See hidden discussions | Win great prizes | Get free support
Exactly. Wonder why the mafia can't understand this ......oh wait because then people will cancel.There is no problem with them raising prices, as long as it is for new contracts or upgrades only. Changing the contract price during a contract should not be allowed.
Thanks JanLegal experts and other relevant parties have been asked. Apparently they are very busy currently and this is quite a complex issue, but they are looking into it and have promised to give us feedback.
On Vodacom: 26.5 million pre-paid, 4.9 million contract - http://businesstech.co.za/news/mobile/78965/vodacom-loses-subscribers-in-sa/
Would love to hear their spin doctors explain thisThanks Jan
The MTR excuse doesn't hold water for contract subscriber increases. It is pure greed.
- 4.9M of their base are contracts,
- assuming the expiry/renewal period is spread evenly throughout the 24 months, lets assume then on average its 12 months til expiry/renewal.
- R10 or R20 increase (per contract per month), so lets average to R15
So 4.9M x R15 x 12 months = R882M p.a.
According to the article, R1B would be lost due to MTR - and now VC have just made that by increasing the contract price on 16% of their base???
OH wait... they also increased the price of prepaid didn't they?
Greedy greedy greedy.
This is something I've also wondered about and I have asked national credit act related questions. CPA and NCA stuff has more hope of seeing some kind of result, I reckon, because contract law stuff seems too complex and costly to be of any use.Something I have thought about, to get a contract the network needs to do an affordability study. This is based on your income and the cost of the package which you want. With the prices going up, does that mean that some people's contracts are no longer affordable? Do networks leave headroom in theor calculations for these increases?
Just to be clear: I'm not defending the price increase. Just adding information to the discussion I have that I think might be relevant.The MTR excuse doesn't hold water for contract subscriber increases. It is pure greed.
Ah right - i didn't realise.Also: as far as I can tell, pre-paid prices have not gone up.
I also appreciate all the times that contract prices have been lowered by the providers when they lowered prepaid costs. Was a real winner back then.
/Oh wait ...
Indeed. Hiking contract prices, or changing contracts to go from Top Up 130 to Top Up 140, is a sure-fire way to increase ARPU (average revenue per user - a key metric for telcos).But actually, this makes it worse... MTR effects both pre and post-paid. So contract subscribers are subsidising the "losses" they incurred on prepaid? Why...? Because we're (contract subscribers) are bound to a term contract!?!?