Vodafone $1 a day for 10MB in court

Forums › One New Zealand (including Vodafone, WxC, Farmside) › Vodafone $1 a day for 10MB in court

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

ahmad

1937 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#547982 21-Nov-2011 17:41

NonprayingMantis:
mattwnz:
NonprayingMantis:
ahmad: Ironically I have no issue with the way that VF billed up to the $1. Perhaps the issue was that they didn't have the information easily available but does it really matter than the $1 is charged after using only 200kb?

My bigger concern, which the CC failed to address, was the fact that 10Mb usage in a day is frankly pathetic and how can it be called "$1 per day" when that implies that it's enough for a day's usage?

10MB/day is plenty big enough for the vast majority of feature phone users ? which is who this plan was aimed at.

Really? You can't own an iphone then, because 10 MB doesn't go anywhere, unless you are just checking email, and even then viewing photo attachments are likely to be more than that.

see bolded part of my post.?? $1/day wasn't aimed at smartphone users. they should be on a plan.? It was aimed at people who have very occiasional mobile internet use on non-smartphones aka feature phones.

This was never made clear in ANY marketing material I saw. Hence my concern.

Also it said $1 per day. Not $1 for 10Mb. That part was hidden away in the fine print and in NZ it is illegal for fine print to substantially change the impression of the offer as per the marketing.

Hinko

273 posts

Ultimate Geek

#548022 21-Nov-2011 18:38

NonprayingMantis:
mattwnz:
NonprayingMantis:
ahmad: Ironically I have no issue with the way that VF billed up to the $1. Perhaps the issue was that they didn't have the information easily available but does it really matter than the $1 is charged after using only 200kb?

My bigger concern, which the CC failed to address, was the fact that 10Mb usage in a day is frankly pathetic and how can it be called "$1 per day" when that implies that it's enough for a day's usage?

10MB/day is plenty big enough for the vast majority of feature phone users ? which is who this plan was aimed at.

Really? You can't own an iphone then, because 10 MB doesn't go anywhere, unless you are just checking email, and even then viewing photo attachments are likely to be more than that.

see bolded part of my post. $1/day wasn't aimed at smartphone users. they should be on a plan. It was aimed at people who have very occiasional mobile internet use on non-smartphones aka feature phones.

NonprayingMantis, you must work for a Telco seeing you know what the target was.

Are you then commenting without bias?

What if I want to infrequently use lots of data?

Why would I want a plan which would bolster already buldging coffers and rip me off? To pay NonprayingMantis even more wages?

NonprayingMantis

6434 posts

Uber Geek

#548137 21-Nov-2011 22:36

Hinko:
NonprayingMantis:
mattwnz:
NonprayingMantis:
ahmad: Ironically I have no issue with the way that VF billed up to the $1. Perhaps the issue was that they didn't have the information easily available but does it really matter than the $1 is charged after using only 200kb?

My bigger concern, which the CC failed to address, was the fact that 10Mb usage in a day is frankly pathetic and how can it be called "$1 per day" when that implies that it's enough for a day's usage?

10MB/day is plenty big enough for the vast majority of feature phone users ? which is who this plan was aimed at.

Really? You can't own an iphone then, because 10 MB doesn't go anywhere, unless you are just checking email, and even then viewing photo attachments are likely to be more than that.

see bolded part of my post. $1/day wasn't aimed at smartphone users. they should be on a plan. It was aimed at people who have very occiasional mobile internet use on non-smartphones aka feature phones.

NonprayingMantis, you must work for a Telco seeing you know what the target was.

Are you then commenting without bias?

What if I want to infrequently use lots of data?

Why would I want a plan which would bolster already buldging coffers and rip me off? To pay NonprayingMantis even more wages?

lol- it was obvious it was targeted at low casual users - that was why it was only for 10MB.
It doesn't take a genius to see that even if the charges were pro-rated at 10c/MB it still wouldn't be a suitable plan for anybody with a smartphone who wanted to use a decent chunk of data.

If you read my other posts in this thread you will see I am quite obviously not on Vodafone's side for this promotion - the advertising implied pro-rating (i.e. 10c =1MB), and that was not how the billing worked. Voda messed up and deserve the fine.

However I do not agree that the plan was meant for, or advertised at, people who wanted to use lots of data, and I do not agree that voda sold it that way - Voda obviously had larger plans for those people.

The advertising wasn't clear about the lack of pro-rating, but from my memory it never suggested that people with smartphones or other high users should be on the plan.

ahmad

1937 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#548139 21-Nov-2011 22:42

NonprayingMantis:
Hinko:
NonprayingMantis:
mattwnz:
NonprayingMantis:
ahmad: Ironically I have no issue with the way that VF billed up to the $1. Perhaps the issue was that they didn't have the information easily available but does it really matter than the $1 is charged after using only 200kb?

My bigger concern, which the CC failed to address, was the fact that 10Mb usage in a day is frankly pathetic and how can it be called "$1 per day" when that implies that it's enough for a day's usage?

10MB/day is plenty big enough for the vast majority of feature phone users ? which is who this plan was aimed at.

Really? You can't own an iphone then, because 10 MB doesn't go anywhere, unless you are just checking email, and even then viewing photo attachments are likely to be more than that.

see bolded part of my post. $1/day wasn't aimed at smartphone users. they should be on a plan. It was aimed at people who have very occiasional mobile internet use on non-smartphones aka feature phones.

NonprayingMantis, you must work for a Telco seeing you know what the target was.

Are you then commenting without bias?

What if I want to infrequently use lots of data?

