Warning: Vodafone $5 roaming

Forums › One New Zealand (including Vodafone, WxC, Farmside) › Warning: Vodafone $5 roaming

1 | 2 | 3

28172 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1639524 23-Sep-2016 16:38

Geektastic: If you use a local SIM, how can people call you? Doesn't it effectively mean your number is off line until you get home?

Not everyone uses their devices for that. People can still get me on wechat, facebook messenger, twitter, ICQ, sometimes skype, email, instagram, snapchat, and probably a few others I have forgotten about. None are tied to a number that is used by a telco to identify me to their billing system.

Richard rich.ms

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1639555 23-Sep-2016 17:35

richms:

Geektastic: If you use a local SIM, how can people call you? Doesn't it effectively mean your number is off line until you get home?

Not everyone uses their devices for that. People can still get me on wechat, facebook messenger, twitter, ICQ, sometimes skype, email, instagram, snapchat, and probably a few others I have forgotten about. None are tied to a number that is used by a telco to identify me to their billing system.

Ah. I see all those as secondary channels with the phone number being the primary one, but my mobile is the house phone (no fixed line) and the work phone.

I'd actually like what I had on Orange in the UK 12 years or so ago - two live numbers on the same SIM, so I could actually have a work number and a home one with different rings etc.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1639556 23-Sep-2016 17:37

sbiddle:

Geektastic:

I would like to see a day come when Vodafone operate a worldwide network, so that your phone is never deemed to be roaming if it is using a VF network regardless of where you are.

Vodafone are moving away from being a global provider but that's got nothing to do with this. A $5 charge exists simply because they can charge it - there is no reason or need for it. When Three launched in 2003 they had no roaming charges when you roamed on any Three network.

The whole irony of this is that a lot of work was done by VF Group in the mid 2000's towards scrapping roaming charges across all Group networks. This was seen as anticompetitive by the EU, and in this part of the world off the record both the ACCC and Commerce Commission took issue with this as well as zero rating of roaming between NZ/AU would have likely been deemed anti competitive.

Not sure it is anticompetitive - nothing stopping anyone else from doing it too!

Linux

11413 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1639557 23-Sep-2016 17:41

Geektastic:
sbiddle:

Geektastic:

I would like to see a day come when Vodafone operate a worldwide network, so that your phone is never deemed to be roaming if it is using a VF network regardless of where you are.

Vodafone are moving away from being a global provider but that's got nothing to do with this. A $5 charge exists simply because they can charge it - there is no reason or need for it. When Three launched in 2003 they had no roaming charges when you roamed on any Three network.

The whole irony of this is that a lot of work was done by VF Group in the mid 2000's towards scrapping roaming charges across all Group networks. This was seen as anticompetitive by the EU, and in this part of the world off the record both the ACCC and Commerce Commission took issue with this as well as zero rating of roaming between NZ/AU would have likely been deemed anti competitive.

Not sure it is anticompetitive - nothing stopping anyone else from doing it too!

Why would other carriers do it if they don't own networks in other countries? Remember carriers are a business to make $$$ not a charity

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1639559 23-Sep-2016 17:43

sbiddle:

Jaxar:

sbiddle:

The whole irony of this is that a lot of work was done by VF Group in the mid 2000's towards scrapping roaming charges across all Group networks. This was seen as anticompetitive by the EU, and in this part of the world off the record both the ACCC and Commerce Commission took issue with this as well as zero rating of roaming between NZ/AU would have likely been deemed anti competitive.

That's pretty funny but yeah I can see the reasoning.

It's the real problem with competition regulators. Many people think the job of somebody such as the Commerce Commission is to deliver the best deal for consumers, when in reality that's not the goal. Their goal is to ensure a level playing field, which doesn't always deliver the best price to consumers.

I think it can work well - if it is designed to.

I used to have a lot to do with OFWAT, the water/sewage industry regulator in the UK. Every 5 years, all the water companies had to submit huge plans detailing what they had achieved in the past 5 years (regarding leak levels, strengthening supply redundancy, new works, customer service etc etc) and what they proposed to do in the next 5 and what they wanted to charge for that period.

The regulator then reviewed the plans, consulted with consumer bodies etc and wrote back more or less saying no, you can do twice as much but you can only charge half what you asked for. The water companies then had a period to make further representations which may or may not result in a (usually minor) revision and then that's it - that is what you can charge for the next 5 years and that is what you must achieve.

