A polite request to recosider your data rollover policy

[sajunky]

"Included MB are valid for 30 days and can not be accumulated to the following month;"

I guess we could go to the same model and not provide roll-over at all on contract. It would definitely fix your problem.

I advise to not smile on this. Unfulfilled promises are not good. Hidden interpretation or ambiguous policies, it it what really turns customers away from you.

I use Internet Starter Pack, it was recharging on 11th starting on January. Not a contract, you know. My rollover was working each month. Sometime (I think May-June) I lost entire (almost 100MB) rollover value. In the same time recharging moved earlier (from 11th to 7th). Since then I don't trust you. In the end you lose.

 

[bboy]

Remember, when you're in contract you must [-]first[/-] fulfill your contractual obligation. Thus we MUST [-]first[/-] give you your monthly allocation .

It's as simple as that. No need for complex conspiracy theories.

fixed

 

[SoTrue]

You're wrong, actually. Think a bit about it and it'll make sense.

You contract your SP to provide you with a fixed amount of data per month, say 250MB @ R99 per month. You pay the money and your SP must give you the data. That is the essence and the core of your contract.

The roll-over to the end of the next month is a value add. You buy a bundle to last 30-days, not 60.

So, by definition, you must (and will) always get what you contracted your SP first and then any possible 'freebies' will kick in.

Another way to look at it; if you did not get roll-over (like with some of the other operators), you would not have an issue, correct? But because you get this extra service, it now is somehow not correct?

Hope this clears it up for you.

Ok, this is my last post on this issue - it seems Vodacom is unable to see the issue from the customer's position.

At least we are in agreement with what the essence of the contract is ("You pay the money and your SP must give you the data").

Why can't Vodacom just implement that? Vodacom sees the rollover as a "value-add" (whatever that means). The customer's position is that the data was paid for and 30 days to use it is just not reasonable. Therefore, rollover is an essential part of the service. There are no such things as "freebies" in life. It is already costed into the pricing.

 

[sajunky]

Vodacom sees the rollover as a "value-add" (whatever that means). The customer's position is that the data was paid for and 30 days to use it is just not reasonable. Therefore, rollover is an essential part of the service. There are no such things as "freebies" in life. It is already costed into the pricing.

Not so true. It it were "value-added", it should be stated in T&T that it can't be used every month or it does work occasionally. Whether it is essential service, not sure, it seems to be your own interpretation. However it is essential that rules were simple, not obscured, not misleading. If not, it is a case for false advertising.

 

[AfricanTech]

@ jannievanzyl

You are correct on the "letter of the contract" - cellular providers are however violating the "spirit of the contract" most egregiously - your customers resent you for this behaviour - is this so difficult to understand?

 

[jannievanzyl]

Ok, this is my last post on this issue - it seems Vodacom is unable to see the issue from the customer's position.

Where did I (or Vodacom) ever say that? Can you point me to any post where I indicated as such?

As much as I understand the concept you're putting across, it does not change the facts of the underlying product; That data cannot be 'stored' for later consumption. Unless you figured out a way to do this?

Rather it seems you're unwilling (unable?) to consider the realities of delivering a transient product over an undetermined time frame.

I've patiently spent my holiday time trying to explain it in as much detail to you as possible. Clearly you're not interested (able?) to understanding it.

 

[b166er]

As much as I understand the concept you're putting across, it does not change the facts of the underlying product; That data cannot be 'stored' for later consumption. Unless you figured out a way to do this?

Your argument here does not really make sense. Surely you 'store' the current month's allotted data because you need to keep track of usage and know exactly when to start slapping your customers with OOB rates. You also know how much a customer has used after a 30 day period because that would be the remaining data on the last second on the last day which you 'stored' for OOB slapping purposes.
Having these data usage numbers available to you, you should be able to provide different permutations of data available to customers i.e. continuous roll over (past month unused + current month).

Arguing that roll over is a value add that customers should be thankful for is quite arrogant. Have you considered that the reason some customers are using your service might because of a roll over facility?

 

[seted]

I think services providers and customers often view data purchases in very different ways.

The average customer sees his 2gb as a unit to be consumed at leisure, like 2l of coke that you can drink now or next month.

A service provider views that 2gb as permission to access 2gb of data within a fixed period. An access fee rather than a consumable.

 

[AfricanTech]

Where did I (or Vodacom) ever say that? Can you point me to any post where I indicated as such?

As much as I understand the concept you're putting across, it does not change the facts of the underlying product; That data cannot be 'stored' for later consumption. Unless you figured out a way to do this?

Rather it seems you're unwilling (unable?) to consider the realities of delivering a transient product over an undetermined time frame.

I've patiently spent my holiday time trying to explain it in as much detail to you as possible. Clearly you're not interested (able?) to understanding it.

Using that logic electricity should expire every 30 days as well.

 

[jannievanzyl]

Using that logic electricity should expire every 30 days as well.

