No broadband ads for Vodacom, says ASA

This ruling does a lot of harm. The average person is pretty damn stupid on all things I.T. They know 'broadband' as fast internet, as in faster than dial-up and not much else. So now, mobile providers will start using some other term and that will confuse the average (stupid) person even more.

ASA is nitpicking here and they are harming the consumer more.
 
Won't be surprised if they pull the ol' "Ok, then we will just say we are better than broadband scheme". Basically they can just release some new ads that read, "Get Fast internet, *as fast as broadband* but cheaper" etc...

All they have to do is compare old(broadband) and whatever they want to call their internet service, either way, damage has been done.
 
so.. ISPs can't use the term "broadband" unless it can prove that over 90% of it's user base goes above 256K speeds?

Well, no-one can be called a broadband provider then.

If I were vodacom advertisers, I'd go "HSPA, 7x faster than normal broadband!" (because broadband is defined as 256K)

"Other providers only offer broadband, we offer 7x more!"

Use the poor excuse of "256K is broadband" against ASA.
 
Broadband 256K was the speed 3 years ago. Minimum should be 1MB and that should be increased next year. 384K and 512K is joke never mind 256K.
 
LOL @ Vodacom's use of a dodgy survey company. It reminds me of when they used dear Jannie van Zyl as an "independent" evaluator in a previous ASA hearing. Will they ever learn?
 
This is a stupid ruling by the ASA. But Vodacom can easily get around it by using equivalent terminology.
 
Does that also mean that Telkom can also no longer use "Do broadband", cause there speed is ****!
 
proguy said:
Does that also mean that Telkom can also no longer use "Do broadband", cause there speed is ****!
Click to expand...

Nope Telkom are OK, Its above 256k on more than 90% of their network

Vodacom's (and the other GSM's) problem is that in many areas the speed falls off to Edge or GPRS speeds
3G coverage and saturation is often a hassle.
How often? I don't know

I see nothing wrong with Vodacom using the "Broadband" term as long as they qualify it with "assuming 3G coverage"
 
Well, I welcome any critical review of so called "broadband" wireless solutions. All these wireless methods utilise a finite slice of spectrum, which has to be shared between all users on that antenna (typically a 120-degree sector on a cell tower). So your "up to 21 Mbps" wireless service will be at most a 0.7 Mbps service once you have 30 users in the coverage area of the sector.

Do not get me wrong --- I think it is good that we have strong competition from the wireless technologies, but they should make it clear that the typical user experience will be far below the claimed maximum speed of the technology. Your average uninformed person will think that Cell C's 21 Mbps service will be faster/better than a 10 Mbps ADSL line. My concern is that this perception is actually preventing tougher competition in the fixed-line market (i.e., delaying the launch of fibre-to-the-{home,kerb,*}).
 
The term "broadband" is stupid anyway; not sure why Vodacom is putting so much effort into this. I really don't care what they call their data offering; I care only about the quality of service I get wherever I may find myself. I believe most people feel this way. How broad is "broadband" anyway (256 is a joke ... so it will have to be a moving target)? If I was Vodacom I would drop this and just call it whatever can work for most.
 
I propose the Youtube "broadband" standard: If a video on Youtube can be played without stuttering it's "broadband" ... if not it's not broadband. And as Youtube increases the quality of their videos so must the def for "broadband" then be adapted. That to me and the average user is what matters and will make some sense. :D
 
Sorry this of off topic and most likely wrong forums ect ect.

I am trying to find out about getting mobile prepaid data bundles, who should i avoid who is the cheapest and the best value for money. Also how much are the 3g cards and what should i avoid like the plague? Speed is not the issue so it does not have to be "broadband" ;) . All I can find so far is 24 or 12 month contracts, any advice would be a great help.

Thanks
 
In another recent article here on MyBB it was stated:
Cell C plans to extend its HSPA+ network to cover 34% of the South African population by the end of 2010, and grow its population coverage to 67% by mid 2011.

