smart phones on vodafone, have to be a millionaire?

Forums › One New Zealand (including Vodafone, WxC, Farmside) › smart phones on vodafone, have to be a millionaire?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

MikeyPI

450 posts

Ultimate Geek

#303309 1-Mar-2010 15:09

@ Kilack you are very much right about the cost of an individual txt message, but stop and just think about the giant network and infrastructure costs required to send & receive that txt. Not just that, but back-ups & redundancies, so you dont end up like Telecom.

Plus the network will have to fund upgrades and maintenance as well, which you would expect it to pay for its self say every 20 years. So thats $500million probably needed every 20years = $25 million a year just to keep operating. (very very rough guesstimate!)

(100 million txts @ 20c a pop! )

MightyApe

You will find anything you want at MightyApe (affiliate link).

wtf

38 posts

Geek

#303321 1-Mar-2010 15:50

Well, having worked for both of the major carriers over the years you might think I have a vested interest, feel free, but I would like to point out that there are more factors in the data pricing than just the cost of reaching websites that are mostly overseas. Consider this:

NZ population: about 4.3 million
NZ area: 268000 sq km
NZ population density: 16.1 per square km

City of Berlin population: about 3.4 million
Berlin area: 891 sq km
Berlin pop density: 9966 per sq km

Now think for a bit about how much less telecommunications infrastructure a Berlin telco would need to reach a similar amount of customers. To get similar performance they will need a similar number of actual cell sites and hence transceivers, but they will need massively less backhaul between the cell sites and the switches, simply because everything is closer together.

Now, that is an extreme example, but it is certainly true that there are massive savings for a telco if the population density is high, eg Japan and much of Europe. That doesn't explain the USA of course, where population densities overall are similar to ours, but then I'm not so sure that the coverage in the USA outside the main centres is all that good anyway. Also I think you will find that some of the operators there somewaht regret having got into the "unlimited" thing at all. It is the same problem network operators everywhere, right down to the LAN at home level have...you put in a network suitable for the current needs, like say email and a bit of surfing, and some genius goes and invents Utube. And so it goes on. Anyone else remember when we were thrilled with the results from a 1200/75 modem? But having set your marketing up around an "unlimited" offering it can be kind of hard to get out of it. To at least give some credit, that is a snag that local ISPs, both fixed and mobile, seem to have avoided. A true unlimited offering might sound like a wonderful thing, but think about how well that might work out if the petrol stations offered it. (All the petrol you want for $500 per month...) A per usage rate actually works out better for the small user, who does not end up subsidising the hogs.

You may also think that the local opcos must be making heaps of money with the current rates, if so then why are they not prepared to offer you twice as much for twice the price? It has been suggested to me by people in a position to know that the opcos tend to regard data as a loss leader to try and get your voice business... I do not know enough to be sure of that, but I do know that if I was selling some good or service profitably, I would be happy to sell you twice as much for the same price. On the other hand, if the available data capacity was mostly what is left over after the current level of perhaps more profitable voice traffic, maybe I would want to limit you so you don't reduce available voice capacity. The current pricing suggests that this might be the case.

The other thing about the Android wanting to store stuff on the Internet, well, remember that Google also has designs on your wallet, and that what is good for them is not necessarily good for you. One thing to look up the relevant map or local services, another to actually store your personal stuff under someone elses control. Even storing it locally in a proprietary format has plenty of pitfalls.

So ask yourself...if you had $1,000,000,000 to spare, would you invest it in building another competitive mobile network in New Zealand? Do you really think you could get an acceptable rate of return on that? Bear in mind that anyone thinking of doing so probably has to borrow the money, so has to convince others that there is going to be a profit in it. I think the billion would actually be on the low side, considering what XT has cost so far, and the fact that they would mostly be using existing sites for it.