A much closer and better analogy (than petrol), for sure. But, again, you can store electricity but not data. Also, you can modulate capacity (turn generation up and down as required) but you cannot do it with data.

Also, and I'm not privy to their costing models, there's a good chance that longer rollover might already be built into the pricing. When we priced data we started with a 30-day rollover. We can easily extend it, but would the market accept an increase because of it?

To be honest, what will most likely happen is that rollover could well be extended. And written off against some future price reduction.

I asked the question somewhere above but so fat no-one's replied: What premium would you put on roll-over, i.e. how important is it to you:

Say 30-days is 0% (i.e. the current pricing). What % hike would you put on:

1. 3-months: +x%
1. 6-months: +y%
1. 12-months: +z%

I suspect most people would opt for a lower price with limited roll-over. But for those who need it, what would you value it?

Some constructive interaction would be appreciated.

 

[ginggs]

Also, and I'm not privy to their costing models, there's a good chance that longer rollover might already be built into the pricing. When we priced data we started with a 30-day rollover. We can easily extend it, but would the market accept an increase because of it?

...and remember electricity keeps going up, people have the expectation that data prices should keep coming down.

What premium would you put on roll-over, i.e. how important is it to you

I'd be happy with zero rollover and a discount.

I don't think I'm alone; a lot of people were happy with zero rollover at Cell-C's 2010 promotional prices.

The biggest problem I have with data on contract, and even pre-paid and top-up to a certain extent, is the lack of hard-capping. I would like to see contracts where you get X amount of data and when it is up you get no more data until you buy another bundle. Similarly, pre-paid and top-up data bundles should stop dead and not eat into one's airtime.

 

[jannievanzyl]

I think services providers and customers often view data purchases in very different ways.

The average customer sees his 2gb as a unit to be consumed at leisure, like 2l of coke that you can drink now or next month.

A service provider views that 2gb as permission to access 2gb of data within a fixed period. An access fee rather than a consumable.

The SP does not provide a 2L of Coke though, more access to a tap of Coke running constantly. Any Coke not drunk from the tap is lost forever.

As I said before, selling time can be seen as another example of a transient product that's packaged in 'fixed units' for some future consumption.

Say you run a water park. It can take 500 people at a time. Typically customers go to the park, buy a ticket to get in and enjoy themselves. If the park fills up, the gates are closed until enough people have left to allow more in. This is analogous to subscribers buying monthly data bundles and a network running at 100% capacity.

Now consider what could happen if you sell an entry but the customer could use it anytime in the next year. A lot of people might buy these and not use them immediately for some reason. But one day, it's pretty hot and everyone decides to go to the park. 2000 people show up but the park can only take 500. They all demand entry as they already paid their entrance fee. A bit of a messy situation, you'll agree.

By selling tickets with a 12-month 'roll-over' at the normal price, the park lost the ability to manage the capacity and it lead to a situation where massive over-subscription occurred.

This is the same issue with providing long-period data rollover. As a network, you loose the ability to plan the capacity of the network and you expose yourself to situations where higher than normal demand is placed on the network with everyone suffering.

Many institutions will sell a ticket with a longer shelf life but these tend to be at a premium. I'm not opposed to this concept, basically selling a longer lifespan at some premium. Thus my request for your thoughts.

 

[b166er]

As I said before, selling time can be seen as another example of a transient product that's packaged in 'fixed units' for some future consumption.

Say you run a water park. It can take 500 people at a time. Typically customers go to the park, buy a ticket to get in and enjoy themselves. If the park fills up, the gates are closed until enough people have left to allow more in. This is analogous to subscribers buying monthly data bundles and a network running at 100% capacity.

Ok. I get that continuous data roll over is messy. I also get that data is not stored, but rather the amount used, somewhere on a lonely server as a floating point number.

My suggestion is then to have a 10% per month carry over data cut. I thus carry over 100MB in month 1, month 2 90MB etc.

And remember this: The park's filling rate is as directly equivalent to the sluggishness of your network

 

[Lino]

The SP does not provide a 2L of Coke though, more access to a tap of Coke running constantly. Any Coke not drunk from the tap is lost forever.

As I said before, selling time can be seen as another example of a transient product that's packaged in 'fixed units' for some future consumption.

Say you run a water park. It can take 500 people at a time. Typically customers go to the park, buy a ticket to get in and enjoy themselves. If the park fills up, the gates are closed until enough people have left to allow more in. This is analogous to subscribers buying monthly data bundles and a network running at 100% capacity.

Now consider what could happen if you sell an entry but the customer could use it anytime in the next year. A lot of people might buy these and not use them immediately for some reason. But one day, it's pretty hot and everyone decides to go to the park. 2000 people show up but the park can only take 500. They all demand entry as they already paid their entrance fee. A bit of a messy situation, you'll agree.

By selling tickets with a 12-month 'roll-over' at the normal price, the park lost the ability to manage the capacity and it lead to a situation where massive over-subscription occurred.

