![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
brad_p:That seems quite ridiculous. If I am a non-technical user who doesn't understand the background to the problem, my phone simply does not work. I have a contract for service with Vodafone, not with Optus. If Vodafone is failing to meet my service requirements or agreement, I should be compensated. Vodafone should manage their relationship with their suppliers, and manage their network capacity requirements, properly. Passing the buck to a supplier is ridiculous for a company the size of VF.
It looks as if everyone will just have to ride this out. I don't see any reason why VF should have to compensate you when it wasn't their fault? (see post bout optus).
cranz: I'm sure like most communication services Vodafone's T&C state that this is best effort, you can not guarantee service 100% of the time when it comes to technology.Yes, I'm sure their T&Cs state that it is best effort and that any failures aren't their responsibility etc, although I think that is a pretty weak excuse.
PenultimateHop: That seems quite ridiculous. If I am a non-technical user who doesn't understand the background to the problem, my phone simply does not work. I have a contract for service with Vodafone, not with Optus. If Vodafone is failing to meet my service requirements or agreement, I should be compensated. Vodafone should manage their relationship with their suppliers, and manage their network capacity requirements, properly. Passing the buck to a supplier is ridiculous for a company the size of VF.
PenultimateHop: Yes, I'm sure their T&Cs state that it is best effort and that any failures aren't their responsibility etc, although I think that is a pretty weak excuse.
100%, no, but you can get close to it. Assuming no roaming service since Christmas Day, Vodafone's roaming service has now had an availability of 97.8% over a year, or 73.3% over a month. That is shockingly poor.
brad_p:
Not rediculous at all. As cranz pointed out above, there T&Cs cover such events as this so they don't need to compensate. Put yourself in VF's shoes - they would want people to be using roaming becuase they make money off this.
...
It is really frustrating for company's when their suppliers let them down and they have to face the negative percepetion on their company. It has nothing to do with the relationships they have with their suppliers.
Loose lips may sink ships - Be smart - Don't post internal/commercially sensitive or confidential information!
brad_p:
Not rediculous at all. As cranz pointed out above, there T&Cs cover such events as this so they don't need to compensate. Put yourself in VF's shoes - they would want people to be using roaming becuase they make money off this. Surely they are just as eager as everyone else is to get this resolved. It is really frustrating for company's when their suppliers let them down and they have to face the negative percepetion on their company. It has nothing to do with the relationships they have with their suppliers.
As cranz also said, VF Traveller would resolve this problem wouldn't it? Just change networks.
I was going to stay out of this, but really, you should try putting yourself in the customer’s shoes. Roaming being down for 1 day is one thing, but over this period of time it can be considered a real inconvenience. And should customers have to change networks to try and get coverage? After all, I'm sure the more $$ wise customers are still getting use to the new Traveller (if opted into), and would by default choose Vodafone as there roaming provider.
T&C's or not, Vodafone NZ must own the issue (which would make a change from some ISPs), and be willing to put things right.
Passing the buck, is just not a good look. End of story.
nzbnw
|
![]() ![]() ![]() |