MTN had covered 48% of the South African population when they announced their year-end results last month while it took Vodacom around 5 years to provide 50% of South Africa's population with 3G coverage.

When one considers Vodacom and MTN’s battle to achieve 50% population coverage Cell C's goals are clearly very ambitious.
Click to expand...

So if those numbers are correct - how do they even come close to the 90% required, or have I missed something?

Orginal article: http://mybroadband.co.za/news/broadband/14967-Cell-broadband-network-What-expect.html
 
ASA is playing silly games if you read the two rulings.

The first time around they stated, and admits it in this new ruling, that the company submitting the reports is deemed by the ASA to be credible and an expert. But the performance data submitted the first time around could not be deemed to be 'representative' of the whole Vodacom network even though the actual performance numbers far exceeded the requirements as per SA government 'Broadband' definition. Basically, company is good, numbers are good, but there not enough of them.

The latest ruling state that they still consider the company credible and an expert and also accept the performance numbers are now representative of the whole 3G network. Basically everything is now OK.

Except ASA now cannot accept the company (they still agree is credible and an expert) anymore as they're not a member of SAMRA, even though it was not an issue the first time around.

Bureaucracy at its best....Wonder what's next? Having to be a member of the Alliance?
 
fvdbergh said:
Well, I welcome any critical review of so called "broadband" wireless solutions. All these wireless methods utilise a finite slice of spectrum, which has to be shared between all users on that antenna (typically a 120-degree sector on a cell tower). So your "up to 21 Mbps" wireless service will be at most a 0.7 Mbps service once you have 30 users in the coverage area of the sector.

Do not get me wrong --- I think it is good that we have strong competition from the wireless technologies, but they should make it clear that the typical user experience will be far below the claimed maximum speed of the technology. Your average uninformed person will think that Cell C's 21 Mbps service will be faster/better than a 10 Mbps ADSL line. My concern is that this perception is actually preventing tougher competition in the fixed-line market (i.e., delaying the launch of fibre-to-the-{home,kerb,*}).
Click to expand...

ASA have ruled long ago against making speed claims. You can't make 'up to' type of speed claims. Cell-C is clearly not aware of this and we'll probably soon see an ASA complaint against them.

This whole issue with using the term "Broadband" is essentially about MINIMUM speed and not MAXIMUM speed. You cannot make these potentially maximum speed claims as the ASA ruled the majority of people must be able to get it. As this is basically impossible on wireless networks they cannot make 21Mb/s, etc. claims.

If you want to call your network "Broadband", you don't need to show the maximum speed, only that the majority of users will get more than 256Kb/s.

If ASA persists in this, it's going to completely remove the term "broadband" from the landscape as the operators will just lodge complaints against each other and eventually no-one will be able to use the term.
 
Its not a stupid ruling at all IMHO. I've been around the country often and not been able to get any useful data coverage in slightly more remote areas or its fallen back to gprs or edge. Its generally a great and very useful (mobile data) service but it is disingenuous to describe the whole network as delivering "Broadband" as it has now been defined.
 
Kabal said:
Sorry this of off topic and most likely wrong forums ect ect.

I am trying to find out about getting mobile prepaid data bundles, who should i avoid who is the cheapest and the best value for money. Also how much are the 3g cards and what should i avoid like the plague? Speed is not the issue so it does not have to be "broadband" ;) . All I can find so far is 24 or 12 month contracts, any advice would be a great help.

Thanks
Click to expand...

@Kabal: Your best bet is Cell C's new 4GS offer: http://cellc.co.za/packages/datapromotion_bundles#
According to mybroadband.co.za it is the "best ever broadband pricing in SA: http://mybroadband.co.za/news/broadband/14949-The-best-ever-broadband-pricing.html
It's pre-paid and if you live in PE, Bloem, East London or Cape Town you're good to go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X