Well it's unlimited data, it's just not all at the same speed.

Strictly speaking they are in no way limiting the AMOUNT of data.

networkn:

 

Well it's unlimited data, it's just not all at the same speed.

 

Strictly speaking they are in no way limiting the AMOUNT of data.

 

I believe the concerns the Comcom have are in the fine print, specifically streaming is limited to SD, no tethering/hotspots. The streaming restriction is only shown when you click on 'Important things to know' page.

Guilty on some charges

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12161252 

To my way of thinking, the best way to market your products is to start with world class service. I'd like to see VF return to the VF I used to deal with 3-5 years ago. Their helpdesk needs an amp up and billing issues need resolving.

Maybe a little less of the tricky wording in their marketing campaigns. Good Honest Internet with world class service.

They seem to specialise in pushing boundaries and enjoy being punished by comcom. I assume it keeps their name in the limelight.

Snipped from Chris' article (my emphasis added):

"In the course of promoting FibreX on our website, we regret we created the impression with some consumers that alternative broadband options were not available at their address, when they may have been," Vodafone said this morning in a statement on its partial climb-down.

"We should have clarified that FibreX was the recommended option, not the only option. We did not intend to mislead customers, and our website address checker has since been updated."

I've fiddled with the address checker, and I still get presented with FibreX as the option... but a sentence has been added to recommend I call an 0800 number to check if Fibre is available. 

I'm posting this here for the wider community to take notice and for perhaps this PUBLIC statement to be pinned somewhere ongoing. The Vodafone forums on this website have been chock full of people posting that they struggled to get fibre from Voda when cable was also there, and the silly steps that had to be taken (like churning).

Putting aside the maths - asking vodafone to put someone on fibre when their cable is available is like asking voda to wholesale Spark when they could offer their own mobile network - Voda avoids having to pay $51/month to chorus/enable for a fibre circuit. Good business sense but a lousy conversation to force sales and front of house into when someone is specifically asking for fibre and NOT cable. 

Sooo... it will be interesting to see if the 'voda won't give me fibre because they are pushing cable' posts go away in the next few months. I guess this spells the end of cable though... it's reduced to a bit pipe that is pricey to expand capacity on, and the market of welly/kapiti/parts of chc has always been small

antoniosk:

 

Sooo... it will be interesting to see if the 'voda won't give me fibre because they are pushing cable' posts go away in the next few months. I guess this spells the end of cable though... it's reduced to a bit pipe that is pricey to expand capacity on, and the market of welly/kapiti/parts of chc has always been small

 

You'd think if Vodafone and Vocus are allowed to unbundle UFB connections in 2020 (as they have proposed), then the cost of maintaining HFC would probably be higher than the wholesale rate, and every would be moved to real fibre.

stinger:

You'd think if Vodafone and Vocus are allowed to unbundle UFB connections in 2020 (as they have proposed), then the cost of maintaining HFC would probably be higher than the wholesale rate, and every would be moved to real fibre.

stinger:

 

antoniosk:

 

Sooo... it will be interesting to see if the 'voda won't give me fibre because they are pushing cable' posts go away in the next few months. I guess this spells the end of cable though... it's reduced to a bit pipe that is pricey to expand capacity on, and the market of welly/kapiti/parts of chc has always been small

 

 

You'd think if Vodafone and Vocus are allowed to unbundle UFB connections in 2020 (as they have proposed), then the cost of maintaining HFC would probably be higher than the wholesale rate, and every would be moved to real fibre.

 

I have no idea what dark fibre would cost under unbundling, but lets presume for conversation it's $25/month. If a carrier has 50k connected paying homes... on fibre that would be real cost of $1.2m a month for line rental, $15m a year. The one-off project to unbundle would be very expensive and slow, and certain elements would not be changed (repairs, lead-ins or lead-in repair, in house installations etc).

I'd be surprised if $15m a year is actually being spent on cable maintenance, judging by how much 'free floating' cable I see around wellington at times!

I imagine fibre will eventually be available everywhere cable is, but how much faster can cable go compared to fibre?

quickymart:

 

I imagine fibre will eventually be available everywhere cable is, but how much faster can cable go compared to fibre?

 

It's fibre to the street cabinet and then it's copper coax from there to the cable modem.  It's not as if I'm getting fibre all the way to my computer. It's fast enough for most of us who are probably running 100/20. I can't tell the difference most of the time.

Anyway, if people are using WiFi in their homes then I think that could be a more significant issue.

There is talk on reddit of people getting a full refund when saying they believed they purchased a true fibre service.

How much of a refund? A month? A year? Since they started the branding?

Supposedly every month paid, refunded, and the install fee for real fibre was waived.