This is the same issue with providing long-period data rollover. As a network, you loose the ability to plan the capacity of the network and you expose yourself to situations where higher than normal demand is placed on the network with everyone suffering.

Many institutions will sell a ticket with a longer shelf life but these tend to be at a premium. I'm not opposed to this concept, basically selling a longer lifespan at some premium. Thus my request for your thoughts.

Thanks for that Jannie, that analogy makes it 1000% clear. Never quite thought of it that way but it raises and highlights the problem with providing long term data rollovers.

Question how are ISP's such as MWEB, Afrihost etc affected by data rollovers?

 

[bboy]

The OP request was for the data rolled over to be used first before the new data bundle was to be used.
There is no 6 month 12 month request here, just a change to the 1 month roll over policy.

EG
At current I can get 100MB a month.
Month1, I use 50MB, leaving 50MB for rollover.
Month2, I now have 150MB(50 rollover and 100 current month) to use, I use 50Mb which comes from my (100 current), so I have 100MB left(50 Current and 50 from rollover).
Month 3, I lose my 50 left over from month 1, I have 50 left over from month 2 so now I have 150MB to use again.

At most with this logic I would have 200MB to use in a month, 1 month carryover + 1 month current. So Yes, my water park will never be over run.

But then lets look at it from the rollover we want.

Month1, 50MB used, 50 left.
Month2 then starts with 150MB , I only use 50(which is now my carry over from month 1), so leaves 100.
month3 then starts with 200MB(100 carry over from month 2 and 100 from current), I use nothing.
Month 3 then starts, I lose month 2's carryover, I keep month 3's carryover and I get my current 100, so once again I have 200MB max...

So... when will my water park ever be out of capacity???? its 200MB vs 200MB.
200MB is the most my waterpark will ever have to offer me over a 2 month period.

On average if my 100MB is used per month, then I will only ever use 100MB per month on either plan a month anyway.

The only real difference here is that on average if I wasn't depleting my bundle every month I'd have more of a chance to use that data, over all I would have a little more data to use but I would NEVER have more than 200MB a month.

 

[sajunky]

I'd be happy with zero rollover and a discount.

I don't think I'm alone; a lot of people were happy with zero rollover at Cell-C's 2010 promotional prices.

Second that. No rollover, no false advertising. If rollover then it should be clearly understood. As for now it is false advertising.
Cell-C has no rollover for data, but they have fair policy for consuming data. It simply takes data which expires first.

 

[Kloofvreter]

I still don't get the concept of not being able to 'store' data. Surely it's just figures, and not something that has to be 'stored', or 'saved' somewhere? If Vodacom knows how much data we are using, surely they know how much is left and how much to carry over? I know my argument probably sounds stupid, so please clarify this for me?

 

[bboy]

I still don't get the concept of not being able to 'store' data. Surely it's just figures, and not something that has to be 'stored', or 'saved' somewhere? If Vodacom knows how much data we are using, surely they know how much is left and how much to carry over? I know my argument probably sounds stupid, so please clarify this for me?

I'm not 100% certain, but I'm pretty sure its like this.

Vodacom don't have a 1000 litre bucket of water, you come along and buy 10 litres, when you want some you come to the bucket and take some out.

Instead Vodacom have a big tap that can give us 20 litres of water a minute, you still buy 10 litres, when you want some you come to the tap , now if 50 other users are also getting there water from the tap at the same time there is gonna be an issue cause that tap cannot deliver water fast enough for everyone to be happy.

So Vodacom have a tap with a delivery rate, you buy water in amounts though, if everyone has a little bit from the tap over time vodacom can deliver a steady service. Hence they cannot "store" your 10 litres for when you want it.

 

[Kloofvreter]

I'm not 100% certain, but I'm pretty sure its like this.

Vodacom don't have a 1000 litre bucket of water, you come along and buy 10 litres, when you want some you come to the bucket and take some out.

Instead Vodacom have a big tap that can give us 20 litres of water a minute, you still buy 10 litres, when you want some you come to the tap , now if 50 other users are also getting there water from the tap at the same time there is gonna be an issue cause that tap cannot deliver water fast enough for everyone to be happy.

So Vodacom have a tap with a delivery rate, you buy water in amounts though, if everyone has a little bit from the tap over time vodacom can deliver a steady service. Hence they cannot "store" your 10 litres for when you want it.

No dude still makes no sense. I use 5 gig of 10. Next month I have 15. I don's see the need to 'store' my 5 gig as if it's something physical taking up storage or space. Data is surely not drying up, is it? ISP's aren't running out of data, are they?

 

[bboy]

No dude still makes no sense. I use 5 gig of 10. Next month I have 15. I don's see the need to 'store' my 5 gig as if it's something physical taking up storage or space. Data is surely not drying up, is it? ISP's aren't running out of data, are they?

I guess.. you dont get it

ISP's dont buy data in amounts, they buy big fat pipes that can deliver data at a certain speed.