Vodacom CEO explains BlackBerry problems and plans

[dracolusus]

I apologise I am being pedantic.
I just hate it when we are expected to swallow facts without any substantiation of said facts.

Fair enough, I just doubt that the dude I spoke to will be allowed to give me the actually give me the actual reports. But I trust him and I don't see the harm in him telling me the actual figures they have. From what I know, it will be a logistical nightmare to try administrated and throttle individual abusers.

And I don't think I've ever seen any company release actual internal reports for the public to go through. Even then, I bet the people on the forum would still question it.

 

[BinaryJack]

How about retroactively charging these guys for the data ?

at OOB rates

Can't....T&C's the terrible things that actually protects the consumer in this regard.
The downloads were actually not OOB (there is no actual bundle) and still falls under the BIS.

The best lesson that VC can learn from this is to realise that the CPA exists and that changes will be required to their T&C's in order to cover their arses.

 

[BBSA]

This is actually not the first time VC knows about this.
Jannie has answered some pointed questions I had with clear answers that makes it clear that VC has a) been monitoring data usage since day 1 and b) that a solution is required for a few months already and that a decision was made because they (VC) could not wait anymore.

So VC made a decision without the CEO's knowledge?

Who made the decision, Jannie?

 

[BinaryJack]

So VC made a decision without the CEO's knowledge?

Who made the decision, Jannie?

Well...let me be really, really evil and give say:
News of The World. Murdock.

 

[BinaryJack]

For the CEO to claim that he was as surprised could actually be 100% factual.
He might have been aware that a solution was required but he might not have been aware that a solution was implemented.
We will never, ever know....unless wikileaks has something.

 

[Valis]

I don't have to prove it to you; I just felt the need to point out you are wrong, because I know the truth, thanks to some digging from my side.

I do apoloogise for the trolling comment, it was uncalled for, you weren't trolling, you were just coming from a place of ignorance, thinking your opinion could not possibly be wrong.

Apology accepted.

I'd still like to see some proof, not just someone stating it as a fact.

Also, it's called scepticism...

 

[dracolusus]

Apology accepted.

I'd still like to see some proof, not just someone stating it as a fact.

Also, it's called scepticism...

“Skepticism is slow suicide” - Ralph Waldo Emerson

 

[InTheCube]

Jannie, with all due respect, you guys Ef'd this one up royally, and the blame lies squarely on your own (Vodacom's) shoulders. My biggest gripe is that a lot of the things you said over the last 2 days on these forums contradicts what Pieter Uys said today. As an outsider, it looks to me like he's calling you a liar. This is extremely bad PR, worse than even setting the limit at 100mb. Don't you guys discuss these things? Did you not try to contact Mr Uys after the schitt hit the fan, to discuss a plan going forward, instead of doing your own thing (defending 100mb), only to then have Mr. Uys go and say the complete opposite (there will be no throttling whatsoever).

The above issue aside, what guys SHOULD have done, is to quietly set the limit to 3-5GB, after which the service would be throttled down to slower speeds, or better still, cut off. You should have done his without telling anyone, not even your PR division, and then monitor what it is going on. See if it makes a difference to performance. Those being abusive, would get slowed down drastically, or cut off, and they would contact Vodacom to complain about their BIS service not working anymore. You could then decide how to deal with these guys, diplomatically, quietly, out of the public eye.

And in the meantime, you continue working with RIM to implement a solution that will help you to easily identify the abusers in order to nail them solidly.

By doing so, not only you would NOT piss off your 98% of users who use the service as intended, but you would also get the abusive ones to report in by themselves.

Even if you didn't cut these abusive guys off, a few threatening/warning emails or telephone calls (without any actualy threats being carried out) would have caused them to change their behaviour very quickly. Tell them that what they are doing is in contravention of the terms of service, and that they will be billed at standard data rates should the abuse continue. Imagine 300GB x R2000. Hell imagine, 10GB x R2000 (R2 per MB = R2000 per GB).

You guys need a Lesson 101 in PR, quiet diplomacy, and how to not piss you subscribers off.

