Spark sinks to a new low..

Forums › Spark New Zealand (including Skinny and BigPipe) › Spark sinks to a new low..

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

1421 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2071879 11-Aug-2018 20:12

tdgeek:

nunz:

I agree - management often kills support to cut costs and price is no indicator but....

Price wars and the race to the bottom of the barrel are directly attributable to smaller businesses going under. They are also directly attributable to the reasons some businesses give bad service - if you dont have the resources (money) then you cant provide good service, you do longer hours, you pressure your staff and cut corners - this eventually leads to bad things for clients.

My point is to support and be loyal to businesses which do put effort back into their client support and product care. Case in point - Viewsonic - sold their product for almost 20 years. Good service (the very few times i needed it) and good product. Happy to not scrape the barrel with what ever new brand is trying to undercut. If a client requests the cheap as stuff - I point them in the direction of another supplier as i don't want the pain that will go with it.

My clients trust me to look after their end of things - and they tend to look after me. Price is not the decider for them - service is. when our supplier tried to push me to a new non viewsonic product (I'ld make more margin on) - I said no and stuck with Viewsonic. Less profit for me - but far better for the client. Most of my clients have been with me in excess of 10 years - partly because while we do keep price in mind, we don't cut corners with cheap stuff.

I think the choice you make and your customer makes is not a choice for some industries where the obscene competition forces price competition, with the corresponding need to cut costs.

I'm in I.t. - trust me - there is competition.

however - the idea of obscene competition is a false one. If you let your competitors set the pace or dictate your prices then you are in trouble. Just don't compete on price. Compete on quality, service, great product, going over the top with looking out for people. Compete on point of difference. Act in ways that engender loyalty. let your clients know they are the number one priority in your business. Price driven businesses are only interested in fast turn over. They don't care about clients - they cant afford to.

Look at Apple. They never compete on price. They are hellishly expensive but they have a strong loyalty base and are one of the worlds richest companies. Can you think of one other company that makes most of its profits on hardware? They leverage their points of difference - innovation, style, luxury, user experience.

tdgeek

29750 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2071882 11-Aug-2018 20:26

nunz:

tdgeek:

nunz:

I agree - management often kills support to cut costs and price is no indicator but....

Price wars and the race to the bottom of the barrel are directly attributable to smaller businesses going under. They are also directly attributable to the reasons some businesses give bad service - if you dont have the resources (money) then you cant provide good service, you do longer hours, you pressure your staff and cut corners - this eventually leads to bad things for clients.

My point is to support and be loyal to businesses which do put effort back into their client support and product care. Case in point - Viewsonic - sold their product for almost 20 years. Good service (the very few times i needed it) and good product. Happy to not scrape the barrel with what ever new brand is trying to undercut. If a client requests the cheap as stuff - I point them in the direction of another supplier as i don't want the pain that will go with it.

My clients trust me to look after their end of things - and they tend to look after me. Price is not the decider for them - service is. when our supplier tried to push me to a new non viewsonic product (I'ld make more margin on) - I said no and stuck with Viewsonic. Less profit for me - but far better for the client. Most of my clients have been with me in excess of 10 years - partly because while we do keep price in mind, we don't cut corners with cheap stuff.

I think the choice you make and your customer makes is not a choice for some industries where the obscene competition forces price competition, with the corresponding need to cut costs.

I'm in I.t. - trust me - there is competition.

however - the idea of obscene competition is a false one. If you let your competitors set the pace or dictate your prices then you are in trouble. Just don't compete on price. Compete on quality, service, great product, going over the top with looking out for people. Compete on point of difference. Act in ways that engender loyalty. let your clients know they are the number one priority in your business. Price driven businesses are only interested in fast turn over. They don't care about clients - they cant afford to.

Look at Apple. They never compete on price. They are hellishly expensive but they have a strong loyalty base and are one of the worlds richest companies. Can you think of one other company that makes most of its profits on hardware? They leverage their points of difference - innovation, style, luxury, user experience.