CJPhoto

73 posts

Master Geek

#303330 1-Mar-2010 16:08

In relation to population density I agree. I dont mind if I dont have 3G when in the middle of the waitakeres. But when i cross the Harbour bridge, i get pretty annoyed when 3G drops and even more annoyed when I lose all connection.

juha

1319 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#303332 1-Mar-2010 16:16

That's a misleading comparison, because New Zealand is quite urbanised, with at least 86 per cent of the population living in towns and cities. Why compare a city with a country anyway?

You could look at the Nordic countries instead: Finland has roughly the same population density as NZ, Norway about a third lower and Sweden a bit more.

As for ROI, 2 Degrees and Trilogy seem to think they'll get their money back, so clearly there are some out there who think it's worth sinking money into the NZ telco market.

Juha

wtf

38 posts

Geek

#303353 1-Mar-2010 16:56

Well, it depends how you want to do the comparison...Berlin has a total population that is quite similar to the whole of New Zealand, but conveniently clusterd so that none of them are more than 20 or 30 km from the centre. If you want to compare on a city basis, the population density of Auckland (including Waitaker, North Shore, Manukau) is around 3179 per square km instead of the 9966 per sq km for Berlin. So you will need more transceivers per sq km in Berlin, but will save quite a lot on the infrastructure to link them up.

Would 2 degrees and trilogy be bothering if not for the clause that says that they can piggyback on the existing operators infrastructure? That amounts to a very significant subsidy when you consider what the existing opcos have had to go through to get planning permission in some cases.

Not that I think the existing opcos are little angels, far from it, they would probably render your grandmother down for lard if they thought they could get away with it.

johnr

19282 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#303367 1-Mar-2010 17:14

CJPhoto: In relation to population density I agree. I dont mind if I dont have 3G when in the middle of the waitakeres. But when i cross the Harbour bridge, i get pretty annoyed when 3G drops and even more annoyed when I lose all connection.

Vodafone NZ is putting new hardware on AHB right now and Vodafone also turned on a new dual layer 3G 900/2100mhz site in the Waitakere Rangers towards the end of last year in Waima

John

dman

946 posts

Ultimate Geek

#303497 1-Mar-2010 22:41

MikeyPI:
freitasm:
MikeyPI: Interesting note from AT&T iphone T&C's "Eligible data plans cover data usage in the U.S. and do not cover international data usage"

As noted this is the same for any New Zealand mobile operator. Didn't you know that? If you didn't know, there's the reason of "bill shock" that have been on the mainstream media lately - many others don't and think their bundle is valid here and overseas.

Yeah, didnt comprehend my own quote, fully aware of roaming, but I thought they where talking international data i.e content from .co.nz etc, not roaming.

I'd happily place a small bet on the fact the majority of .co.nz websites are located in the USA

https://www.youtube.com/c/SoundSpeeding

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
76368 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#303498 1-Mar-2010 22:42

Regardless of the location/source of data, that quote is in regards of mobile data roaming.

Please support Geekzone by subscribing, or using one of our referral links: Dosh referral: 00001283 | Sharesies | Goodsync | Mighty Ape | Backblaze

freitasm on Keybase | My technology disclosure

andrewcnz

955 posts

Ultimate Geek

#303501 1-Mar-2010 22:54

johnr:
CJPhoto: In relation to population density I agree. I dont mind if I dont have 3G when in the middle of the waitakeres. But when i cross the Harbour bridge, i get pretty annoyed when 3G drops and even more annoyed when I lose all connection.