 

[LFX]

^^

+1

 

[wizzard2040]

Good news Vodacom, the number of people moving to other networks should alleviate some of the strain. That's what you wanted, right?

Classis.. That's exactly what I'm doing ,since 2008 they have offered the slowest internet to say the least and now they want to lie about implementing a cap even tho the higher ups confirmed this what a joke they must think just like the govourment that we are baffoons and will believe any drivel that comes out their mouth I have need for you Vodacom we don't like u ,never have and never will

 

[Andysor]

...what guys SHOULD have done, is to quietly set the limit to 3-5GB, after which the service would be throttled down to slower speeds...

Are you guys on crack with your petulant, unrealistic BIS expectations? Talk about a culture of entitlement in SA...

ONE of the abusers used 300GB (allegedly), which doesn't mean that 3-5GB is to be considered normal usage on a phone without using streaming or downloading anything. Especially not for R69/month.

Either you are vastly overestimating the amount of data you're using doing normal activities or you can be classified as an abuser.

 

[falcon786]

2. The 100MB threshold is just to low, even if the stats say otherwise. A number of forumites could show they're in the legit group but will trigger the threshold. Most said a number closer to 500MB (5 x the typical usage) is a more logical number. Of course a few said you should never do anything - but we all know what they're were doing in the first place.

What about the number of forumites that believe 5gb is more reasonable?Like me...

I did not thumb suck this,its been put in place by some US carriers like verizon,just because you guys have lowered everyones expectations by stating 100mb they asking for low amounts like 1GB(how come you only seen the 500mb calls lol)
Seems you've been selectively reading the posts?

Jannie 5gb will be more inline with international best practice,please stop milking us because you have lowered our expectations by calling 100mb fair.

I'm sure most users dont even know that they can download lots of legitimate videos that our peers in the rest of the world enjoy from sites such as vuclip etc.....isnt it about time south africans also be allowed decent internet usage?

5gb can be enough for a long time to come still.....please think long term and whats in your customers and your best interests...I know its hard with shareholders demanding profits but it needs to be a win win situation and I'm sure verizons shareholders also demand profits so if they can do it then so can our networks.

 

[falcon786]

Yes, if you cut through all the noise, it really comes down to what a fair number is? 100MB was just too low, 300GB clearly too high, so what's a good number?

My (personal) view was look at what the typical user is doing and multiply that with a factor of 3 to 5 to be safe. Thus my feelings around 500MB with decent throttling after that. It would give enough of a head-room for even the peeps here that started reporting their usage.

Also, most operators are selling 500MB of data at around R150/month, so 500MB for R59 with no capping is a very good deal.

But that's my view, not formal policy at this point in time.

Look at your peers in the us then maybe take a page out of their book,i believe att have two options....

1.a low usage bis with 1gb "cap"
1.A higher usage bis with a 5gb cap at a slightly higher price.

Seems to be working for them just fine....

 

[falcon786]

Think that's been pretty clear for a while now. A case of he who protests too much?

I am on MTN bis currently on my blackberry which is my second phone,I use around 3-6gb a month which i feel is not abuse.

Im just a power user.....i dont do torrentz etc so im in no way abusing the service,isnt this uncapped?

I agree that 100GB+ could surely be regarded as abuse,but my question is is the usage patterns today really an indication of what the consumers need,especially once they start consuming more internet services....i know this isnt a first world country but does that mean we should never advance and always stay backwards to other countries.
Anything less than 3gb means that we are simply as south africans being held back by our service provider AGAIN ala telkom all these years...

 

[falcon786]

FUP off !

Why should he,he has a point or two.

 

[falcon786]

Yeah, some people have had some serious pink panty melt downs here. Must be frustrating to find out that you can't pirate cr@p for next to nothing anymore. BTW, MTN's throttle policy is set at 150mb, FYI...Cell C has one as well, even if they say they don't

The point I saw is that Vodacom were trying to sort out the crappy connection quality we have been having for the last god knows how long and the typical S.A. mentallity is to S*** their pants and be negative.

*COUGH*BULLsh*t......