You are comparing Apple, to those engaged in the NZ telco industry, and you say you are in IT??. Seems to me you are in Marketing and went from your degree to teaching Marketing

Jogre

182 posts

Master Geek

#2072321 13-Aug-2018 07:50

tdgeek:

nunz:

I'm in I.t. - trust me - there is competition.

however - the idea of obscene competition is a false one. If you let your competitors set the pace or dictate your prices then you are in trouble. Just don't compete on price. Compete on quality, service, great product, going over the top with looking out for people. Compete on point of difference. Act in ways that engender loyalty. let your clients know they are the number one priority in your business. Price driven businesses are only interested in fast turn over. They don't care about clients - they cant afford to.

Look at Apple. They never compete on price. They are hellishly expensive but they have a strong loyalty base and are one of the worlds richest companies. Can you think of one other company that makes most of its profits on hardware? They leverage their points of difference - innovation, style, luxury, user experience.

You are comparing Apple, to those engaged in the NZ telco industry, and you say you are in IT??. Seems to me you are in Marketing and went from your degree to teaching Marketing

No he's backing up his theory with an example, while you're being snarky without offering a counter. Companies will compete on price when they can't adjust their product or service to stand on its own. Offset printing companies went in a race to the bottom a few years ago with outfits like 3A printing popping up, to the extent where people still in the printing industry refer to it as a sunset industry. Most printing companies were unable to market services/products so they could only adjust pricing to draw customers. Apple spent millions/billions on marketing for their services/products so they didn't have to adjust price so offering Apple as an example is pretty darn relevant.

matisyahu

1623 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#2073475 14-Aug-2018 19:09

To quote a great philosopher: "Hate the game not the player". I load D2D as much as the next person but until the government bans telemarketing, cold calling, D2D and other practices then Spark management wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't explore all options when it comes to getting their name out there and winning over customers.

"When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called 'the People's Stick'"

tdgeek

29750 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2073488 14-Aug-2018 19:58

Jogre:

tdgeek:

nunz:

I'm in I.t. - trust me - there is competition.

however - the idea of obscene competition is a false one. If you let your competitors set the pace or dictate your prices then you are in trouble. Just don't compete on price. Compete on quality, service, great product, going over the top with looking out for people. Compete on point of difference. Act in ways that engender loyalty. let your clients know they are the number one priority in your business. Price driven businesses are only interested in fast turn over. They don't care about clients - they cant afford to.

Look at Apple. They never compete on price. They are hellishly expensive but they have a strong loyalty base and are one of the worlds richest companies. Can you think of one other company that makes most of its profits on hardware? They leverage their points of difference - innovation, style, luxury, user experience.

You are comparing Apple, to those engaged in the NZ telco industry, and you say you are in IT??. Seems to me you are in Marketing and went from your degree to teaching Marketing

No he's backing up his theory with an example, while you're being snarky without offering a counter. Companies will compete on price when they can't adjust their product or service to stand on its own. Offset printing companies went in a race to the bottom a few years ago with outfits like 3A printing popping up, to the extent where people still in the printing industry refer to it as a sunset industry. Most printing companies were unable to market services/products so they could only adjust pricing to draw customers. Apple spent millions/billions on marketing for their services/products so they didn't have to adjust price so offering Apple as an example is pretty darn relevant.

Quite wrong. Apple as you say spent billions on marketing and using the genius of Steve Jobs. They can charge whatever they like, and did, and do. Due to their marketing model they have no competition.

Telco's in NZ cannot charge what they like as punters go elsewhere, as many do to save a few bucks a month. When 2D came on stream they cut prices, so everyone else had to as well. Often it was increasing the deal at same price, or dropping the price, or paying for added value and giving that away free. All a race to the bottom. The problem is you have the same market yet everybody drops prices, so national telco revenue has to drop for everyone. Offshore help desks were used to trim costs, people dont like that, then some bring them back, and face higher costs. People complain about service, as there is little funding to have the help desks as manned as people want.

Literally everything about Apple and our telco's is the opposite.

One thing that does match are profits. I believe 2D and Voda lose money annually. (I believe that Voda returned to a small profit 2017) Spark makes a profit.

matisyahu

1623 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#2073608 15-Aug-2018 01:14

tdgeek:

Quite wrong. Apple as you say spent billions on marketing and using the genius of Steve Jobs. They can charge whatever they like, and did, and do. Due to their marketing model they have no competition.

