Why Vodacom depletes your new mobile data first

[Geoff.D]

But there is 24x7 capacity which, if you or someone else don't use it, is lost forever. But it incurred a cost.

Put another way, data is not a product, but a service which must be available 24x7 in case someone uses it.

Data Capacity is not lost, because it does not exist. The cost of building and maintaining a road is FIXED. If no one uses the road the cost of building it is the same and so is the cost of maintaining it.
Similarly, the infrastructure is there for communications 24x7, regardless if it is never used or fully utilised. nothing changes.

The ONLY component that is lost is the time that passes. That is a resource that no one ever gets back.

At a stretch, you can call it an opportunity revenue that is lost IF no one uses the "capacity" created that is all.
And the easier and cheaper an operator makes it for the market to utilise the capacity, the better the utilisation will be which will ensure that the opportunity revenue IS actually realised.
It is like a bus or the Gautrain, the more affordable it is to use the service, the more likely it is that the bus or train will run at full "capacity"

The Gold card for use of the Gautrain illustrates the concept. You "prepay" for access to the "capacity" in the form of a seat which is a "container" in which the "data" (you) reside while you are on the train, which you use WHEN you want to for as long as you want to, to travel as far as you want to.
You don't lose your credit after a fixed period. The train or bus runs according to a schedule whether it is full or empty! The only way that will ever change will be if a bus or train stands in a station until it is full before departing.

 

[jannievanzyl]

The difference between prepaid and postpaid is only about when you pay. Before you eat the sandwich or drink the coffee (a take away) or a sit-down meal in the restaurant. The ONLY difference is the timing, nothing about consuming the product, which remains the same, it is still a sandwich or a coffee.

And the contractual requirements.

 

[jannievanzyl]

Which begs the question why are networks even wanting to punish us for using it?

Not sure how you get to this point?

Networks WANT you to use data.

On after-hours data, two relevant points;

- Free Night-Owl data was started by Vodacom, years ago. I know this because I did it.

- Off-peak is now between 1am and 6am with loads still at about 70% of peak.

 

[Geoff.D]

Which begs the question why are networks even wanting to punish us for using it? You could give night data at 100th the cost that you do. Even Cell C cancelled theirs for some reason. Just mind boggling how networks are behaving if data is a scarce resource.

That IS the point precisely! The operators should be encouraging the marketplace to utilise the "capacity" fully because that way they will realise the full opportunity revenue that the "capacity" is able to generate. (Maximum utilisation equals maximum revenue).
So the operators can try and make it more attractive to utilise capacity in non-peak periods, or, you could lower the overall price and thus reduce a perceived barrier time barrier.

 

[jannievanzyl]

Data Capacity is not lost, because it does not exist. The cost of building and maintaining a road is FIXED. If no one uses the road the cost of building it is the same and so is the cost of maintaining it.
Similarly, the infrastructure is there for communications 24x7, regardless if it is never used or fully utilised. nothing changes.

Networks are made up of links that are rated in Gb/s and they run at those speeds, irrespective if anyone is using them or not. And their cost is fixed., not a function of utilization.

In other words, EXACTLY like a road system where the cost is fixed, irrespective if the road is empty or jam-packed.

So, I'm not sure what your point is as it seems you agree with what I said.

 

[jannievanzyl]

That IS the point precisely! The operators should be encouraging the marketplace to utilise the "capacity" fully because that way they will realise the full opportunity revenue that the "capacity" is able to generate. (Maximum utilisation equals maximum revenue).
So the operators can try and make it more attractive to utilise capacity in non-peak periods, or, you could lower the overall price and thus reduce a perceived barrier time barrier.

And you think network operators don't do this???

 

[Geoff.D]

And the contractual requirements.

What contractual requirement? Those words and cr@p the lawyers and marketers come up with to create the packages?

 

[jannievanzyl]

What contractual requirement? Those words and cr@p the lawyers and marketers come up with to create the packages?

The terms of the contract, yes. Especially where your SP agrees to contractually supply you with a certain amount of data every month. Which is what you are paying for, right?

Those words and cr@p are actually there to protect both parties.

 

[bwana]

The terms of the contract, yes. Especially where your SP agrees to contractually supply you with a certain amount of data every month. Which is what you are paying for, right?

Those words and cr@p are actually there to protect both parties.

How does FIFO prevent a SP from supplying certain amount of data every month?

Rhetorical question obviously, because it doesn't.

 

[Geoff.D]

And you think network operators don't do this???

Not all do. The Measure you introduced in VC are and were exactly that. BUT the question is why did you do it?

Because the plan was to maximise revenue generation or because someone had the perception that if we could get customers to utilise the capacity off-peak, we could reduce network costs by reduced capex spend on additional capacity to meet the peak demand in peak periods?

And no, I did not imply that operators do not do this.

 

[Geoff.D]

The terms of the contract, yes. Especially where your SP agrees to contractually supply you with a certain amount of data every month. Which is what you are paying for, right?

Those words and cr@p are actually there to protect both parties.

It would protect both parties IF the customer actually understood what he is signing for.

What the contracts are saying is IF you the customer undertake to use x GB of "data" we will charge you at a rate of so much per MB. What is wrong when the operators specify you must use that in a pre-defined period.
"We" only pay for that because that is what the operator has decided is the way he structures his packages. There is no negotiation involved. It is, "take it or leave it".

 

[Geoff.D]

Networks are made up of links that are rated in Gb/s and they run at those speeds, irrespective if anyone is using them or not. And their cost is fixed., not a function of utilization.

