Free TXT wekends extended until 31/10/06

Forums › One New Zealand (including Vodafone, WxC, Farmside) › Free TXT wekends extended until 31/10/06

1 | 2

retardinator

114 posts

Master Geek

#40040 29-Jun-2006 02:58

NZBNW: But you see that either Telco would not let this happen, as I have said a price was is not in the best interest of either Telco, and really not for the consumer. If one player was to leave the mobile market and another enter, all that really says is we could have had three players, but we still have two. I too believe in the principles of free market, where if a business fails through competition then so be it, which can happen when you have a one larger player and a few smaller players with the later usually having deeper pockets.

We are just not going to see eye to eye on that issue. :)

Pernod

52 posts

Master Geek

#40079 29-Jun-2006 13:38

retardinator:
Firstly: I consider it more relevant to compare the proportion of cellphone users in a country rather than the population as a whole.
Secondly: I believe it would be relevant to compare ourselves to countries with similar attributes.

In this regard, perhaps Norway, Denmark and Ireland would be prime candidates for this, considering their geographic and demographic similarities to New Zealand.

Based on a little research on Google I have to disagree with both of these points.

Firstly: Proportion of the population that have cell phones is not at all relevant. It would only be relevant if there were entire areas without cell phones and did not need coverage. Regardless of how many people have phones, you still require coverage everywhere there is a reasonable population.

Secondly:
Last time I checked Ireland and Denmark were pretty much flat. Providing coverage to the likes of Dublin or Arhus is easy, plonk a tower on top of the closest tall building. In places like Auckland and Wellington this just doesn't cut it.
Likewise the land area of Denmark and Ireland are a joke when comparing to NZ. More land, and difficult terrain means higher costs - its as simple as that.

Norway is a closer representation, however they also have a few slight difference that I would imagine make a large difference. Firstly they have a more black/white split between Densely populated and Empty. According to your table they have 50% more unpopulated land that NZ! Higher population densities are easier to service. On top of this they have almost 20% higher mobile penetration making the cost of service per user lower.

It is also important to note Norway is predominantly on one side of a mountain range, unlike NZ which has a number of ranges through the middle of it, with population spread across both sides of the mountain.

Lastly, Norway has a GPD 60% higher than NZ! So even if their mobile rates were exactly the same as ours, they would score much better than NZ as relative to GDP they would be 40% cheaper!

Based on this I simply cant understand how anyone could expect NZ to have lower mobile costs than (or even match) these three countries.

Trying to compare central European country's mobile rates with ours is like comparing US oil prices to ours! Its just not apples with apples!

retardinator

114 posts

Master Geek

#40089 29-Jun-2006 14:33

Pernod: Firstly: Proportion of the population that have cell phones is not at all relevant. It would only be relevant if there were entire areas without cell phones and did not need coverage. Regardless of how many people have phones, you still require coverage everywhere there is a reasonable population.

It is relevant as it contributes towards my argument that of the proportion of cellphone users in New Zealand, 86% of them live in urban areas. Contributing to the likeliness that New Zealand Mobile Network Providers are achieving greater economies of scale and having to supply coverage to these other areas is possibly more than offset by the return from the urban areas.

According to your table they[Norway] have 50% more unpopulated land that NZ!

How on earth is that true when they have the same population density as New Zealand?!

Secondly:
Last time I checked Ireland and Denmark were pretty much flat. Providing coverage to the likes of Dublin or Arhus is easy, plonk a tower on top of the closest tall building. In places like Auckland and Wellington this just doesn't cut it.
Likewise the land area of Denmark and Ireland are a joke when comparing to NZ.....It is also important to note Norway is predominantly on one side of a mountain range, unlike NZ which has a number of ranges through the middle of it, with population spread across both sides of the mountain.

Those points regarding the different terrian are covered in the document of which I have been referring to, and I agree with their rationale. Did you read this document?

Lastly, Norway has a GPD 60% higher than NZ! So even if their mobile rates were exactly the same as ours, they would score much better than NZ as relative to GDP they would be 40% cheaper!

I compared the amount spent as a percentage of GDP per capita for each user type...why?! becuase it is a relative comparison. I do not consider your point valid, evenless so when considering the potential economies of scale obtained by New Zealand's mobile network providers.

Based on this I simply cant understand how anyone could expect NZ to have lower mobile costs than (or even match) these three countries

...Really?

nzbnw

2374 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Spark NZ

#40102 29-Jun-2006 16:04

retardinator:We are just not going to see eye to eye on that issue. :)

Apparently not

.

Cheers

Jama

1420 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#40105 29-Jun-2006 16:17

How bizarre... Does Norway have an RMA? Do they have to go through a lengthy, costly process just to tilt an antenna array let alone build a new one? Norway experiences severe weather and shorter summer, doesn't that mean people spend more time inside than outside? Isn't booze controlled by the Norwegain government and aren't taxes like near 50% but you really get free healthcare, education and looked after in your old age? Is Norway split across two major islands?

Sounds like chalk and cheese to me.

retardinator

114 posts

Master Geek

#40107 29-Jun-2006 16:36

Jama: How bizarre... Does Norway have an RMA? Do they have to go through a lengthy, costly process just to tilt an antenna array let alone build a new one?

Not sure, do you know or are you asking a question?! as I am not too interested in doing any of your research to aide you in making your points. If you want to make a point, please back it up with data or information which allows comparison just as I did. What I am arguing is relevant considering the statistical data and information that I sourced from the New Zealand mobile cost and prices report by Network Strategies, as commissioned by Telstra Clear and, as hosted by New Zealand's Commerce Commission website.

Again Norway experiences severe weather and shorter summer, doesn't that mean people spend more time inside than outside?

Relevance?

Isn't booze controlled by the Norwegain government and aren't taxes like near 50% but you really get free healthcare, education and looked after in your old age?

Again relevance? and you're going OT.

Is Norway split across two major islands?

...There is no relevance there, the land sizes between Norway and New Zealand are similar.

Sounds like chalk and cheese to me.

Thanks for your contribution

bradstewart

4335 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#40108 29-Jun-2006 16:42

I am locking this thread before it starts getting out of control. Too far off topic.

1 | 2