Why would I want a plan which would bolster already buldging coffers and rip me off? To pay NonprayingMantis even more wages?

lol- it was obvious it was targeted at low casual users - that was why it was only for 10MB.
It doesn't take a genius to see that even if the charges were pro-rated at 10c/MB it still wouldn't be a suitable plan for anybody with a smartphone who wanted to use a decent chunk of data.

If you read my other posts in this thread you will see I am quite obviously not on Vodafone's side for this promotion - the advertising implied pro-rating (i.e. 10c =1MB), and that was not how the billing worked. Voda messed up and deserve the fine.

However I do not agree that the plan was meant for, or advertised at, people who wanted to use lots of data, and I do not agree that voda sold it that way - Voda obviously had larger plans for those people.

The advertising wasn't clear about the lack of pro-rating, but from my memory it never suggested that people with smartphones or other high users should be on the plan.

You say it wasn't targeted at smartphone users or high users. Fact is it simply said "$1 a day for internet". The fine print may have said 10Mb but there was nothing in the marketing to suggest it was only suitable for dasual use. It implied that you could use it almost in an unlimited fashion (well not for huge downloads of course) for the $1 a day. You and I can understand what 10Mb is but many wouldn't have.

I raised this point at the time as did others.

NonprayingMantis

6434 posts

Uber Geek

#548140 21-Nov-2011 22:48

ahmad:
NonprayingMantis:
mattwnz:
NonprayingMantis:
ahmad: Ironically I have no issue with the way that VF billed up to the $1. Perhaps the issue was that they didn't have the information easily available but does it really matter than the $1 is charged after using only 200kb?

My bigger concern, which the CC failed to address, was the fact that 10Mb usage in a day is frankly pathetic and how can it be called "$1 per day" when that implies that it's enough for a day's usage?

10MB/day is plenty big enough for the vast majority of feature phone users ? which is who this plan was aimed at.

Really? You can't own an iphone then, because 10 MB doesn't go anywhere, unless you are just checking email, and even then viewing photo attachments are likely to be more than that.

see bolded part of my post.?? $1/day wasn't aimed at smartphone users. they should be on a plan.? It was aimed at people who have very occiasional mobile internet use on non-smartphones aka feature phones.

This was never made clear in ANY marketing material I saw. Hence my concern.

Also it said $1 per day. Not $1 for 10Mb. That part was hidden away in the fine print and in NZ it is illegal for fine print to substantially change the impression of the offer as per the marketing.

well my google fu doesn't show up any vodafone adverts from 2008 (strange huh? :P ) but linked in this very thread is an old geekzone thread from 2008 which had the original press release about the plan

Quote:

Vodafone launches $1 a day mobile broadband

Vodafone has blown apart the mobile data market with the launch of its new casual rate of $1 a day.

From July 28, customers will be able to surf the net, download music and games and play on their favourite sites without committing to a fixed monthly data contract.

The $1 a day casual rate gives customers up to 10MB of data – more than enough for most casual users on their mobile devices. Customers who go over that limit will be charged at $1 per megabyte and users who regularly need more can take advantage of our suite of data plans.

Is putting it right at the top of a press release 'hiding in the fine print'? Not in my book. The bit they don't mention in the press release (and the reason for the court case) is the shady pro-rating.

http://www.geekzone.co.nz/forums.asp?forumid=40&topicid=23049&page_no=1

ahmad

1937 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#548142 21-Nov-2011 22:51

Ironically I can't see why the pro-rating is that much of an issue unless it really was too hard to find out how it would be charged. A steep charge up to the dollar isn't a big deal to me personally.

With regards the ads I'm referring to all the consumer marketing material instore, print ads, and brochures.

NonprayingMantis

6434 posts

Uber Geek

#548147 21-Nov-2011 22:58

ahmad: Ironically I can't see why the pro-rating is that much of an issue unless it really was too hard to find out how it would be charged. A steep charge up to the dollar isn't a big deal to me personally.

With regards the ads I'm referring to all the consumer marketing material instore, print ads, and brochures.

So you are not bothered about the pro-rating issue even though it was buried in the fine print, yet you are bothered about the fact that it was only 10MB because ti was.... hidden in the fine print (even though it actually wasn't). huh?

how about this stuff article:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/497677

"From July 27, any Vodafone customers not on a fixed data plan will pay $1 a day for the first 10 megabyte of data they use, then $1 for every additional megabyte.
Currently these casual users pay $11.25 per megabyte"

the 10MB limit is very clear to me. the pro-rating? not even mentioned.

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.

ahmad

1937 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#548149 21-Nov-2011 23:02

As it said it wasn't clear in instore brochure and print media from VF on it. I take $1 to mean $1. When they say all you can eat at Pizza Hut for $13.95 noone asks how much per slice up to that $13.95.

NonprayingMantis

6434 posts

Uber Geek

#548153 21-Nov-2011 23:05

ahmad: As it said it wasn't clear in instore brochure and print media from VF on it. I take $1 to mean $1. When they say all you can eat at Pizza Hut for $13.95 noone asks how much per slice up to that $13.95.

did it ever say unlimited? I certianly don't remember that. the stuff article and geekzone thread were very clear. Nobody in that thread thought it was unlimited internet for $1, but lots of people were confused by the way the pro-rating worked. Not a representative sample sure, but still...

ahmad

1937 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#548156 21-Nov-2011 23:08

I didn't say it said unlimited but it said "Internet for $1 a day". It implies at the very least that you can use it without worrying.

The pro-data issue is a strange one. All TXT and monthly data add-ons are generally prepaid in advance with no pro-rataring. I don't get why the big issue with this specifically.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7