In other words, EXACTLY like a road system where the cost is fixed, irrespective if the road is empty or jam-packed.

So, I'm not sure what your point is as it seems you agree with what I said.

Now we are entering another completely misunderstood concept and it about the "words" we use. "Speed" is NOT the correct concept. It has never been the correct word to use to describe "bandwidth". Somehow, in the digitisation process, we all lost our way and created this perception that it is "speed" we are talking about and that obviously data travels faster in fibre etc etc.

But to unpack this concept properly, one has to start at the beginning and get everyone on the same page about what "speed" means, what data rate means, what frequency means, what wavelength means, what bandwidth means and why these concepts are described as they are and then finally why describing a pipe or capacity in terms of "speed" is fundamentally wrong, even IF the measure used (b/s, Mb/s, Gb/s etc) is the same.

And to do that we need to go back to the analogue network terms used to describe frequency and bandwidth.

 

[Geoff.D]

How does FIFO prevent a SP from supplying certain amount of data every month?

Rhetorical question obviously, because it doesn't.

What the Operators are providing you with is a "port" (think of it as a gate) which is either closed ( which means you have to negotiate to get it opened for you (entry into a nightclub) or Open (always on, 24/7, however you want to describe it), that is wide enough for you to get through. (single file personnel gate, or a gate wide enough for a bus).

That is a fixed cost to you and it costs an operator a fixed cost to provide it. You lease the right to use that gate on a monthly basis.

Then the operator says on the other side of the gate, the roadway will be wide enough for your bicycle, person or bus. and that will cost you a rate depending on how many of your busses use that roadway.

 

[jannievanzyl]

Now we are entering another completely misunderstood concept and it about the "words" we use. "Speed" is NOT the correct concept. It has never been the correct word to use to describe "bandwidth". Somehow, in the digitisation process, we all lost our way and created this perception that it is "speed" we are talking about and that obviously data travels faster in fibre etc etc.

But to unpack this concept properly, one has to start at the beginning and get everyone on the same page about what "speed" means, what data rate means, what frequency means, what wavelength means, what bandwidth means and why these concepts are described as they are and then finally why describing a pipe or capacity in terms of "speed" is fundamentally wrong, even IF the measure used (b/s, Mb/s, Gb/s etc) is the same.

And to do that we need to go back to the analogue network terms used to describe frequency and bandwidth.

If a link is not measure in bits/second, pray please tell how it is measured.

And how does frequency affect speed in any material way? As you seem to imply.

If you have a certain carrier frequency and you have an allocation of spectral bandwidth in there, it still calculates to a specific speed, measured in bits/s.

 

[jannievanzyl]

How does FIFO prevent a SP from supplying certain amount of data every month?

Rhetorical question obviously, because it doesn't.

It does, actually. When you've not used up your monthly allocation.

If you use up your allocation every month, then it does not apply, fully agree. But what happens if you don't? How do the SP fulfill it's legal obligation? Practically?

 

[jannievanzyl]

Because the plan was to maximise revenue generation or because someone had the perception that if we could get customers to utilise the capacity off-peak, we could reduce network costs by reduced capex spend on additional capacity to meet the peak demand in peak periods?

I don't understand a word you're saying, sorry.

 

[Geoff.D]

It does, actually. When you've not used up your monthly allocation.

If you use up your allocation every month, then it does not apply, fully agree. But what happens if you don't? How do the SP fulfill it's legal obligation? Practically?

So the justification SPs used in the beginning, to "expire" unused volume measured in MB was because I as a user did not "use up" the contracted MB in one month? Then as a concession, Allow you "carry over" the unused part to the next month BUT you must first "use up" the current allocation before the previous month's carryover could be used is because the SP failed to meet its obligation to the user in the previous month?

Unbelievable! Only a lawyer could argue that because the customer did not use up all his allocation, it is now putting the SP in breach of the contract.

And then to say, "if you used up your allocation" fine" and then rub salt into the wounds to say "but IF you buy this Prepaid", we will use the FIFO principal?

The answer is to change the contract! Change the contracts to reflect what the customer wants NOT what you as an SP thinks he wants!

 

[Geoff.D]

I don't understand a word you're saying, sorry.

Let me try again.
What was the motive VC had for introducing the "night owl" allocation and to change the "rules" that apply to Off-peak and on-peak?

Was it to :

1. Increase capacity utilisation and thereby revenue generation?
2. To encourage customers to change their usage patterns to shift capacity utilisation off-peak because there was a shortage of capacity during on-peak?

 

[bwana]

It does, actually. When you've not used up your monthly allocation.

If you use up your allocation every month, then it does not apply, fully agree. But what happens if you don't? How do the SP fulfill it's legal obligation? Practically?

Is it not a legal obligation simply because that's what Vodacom chose to put in the contract? If so, the solution seems pretty obvious...

 

[Geoff.D]

Is it not a legal obligation simply because that's what Vodacom chose to put in the contract? If so, the solution seems pretty obvious...

And what's more, there has never been anything that stops VC from changing the contract. At the next upgrade. The operators could even say to all existing contract holders that as of date, xyz, the basic T&Cs will be changed to ........
No, this legal obligation stuff is just a convenient excuse.

Now, we need someone to go and look at all those yards and yards of wordage, and find the clause that all these contracts have in them about the operator reserving his rights to amend the the T&C's at any time to finish off this debate ,
Case closed.

Update. There are at least two clauses in all the T&C's where VC reserve their rights to amend the same at any time, placing the onus on you the customer to check what the new conditions are from time to time ....
Take it or leave it.