

Apologies to those affected.

Paul

Paul Brislen
Head of Corporate Communications
Vodafone

http://forum.vodafone.co.nz

exportgoldman

1202 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#341008 12-Jun-2010 18:38

sbiddle:And this is the area that is open to debate. What some operators believed Telecom were doing and what Telecom's actual plans were were totally different. It seems there were big telcos out there who chose to actually ignore what Telecom were planning and running briefings on and and instead focus on the short term goal of the delivery of ULL services while totally ignoring the risks of midpoint injection.

Telecom never planned to only cabinetise long runs. There network was always going to be a fully cabinetised network dating back to ~2002 when the first proposals occured. Initial plans were also for a significant number of exchanges to go as well (since they would be obsolete), but this has not occured due to the (very) delayed launch of NGN voice services.

Telecom's intentions were certainly well know to anybody who asked. I was writing stuff on here detailing Telecom's plans and the risks of midpoint injection and ULL long before your network was even deployed.

Maybe somebody should have read my posts!

Maverick from WorldxChange is one of the only ISP OPPS which seems to have A) Been to the Briefings and B) Understood this concept, and has warned other ISP's in these very forums about the problems of unbundling, which is why they didn't put their own gear in exchanges.

I can back you up about Telecom's NGN plans, I even remember at NZ Herard article about how much Telecom were going to earn from selling a property in every suburb in NZ.

Tyler - Parnell Geek - iPhone 3G - Lenovo X301 - Kaseya - Great Western Steak House, these are some of my favourite things.

pctek

807 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#341766 15-Jun-2010 07:26

PaulBrislen: @quickymart, No.

@pctek, my apologies for your situation. I hope we got it sorted in the end.

One other thing. The main reason I posted it, is not to start an argument on unbundling but to point out issues with call centre people.

I also had requested Caller ID as well. This showed as being active on my account, however I noticed it wasn't working after a few days. (being on an exchange incapable of it for 4 years, it took me a while.....)

I called one of your people and explained the situation and he immediately started telling me I needed to disconnect all devices from jackpoints, remove my filter from the phone etc.

We had a bit of an argument over that, I had pointed out caller ID didn't work from day one, when I had been using the phone without a filter at all (it was still in the moving truck).

Then he said Henderson exchange was not able to provide me with caller ID because I already had Voicemail and having both enabled causes caller ID to not work. This was because the exchange is a 6E.

At which point I told him to stop talking and log it as a fualt. He then insisted I would be charged for a problem at my end.

When the Chorus guys turned up here they wondered why on earth they had been sent to my address and phoned in to get the caller ID enabled at the exchnage like it should have been.

Later that day Caller ID was now sorted.

It's not the problem - it's the call centre people.

I know better, for one thing my husband had originally installed that exchange, and various of it's upgrades. WE had also been off that exchnage previously and had these phone features enabled.

I knew better, but loads of people ringing in with these sort of issues would believe them and go away thinking they couldn't have the service.

Really, they should have a few clues before being employed, and if they really don't know something, check with someone who does before giving this sort of info to customers.

hellonearthisman

1819 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#345127 25-Jun-2010 10:14

hellonearthisman: @PaulBrislen you said "We put customers on LLU where we can but only if their line won't be cabinetised for the next 12 months."

Does that include customers on the Red Network at the wholesale level, like Slingshot?

[bump]

VFNZPaulBrislen

970 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#345137 25-Jun-2010 10:40

That's probably a question for Slingshot... they have their own criteria for unbundling (since they do their own LLU stuff as well).

Paul Brislen
Head of Corporate Communications
Vodafone

http://forum.vodafone.co.nz

hellonearthisman

1819 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#346338 29-Jun-2010 13:13

Thanks Paul, Looks like Slingshot is happy to sell the Red Network in locations that Vodafone wouldn't. http://forums.slingshot.co.nz/viewtopic.php?p=37373#p37373