I know from the pain it caused in the companies - restructures, redundancies, mergers and so on - that the deals were definitely more to the benefit of the consumers than the businesses.

The regulators here, however, do not seem to work that way and seem to have far fewer (if any) teeth when it comes to enforcing things (see Chorus for details...!)

Maybe it is a market size issue?

richms

28172 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1639588 23-Sep-2016 18:13

Geektastic:

I think it can work well - if it is designed to.

I used to have a lot to do with OFWAT, the water/sewage industry regulator in the UK. Every 5 years, all the water companies had to submit huge plans detailing what they had achieved in the past 5 years (regarding leak levels, strengthening supply redundancy, new works, customer service etc etc) and what they proposed to do in the next 5 and what they wanted to charge for that period.

The regulator then reviewed the plans, consulted with consumer bodies etc and wrote back more or less saying no, you can do twice as much but you can only charge half what you asked for. The water companies then had a period to make further representations which may or may not result in a (usually minor) revision and then that's it - that is what you can charge for the next 5 years and that is what you must achieve.

I know from the pain it caused in the companies - restructures, redundancies, mergers and so on - that the deals were definitely more to the benefit of the consumers than the businesses.

The regulators here, however, do not seem to work that way and seem to have far fewer (if any) teeth when it comes to enforcing things (see Chorus for details...!)

Maybe it is a market size issue?

I think something similar could work for the mobile telcos where they have the monopoly use of certain slices of spectrum. Would be better than the current BS of auctioning it to the highest bidder since that means that the only people that are paying the amounts they pay are the users of the network. So indirectly its just another form of taxation.

Make the networks commit to a certain amount of non profitable buildout in whopwhops inorder to get their 5G freqs or simaler. Give it to the networks which will do the most good with it and if they do not achieve it, then charge them the sillymoney amounts for it.

Richard rich.ms

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#1639592 23-Sep-2016 18:46

Geektastic:

sbiddle:

Geektastic:

I would like to see a day come when Vodafone operate a worldwide network, so that your phone is never deemed to be roaming if it is using a VF network regardless of where you are.

Vodafone are moving away from being a global provider but that's got nothing to do with this. A $5 charge exists simply because they can charge it - there is no reason or need for it. When Three launched in 2003 they had no roaming charges when you roamed on any Three network.

The whole irony of this is that a lot of work was done by VF Group in the mid 2000's towards scrapping roaming charges across all Group networks. This was seen as anticompetitive by the EU, and in this part of the world off the record both the ACCC and Commerce Commission took issue with this as well as zero rating of roaming between NZ/AU would have likely been deemed anti competitive.

Not sure it is anticompetitive - nothing stopping anyone else from doing it too!

There was lots stopping anybody else from doing it - the mere fact nobody else owned networks in all the countries being the most significant obstacle.

GoodSync

GoodSync. Easily back up and sync your files with GoodSync. Simple and secure file backup and synchronisation software will ensure that your files are never lost (affiliate link).

lchiu7

6474 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1639623 23-Sep-2016 21:29

richms:

Geektastic: If you use a local SIM, how can people call you? Doesn't it effectively mean your number is off line until you get home?

Not everyone uses their devices for that. People can still get me on wechat, facebook messenger, twitter, ICQ, sometimes skype, email, instagram, snapchat, and probably a few others I have forgotten about. None are tied to a number that is used by a telco to identify me to their billing system.

That's my view also. But there is nothing to stop you from making one call back to NZ and changing your VM message to say call this overseas number if you want to be reached by traditional phone. Of course that won't help for SMS.

I have a Google Voice number so when I travel I usually change my VM on my NZ number to tell people to call or text this US number which works no matter what country I'm in so long as I have Internet. And people don't have to use any of the messaging apps listed above - just SMS.

Staying in Wellington. Check out my AirBnB in the Wellington CBD. https://www.airbnb.co.nz/h/wellycbd PM me and mention GZ to get a 15% discount and no AirBnB charges.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1639637 23-Sep-2016 22:01

Linux:
Geektastic:

sbiddle:

Geektastic:

I would like to see a day come when Vodafone operate a worldwide network, so that your phone is never deemed to be roaming if it is using a VF network regardless of where you are.

Vodafone are moving away from being a global provider but that's got nothing to do with this. A $5 charge exists simply because they can charge it - there is no reason or need for it. When Three launched in 2003 they had no roaming charges when you roamed on any Three network.