Vodafone NZ is putting new hardware on AHB right now and Vodafone also turned on a new dual layer 3G 900/2100mhz site in the Waitakere Rangers towards the end of last year in Waima

John

That Waima site is great, know some very happy voda customers in that area. From 1 bar 2G to full strength 3G is real nice!

dman

946 posts

Ultimate Geek

#303504 1-Mar-2010 23:02

freitasm: Regardless of the location/source of data, that quote is in regards of mobile data roaming.

yes I know, but it further re-inforces the point made earlier in this same thread that most people don't understand the difference between local data or .co.nz sites

for instance, here is an odd fact (but the fact it exists illustrates how people gets confused):
ALL of the .co.nz sites I've worked with this year are hosted over in AMERICA, yet by some funny coincidence all the .com sites I've worked with so far this year are hosted in NZ

https://www.youtube.com/c/SoundSpeeding

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
76368 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#303506 1-Mar-2010 23:08

Fact of the day: even though it's more expensive, Geekzone is hosted in New Zealand. We decided this mainly because of speed for national access. Although sometimes I really think should be paying peanuts for a server in the U.S. instead, but then I think of the benefits for 50% of our readership, plus the fact we can if needed just go visit the datacentre in Auckland (as I've done in the past a few times).

Please support Geekzone by subscribing, or using one of our referral links: Dosh referral: 00001283 | Sharesies | Goodsync | Mighty Ape | Backblaze

freitasm on Keybase | My technology disclosure

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#303541 2-Mar-2010 06:36

wtf: Well, it depends how you want to do the comparison...Berlin has a total population that is quite similar to the whole of New Zealand, but conveniently clusterd so that none of them are more than 20 or 30 km from the centre. If you want to compare on a city basis, the population density of Auckland (including Waitaker, North Shore, Manukau) is around 3179 per square km instead of the 9966 per sq km for Berlin. So you will need more transceivers per sq km in Berlin, but will save quite a lot on the infrastructure to link them up.

Would 2 degrees and trilogy be bothering if not for the clause that says that they can piggyback on the existing operators infrastructure? That amounts to a very significant subsidy when you consider what the existing opcos have had to go through to get planning permission in some cases.

Not that I think the existing opcos are little angels, far from it, they would probably render your grandmother down for lard if they thought they could get away with it.

2degrees are doing very little co-siting. It's something they demanded for years yet never took advantage of.

The real issue with co-siting is that it's fine on buildings but over the past few years the strategy with cellsites has been to build them as small as possible, certainly in metropolitan areas the days of large sites are gone and we're seeing many incorporates into existing structures such as light standards. The simple reality is you can't co-site gear from more than a single operator on many of these sites because there isn't space.

Byrned

453 posts

Ultimate Geek

#303596 2-Mar-2010 11:11

wtf: Well, having worked for both of the major carriers over the years you might think I have a vested interest, feel free, but I would like to point out that there are more factors in the data pricing than just the cost of reaching websites that are mostly overseas. Consider this:

NZ population: about 4.3 million
NZ area: 268000 sq km
NZ population density: 16.1 per square km

City of Berlin population: about 3.4 million
Berlin area: 891 sq km
Berlin pop density: 9966 per sq km

I would think a fairer comparison would be compare Berlin to Auckland

Greater Auckland population: 1,436,500 (est. June 09)
Auckland area: 1086 sq km
Auckland pop density: 1322 per sq km

Or, Germany's pop density approx. 229 per sq km

Your argument still wins but with fairer data

MikeyPI

450 posts

Ultimate Geek

#303608 2-Mar-2010 11:36

Byrned:
wtf: Well, having worked for both of the major carriers over the years you might think I have a vested interest, feel free, but I would like to point out that there are more factors in the data pricing than just the cost of reaching websites that are mostly overseas. Consider this:

NZ population: about 4.3 million
NZ area: 268000 sq km
NZ population density: 16.1 per square km

City of Berlin population: about 3.4 million
Berlin area: 891 sq km
Berlin pop density: 9966 per sq km

I would think a fairer comparison would be compare Berlin to Auckland

Greater Auckland population: 1,436,500 (est. June 09)
Auckland area: 1086 sq km
Auckland pop density: 1322 per sq km

Or, Germany's pop density approx. 229 per sq km

Your argument still wins but with fairer data

Except the population disparity which cant be ignored. Margins are the focal point, so 2.5x the number of customers in the same sized location makes a huge difference to ROI.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5