Telco's in NZ cannot charge what they like as punters go elsewhere, as many do to save a few bucks a month. When 2D came on stream they cut prices, so everyone else had to as well. Often it was increasing the deal at same price, or dropping the price, or paying for added value and giving that away free. All a race to the bottom. The problem is you have the same market yet everybody drops prices, so national telco revenue has to drop for everyone. Offshore help desks were used to trim costs, people dont like that, then some bring them back, and face higher costs. People complain about service, as there is little funding to have the help desks as manned as people want.

Literally everything about Apple and our telco's is the opposite.

One thing that does match are profits. I believe 2D and Voda lose money annually. (I believe that Voda returned to a small profit 2017) Spark makes a profit.

In the case of Vodafone I think it is just grossly inefficient management being the cause where as with 2D it is more an economies of scale matter of battling against inertia where the gap isn't sufficiently big enough for many to warrant moving from their current provider. The pricing in New Zealand is pretty damn good when you consider the population density (or there lack of) so there is only so much blood one can squeeze from a stone. Then again this goes back to the bigger issue which is ideally New Zealand needs to have a population of around 30-40million to get the sorts of economies of scale to drive down to the prices that many here wish were being charged not only for services but also when buying new mobile phones and other electronic gadgets.

"When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called 'the People's Stick'"

nunz

1421 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2074600 16-Aug-2018 19:46

tdgeek:

You are comparing Apple, to those engaged in the NZ telco industry, and you say you are in IT??. Seems to me you are in Marketing and went from your degree to teaching Marketing

Seems to me you are being rude .. how dare you insinuate I went to University and got a degree???

It's an analogy or example to explain a business that does not compete on price. and in case you forgot - Apple is in the business of IT. The example negates the idea of obscene competition etc. The discussion isn't on IT it's on how people do business.

All businesses are the same at their core. They are there to make money - they do it by offering goods and services. They market their goods and services in a competitive environment. What they do to make money is often less important than how they do it. Great businesses could sell sand to the arabs and make a profit, poor businesses couldn't sell hookers to Donald Trump.

And that doesn't take a degree - it takes common sense.

And with all due respect to marketing - they are image makers, not engaged in solid business practice implementation. That's business leadership and common sense. No amount of marketing is going to succeed in a poor business. Eventually the facade crumbles.

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

nunz

1421 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2074612 16-Aug-2018 20:06

tdgeek:

Quite wrong. Apple as you say spent billions on marketing and using the genius of Steve Jobs. They can charge whatever they like, and did, and do. Due to their marketing model they have no competition.

Telco's in NZ cannot charge what they like as punters go elsewhere, as many do to save a few bucks a month. When 2D came on stream they cut prices, so everyone else had to as well. Often it was increasing the deal at same price, or dropping the price, or paying for added value and giving that away free. All a race to the bottom. The problem is you have the same market yet everybody drops prices, so national telco revenue has to drop for everyone. Offshore help desks were used to trim costs, people dont like that, then some bring them back, and face higher costs. People complain about service, as there is little funding to have the help desks as manned as people want.

Literally everything about Apple and our telco's is the opposite.

One thing that does match are profits. I believe 2D and Voda lose money annually. (I believe that Voda returned to a small profit 2017) Spark makes a profit.

Telecos are in a stupid race for the bottom. and it hurts consumers.

There is a significant proportion of clients on the move between Vodafone, Spark and 2Degrees. They are moving, not normally because of technical issues (that's normally the occasion of - not the reason for leaving) but because they are totally steamed at the poor service, poor support and complete indifference shown by the big three. 2Degrees capatilised on that when they entered the market - then ended up doing exactly the same.

Getting a new client is costly. it involves unrecoverable time and expenses signing them up, getting them devices, connecting them, setting up records, playing at he exchange etc etc etc. That's dead money. If the money that was spent on that was spent on looking after clients then the bleed would stop. If one teleco could get its act together and stop bleeding clients then their share would grow as disaffected clients from other telecos came in. "Harvard business states" Depending on which study you believe, and what industry you’re in, acquiring a new customer is anywhere from five to 25 times more expensive than retaining an existing one. " https://hbr.org/2014/10/the-value-of-keeping-the-right-customers

The most expensive client is a new one - the best money maker is a long term settled client.