I'm on MTN BIS and download around an average of 3gb a month....yes the speed are lower after the first gig or two but it always remains around 30-80kbps so they not doing anything as drastic as shutting us down to edge speeds...seems they have found a good way to manage the network based on usage times etc....

Throttled but in a perfectly usable way,sites etc load very fast.

So how do ther other networks worldwide handle it with putting draconian throttling limits?

 

[falcon786]

Are you guys on crack with your petulant, unrealistic BIS expectations? Talk about a culture of entitlement in SA...

ONE of the abusers used 300GB (allegedly), which doesn't mean that 3-5GB is to be considered normal usage on a phone without using streaming or downloading anything. Especially not for R69/month.

Either you are vastly overestimating the amount of data you're using doing normal activities or you can be classified as an abuser.

Oh so the rest of the world is entitled to 1-5gb usage but we not?
Who is being abused ....

 

[InTheCube]

Are you guys on crack with your petulant, unrealistic BIS expectations? Talk about a culture of entitlement in SA...

ONE of the abusers used 300GB (allegedly), which doesn't mean that 3-5GB is to be considered normal usage on a phone without using streaming or downloading anything. Especially not for R69/month.

Either you are vastly overestimating the amount of data you're using doing normal activities or you can be classified as an abuser.

I didn't say 3-5GB was a reasonable limit, in fact I didn't even try to discuss what a reasonable limit is, or should be. Since previously there was NO LIMIT, a limit of 3-5GB would need to set, in order to catch the abusers, without raising eyebrows from the 98% who aren't abusive. I also said this should be done quietly in order to see the effect it has on overall performance of the BIS service. So please get off your high horse, and read the fskking post again, before opening your kuunt hole and spewing your schitt all over our civil discussions.

 

[Albereth]

Bunch more porkies on the radio last night.

Anyhow - has the Rim Invoice scan been uploaded?

Seems Vodacom are pulling in at least R60M a month from BB users

 

[Albereth]

Jannie, with all due respect, you guys Ef'd this one up royally, and the blame lies squarely on your own (Vodacom's) shoulders. My biggest gripe is that a lot of the things you said over the last 2 days on these forums contradicts what Pieter Uys said today. As an outsider, it looks to me like he's calling you a liar. This is extremely bad PR, worse than even setting the limit at 100mb. Don't you guys discuss these things? Did you not try to contact Mr Uys after the schitt hit the fan, to discuss a plan going forward, instead of doing your own thing (defending 100mb), only to then have Mr. Uys go and say the complete opposite (there will be no throttling whatsoever).

The above issue aside, what guys SHOULD have done, is to quietly set the limit to 3-5GB, after which the service would be throttled down to slower speeds, or better still, cut off. You should have done his without telling anyone, not even your PR division, and then monitor what it is going on. See if it makes a difference to performance. Those being abusive, would get slowed down drastically, or cut off, and they would contact Vodacom to complain about their BIS service not working anymore. You could then decide how to deal with these guys, diplomatically, quietly, out of the public eye.

And in the meantime, you continue working with RIM to implement a solution that will help you to easily identify the abusers in order to nail them solidly.

By doing so, not only you would NOT piss off your 98% of users who use the service as intended, but you would also get the abusive ones to report in by themselves.

Even if you didn't cut these abusive guys off, a few threatening/warning emails or telephone calls (without any actualy threats being carried out) would have caused them to change their behaviour very quickly. Tell them that what they are doing is in contravention of the terms of service, and that they will be billed at standard data rates should the abuse continue. Imagine 300GB x R2000. Hell imagine, 10GB x R2000 (R2 per MB = R2000 per GB).

You guys need a Lesson 101 in PR, quiet diplomacy, and how to not piss you subscribers off.

And only if it is abuse. The fact that some people may have found a way to dl the internet can only be abuse if abuse is defined. Express shock and horror that someone has taken unlmited to actually mean unlimited.

The short of it all is that Vodacom thought they had reached a sweet spot where the current set of subscribers paid for everything and any new joiners would be pure cream.

No sympathy whatsoever for Vodacom - remember, these are the people that brought us that bloody meercat.