The whole irony of this is that a lot of work was done by VF Group in the mid 2000's towards scrapping roaming charges across all Group networks. This was seen as anticompetitive by the EU, and in this part of the world off the record both the ACCC and Commerce Commission took issue with this as well as zero rating of roaming between NZ/AU would have likely been deemed anti competitive.

Not sure it is anticompetitive - nothing stopping anyone else from doing it too!

Why would other carriers do it if they don't own networks in other countries? Remember carriers are a business to make $$$ not a charity

They would do so to make money, I presume.

I presume they rent space. It's up to them whether they choose to compete. Anti-competitive means that VF (or whoever) would be indulging in deliberate practices to prevent them from being able to compete if they so wished. The fact that VF happen to be a bigger business with overseas networks is not anti-competitive in and of itself.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1639638 23-Sep-2016 22:02

sbiddle:

Geektastic:

sbiddle:

Geektastic:

I would like to see a day come when Vodafone operate a worldwide network, so that your phone is never deemed to be roaming if it is using a VF network regardless of where you are.

Vodafone are moving away from being a global provider but that's got nothing to do with this. A $5 charge exists simply because they can charge it - there is no reason or need for it. When Three launched in 2003 they had no roaming charges when you roamed on any Three network.

The whole irony of this is that a lot of work was done by VF Group in the mid 2000's towards scrapping roaming charges across all Group networks. This was seen as anticompetitive by the EU, and in this part of the world off the record both the ACCC and Commerce Commission took issue with this as well as zero rating of roaming between NZ/AU would have likely been deemed anti competitive.

Not sure it is anticompetitive - nothing stopping anyone else from doing it too!

There was lots stopping anybody else from doing it - the mere fact nobody else owned networks in all the countries being the most significant obstacle.

That is not deliberate anti-competitive behaviour. Nothing to stop others from acquiring or building them if they have the cojones and/or wherewithal...

Linux

11413 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1639642 23-Sep-2016 22:08

Of course it's cheap to build mobile networks and aquire spectrum and employ staff and run

Silly me! Off to build one now around Europe will be back few hours when done :p

Linux

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1639654 23-Sep-2016 23:24

Linux: Of course it's cheap to build mobile networks and aquire spectrum and employ staff and run

Silly me! Off to build one now around Europe will be back few hours when done :p

Linux

Just because it is expensive does not make it anti-competitive. Indeed, you could flip it and say it is anti-competitive to prevent a telco from using their own paid for asset as they wish.

If I start White Van Man couriers in NZ, it is not anti-competitive of FedEx to have a worldwide network I cannot afford...!

Here is a list of anti-competitive practices. "Being bigger because we raised more market capital and expanded faster" is not listed...!

Linux

11413 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1639660 24-Sep-2016 00:32

Why would you build another mobile network to offer free roaming services?

You think the share holders are going to vote ' yes ' ? I don't think so

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#1639701 24-Sep-2016 07:59

Geektastic:

sbiddle:

Geektastic:

sbiddle:

Geektastic:

I would like to see a day come when Vodafone operate a worldwide network, so that your phone is never deemed to be roaming if it is using a VF network regardless of where you are.

Vodafone are moving away from being a global provider but that's got nothing to do with this. A $5 charge exists simply because they can charge it - there is no reason or need for it. When Three launched in 2003 they had no roaming charges when you roamed on any Three network.

The whole irony of this is that a lot of work was done by VF Group in the mid 2000's towards scrapping roaming charges across all Group networks. This was seen as anticompetitive by the EU, and in this part of the world off the record both the ACCC and Commerce Commission took issue with this as well as zero rating of roaming between NZ/AU would have likely been deemed anti competitive.

Not sure it is anticompetitive - nothing stopping anyone else from doing it too!

There was lots stopping anybody else from doing it - the mere fact nobody else owned networks in all the countries being the most significant obstacle.

That is not deliberate anti-competitive behaviour. Nothing to stop others from acquiring or building them if they have the cojones and/or wherewithal...

You mightn't deem that anti competitive but competition regulators certainly deem it as such.

Bundling of fixed line + mobile in NZ wasn't possible for many years because this was deemed to be anti competitive.

longwayfromhome

7 posts

Wannabe Geek

#1639724 24-Sep-2016 09:56

sbiddle:

... You're also told clearly $5 daily usage applies in a TXT when you land...

Just back from a week in Sydney - the usual texts on landing did not appear - I am wondering if they have been discontinued, creating the (more-or-less correct) impression of a seamless service. Travelling to AU and USA regularly - the $5 deal is terrific.

1 | 2 | 3