People do make some choices based on cost - but they make choices to LEAVE based on satisfaction. Up your service levels, improve your game and you will keep existing clients while catching new ones. if one teleco could improve their retention rate by 10% they have a guaranteed pool of people in flux, moving from teleco to teleco, they would pick up .

SNAP, if you want an IT / Teleco example, were more expensive than 2D and Vodafone and spark - but had a solid client base - and a more stable client base. Why? because their services and support were good.

I know for me personally running into issues with snap connections, was annoying, but their support staff worked with me to resolve them. I felt cared for, listened to and responded to. Whats more I wasn't treated like a moron by an under trained, list quoting, robotron help desk person. I would have paid more money to them if they asked - why? coz they made my life happier and easier.

Let me stop this being my opinion and turn to research - and I don't mean marketing hype from google:

A - Customers rely on their emotional experiences with salespeople more than any of the traditional factors, according to research by the Peppers & Rogers Group, which showed that:

60% of all customers stop dealing with a company because of what they perceive as indifference on the part of salespeople
70% of customers leave a company because of poor service, which is usually attributed to a salesperson
80% of defecting customers describe themselves as “satisfied” or “very satisfied” just before they leave, and
Customers who feel their salespeople are exceptional are 10 to 15 times more likely to remain loyal.

B - Health Providers - People would pay more for service and care ... https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20111205006288/en/New-Peppers-Rogers-Group-Study-Reveals-Customers

C - Institute of Architects - USA - The reason people leave - unhappiness: https://www.aia.org/articles/83556-three-reasons-why-clients-leave-and-how-to-w:46

D - Harvard business revue - https://hbr.org/2014/10/the-value-of-keeping-the-right-customers

and the lists go on - it is service and experience, not pricing, that most affects customer retention.

BTW - you saying people buy Apple based on marketing - makes my case for me. you are agreeing it is not pricing / it's not the money - its other things that are important.(in this case image and enjoyment and buzz and lifestyle and trendiness and ego and ....)

nunz

1421 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2074623 16-Aug-2018 20:28

matisyahu:

In the case of Vodafone I think it is just grossly inefficient management being the cause where as with 2D it is more an economies of scale matter of battling against inertia where the gap isn't sufficiently big enough for many to warrant moving from their current provider. The pricing in New Zealand is pretty damn good when you consider the population density (or there lack of) so there is only so much blood one can squeeze from a stone. Then again this goes back to the bigger issue which is ideally New Zealand needs to have a population of around 30-40million to get the sorts of economies of scale to drive down to the prices that many here wish were being charged not only for services but also when buying new mobile phones and other electronic gadgets.

While I agree to a certain extent (my experience of corporate and govt shows me they are very inefficient at one level), I disagree at another. It was less than 15 years ago where i was paying over $1000 per month for 10GB of data. At the time telecom had a monopoly and that price was the lowest price. I also paid about $2500 per month for three mobile phones (10 years ago) and around $200 per month for a phone line, 0800 number and very little out going calls - almost zero toll calls.

Since then a huge amount has been spent on infrastructure (money out) while pricing has crashed. I now get unlimited NZ / Aus phone calls AND 3GB of datq for $40 ish per month. My phone bill is $14 per month on a bad month and my over seas calls are lucky to be $3 per hour maximum. with Skype etc - i don't toll call much any more. That's a crazy reduction in money in. I also suck huge amounts more data doing backups, watching movies, and blogging on Geekzone - than I ever used to. That's more cost.

The net result is increased costs & drastically lowered income.

The above are a huge contributor of a failure to make money. Add into that deregulation and more competition and I'm surprised anyone is in business.

If VF and 2D are losing money - then they should get out of business. The first and really only important rule of business is, "Make money". If you aren't then you are a charity and failing in your primary objective - which is profit. How you achieve the first rule is important - but the first rule is the one and only reason for a business to exist.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79295 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#2074626 16-Aug-2018 20:32

Knock it off with the huge quotes folks.

nunz

1421 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2074627 16-Aug-2018 20:33

freitasm:Knock it ... quotes folks.

Sorry. fixed.

Tinkerisk

4232 posts

Uber Geek

#2074663 17-Aug-2018 05:20

DarthKermit:

Oh for the good old days when the Post Office owned all the phones:

OT: I have linked that one from 1948 in an completely original state and fully operational via VoIP at home to the network. You can't beat that sophisticated ringing sound of the two bells. Due to an small interface box converting impulses (IWV) to tones (MFV), it is capable to use 10 preset numbers. (Don't worry, I have modern HD DECT phones as welll ;-)

- NET: FTTH, OPNsense, 10G backbone, GWN APs, ipPBX
- SRV: 12 RU HA server cluster, 0.1 PB storage on premise
- IoT: thread, zigbee, tasmota, BidCoS, LoRa, WX suite, IR
- 3D: two 3D printers, 3D scanner, CNC router, laser cutter

MichaelNZ

1392 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Integrity Tech Solutions

#2082015 31-Aug-2018 18:27

LOL.

I'm with InspireNet. Every month I just pay their bill for $85 I figure it's fair so why rock the boat?

I never have to complain here.

WFH Linux Systems and Networks Engineer in the Internet industry | Specialising in Mikrotik | APNIC member | Open to job offers

tdgeek

29750 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2082020 31-Aug-2018 18:46

nunz:

BTW - you saying people buy Apple based on marketing - makes my case for me. you are agreeing it is not pricing / it's not the money - its other things that are important.(in this case image and enjoyment and buzz and lifestyle and trendiness and ego and ....)

It doesnt make the case for you, it backs my response. Marketing gave Apple customer love. They buy Apple because of that, and supreme service to back that up, so yes they do pay more, a lot more. If you want an iPhone you can only go to one shop. Telco's (not Telecos's) sell the transmission of bits and bytes. Anyone can do that, and another thread mentioned 80 RSP's are out there. All selling data transmission. Its a generic product, who cares who its with. There will be customers that pay more for a big company, better service. But many go where its a few bucks cheaper. If you wanted top service, with call centres manned up to take calls quick, thats a mammoth cost. You would then get Apple service at a huge premium, and for most people, its set and forget, especially fibre.

If Telco's can simply hire an army of staff, they would do that, charge more, make an ok margin of the customers that stayed, and lose revenue on the outflow that went to save what would then be a much higher price. Instead they add on added value products, which are not cheap.

tdgeek

29750 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2082023 31-Aug-2018 18:56

nunz:

Since then a huge amount has been spent on infrastructure (money out) while pricing has crashed. I now get unlimited NZ / Aus phone calls AND 3GB of datq for $40 ish per month. My phone bill is $14 per month on a bad month and my over seas calls are lucky to be $3 per hour maximum. with Skype etc - i don't toll call much any more. That's a crazy reduction in money in. I also suck huge amounts more data doing backups, watching movies, and blogging on Geekzone - than I ever used to. That's more cost.

The net result is increased costs & drastically lowered income.

The above are a huge contributor of a failure to make money. Add into that deregulation and more competition and I'm surprised anyone is in business.

If VF and 2D are losing money - then they should get out of business. The first and really only important rule of business is, "Make money". If you aren't then you are a charity and failing in your primary objective - which is profit. How you achieve the first rule is important - but the first rule is the one and only reason for a business to exist.

Exactly. There is a great deal of triplication over the big three. Data has got cheaper, so that has helped a lot. But you have the same number of customers, yet spread over more businesses, each with a CEO, management team and so on. Plus as tech has advanced you need teams to create this, a lot of money is spent as tech improves, yet the customer numbers remain the same, so you arent even improving the product and charging more, you are improving it and not charging any more.

VF I believe, remains here to have a presence. 2D, are the disruptor to bring prices down, they have, and they are recently making a small profit, after years of losses. Cost savings of any sort will have to continue. That Spark makes the profit it does has to be commendable.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6