Cellnet First - explained
Chris Lawrence
I've just spent a while on the phone talking to one of the managers in
the Cellnet First promotions scheme. Here is how it works.
Your bill comes in and, with your free call allowance, comes to a total
of X (X may be 0 if you've not gone over your call allowance). You pay
all bills as normal. Every three months you receive a 'statement'
which shows the following:
For each month, listed separately:
First in Fairness: 3% discount on all calls made. If it would have been
cheaper for you to have been on another tariff, you are given a refund
for the difference. The 3% discount on all calls and any refund is
totalled - call this amount A.
First for Families/Firms: You are shown how many calls you made, off-
peak and peak, to any of your ten chosen numbers. A 10% discount is
applied to the peak group and a 50% discount is applied to the off-peak
group. The savings for these groups are totalled - call this amount B.
A and B are totalled and this amount is offset against your free call
allowance for the **tariff you're on** (since this is how you actually
paid your bills), NOT the better tarrif you could have been on. In
other words, a percentage saving on a free call is zero and you get
nothing back for savings on your free calls. Having offset A plus B
against your free call allowance, there is a difference left over - call
this amount C (C may well be zero if the savings so far take your bill
under your free call allowance, as explained above).
First in Freedom: All your calls are discounted by Z%, where Z depends
on how long you have promised to stay with Cellnet ON YOUR CURRENT
MOBILE ACCOUNT (if you take up a new SIM-only deal or whatever, the term
is restarted, just as when you take up a new account you have to wait
all over again before you can have international roaming, etc). Call
this amount D. C and D are totalled to give the final amount E.
You are refunded E, either to your bank account or to your airtime
account. Remeber that this happens for each month, so each Check Up
should contain all of the above for three months (they may be grouped
together even though this is how it breaks down). The refunds may take
your bill down to nothing each month and will certainly save you money.
You still pay all bills as normal and are given all refunds on three
bills at a time every three months.
Even if you have a pre-paid deal you can still be refunded money for
being on the wrong tariff. This is because your bill includes monthly
subs just like everyone else's, even if it is immediately cancelled
because you've pre-paid. If you think this can't be right (because you
seem to be getting a refund on something for nothing) remember that you
always had this saving anyway, by buying a pre-paid deal, whether it was
a bundle package or just a SIM-only deal for 30 quid last year.
If you have not received a Cellnet First brochure, it's because they are
waiting for your service provider to opt into the scheme (they can't see
anyone not doing so).
If you have the option of the six extra months pre-paid (from the
Nov/Dec/Jan promotion), then your account will be pre-paid into the
middle of next year. Since it is now the middle of this year, it means
that you will be with Cellnet on your current account for one year, from
now. Therefore you can legitimately opt for a one year First in Freedom
discount of 3% on all your calls.
[Disclaimer: this is how I understand the promotion to work after asking
a *lot* of questions. I may have understood parts wrongly and the
manager might have passed wrong information on to me. If in doubt about
something, double check with the Freefone number on 0800 114433]
Has anyone got any comments on this promotion? It does seem to be a
fantastic first for any network which can only result in savings for the
user. For example, I will be saving 6% automatically (3% gross for
First in Fairness and then 3% net for First in Freedom) with an extra
10% or 50% (gross) on ten designated numbers. Assuming that the savings
don't reduce my bill below the free calls allowance, I still stand to
get huge savings on the remainder. It almost seems like there should be
a catch...
It seems to be designed to reward customers for staying on the same
account and therefore reduce churn. However, First in Fairness doesn't
benefit some people - for example, those who are on the lowest tariff
and pay monthly subs but who make very few calls. They still pay UKP
17.50 per month for the phone to sit there. Heavier users are refunded
if they're not as heavy now and again, however.
So it seems to be aimed at reducing churn and promoting heavier use
overall, by providing a sort of 'safety net'. Probably great for the
business sector; is it going to be good enough for the typical home user
or are they still going to go for the sheer cheapness of SIM-only deals?
I think so, but I welcome the changes anyway because nobody is losing
out, even if not everyone gains.
--
Chris http://www.spacetime.demon.co.uk/index.htm ICQ 9898144
Liverpool, UK Please replace 'news' with 'news00' to reply by email
'Seriously not broken' - Team TSF (UK)
Avanti
Chris Lawrence wrote:
[snip]
> Has anyone got any comments on this promotion? It does seem to be a
> fantastic first for any network which can only result in savings for the
> user. For example, I will be saving 6% automatically (3% gross for
> First in Fairness and then 3% net for First in Freedom) with an extra
> 10% or 50% (gross) on ten designated numbers. Assuming that the savings
> don't reduce my bill below the free calls allowance, I still stand to
> get huge savings on the remainder. It almost seems like there should be
> a catch...
>
> It seems to be designed to reward customers for staying on the same
> account and therefore reduce churn. However, First in Fairness doesn't
> benefit some people - for example, those who are on the lowest tariff
> and pay monthly subs but who make very few calls. They still pay UKP
> 17.50 per month for the phone to sit there. Heavier users are refunded
> if they're not as heavy now and again, however.
>
> So it seems to be aimed at reducing churn and promoting heavier use
> overall, by providing a sort of 'safety net'. Probably great for the
> business sector; is it going to be good enough for the typical home user
> or are they still going to go for the sheer cheapness of SIM-only deals?
> I think so, but I welcome the changes anyway because nobody is losing
> out, even if not everyone gains.
>
> --
> Chris http://www.spacetime.demon.co.uk/index.htm ICQ
[snip]
Well I will not be cynical, it still seems a bit confusing but if the
customer benefits I will take your word for it.
Martin Jay
In article <sZfNzaAz...@spacetime.demon.co.uk>, Chris Lawrence
<ne...@spacetime.demon.co.uk> writes
>Has anyone got any comments on this promotion? It does seem to be a
>fantastic first for any network which can only result in savings for the
>user.
And best of all it's so easy to understand. :-)
10% off here, 50% of there, plus %3 and a further 3%-15% off everything.
Why didn't Cellnet simply cut the cost of calls to something like
30p/min peak and 5p/min off peak? I think we all know the answer.
I believe Cellnet have now come up with the most complicated tariff
structure of any of the networks. Let's not forget that the majority of
these reductions only apply to ten numbers that are nominated by the
customer.
I'm sure that all Cellnet users will see their bills reduce, but I also
suspect that all Vodafone user will too, yet Vodafone's tariff
reductions are much easier to understand.
--
Martin Jay
phil henry
On Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:52:48 +0100, Martin Jay
<mar...@bona.demon.co.uk> wrote:
[...]
>I'm sure that all Cellnet users will see their bills reduce, but I also
>suspect that all Vodafone user will too, yet Vodafone's tariff
>reductions are much easier to understand.
and Vodafone has said that there are more
to come (but they would anyway).
Are there courses in unravelling telecoms
confusion marketing ?
Ian Parker
>And best of all it's so easy to understand. :-)
>
£2.50 per month if you don't make enough peak local calls.....(or C to C
calls)
Ian
Chris Lawrence
In news article <358963...@virgin.com>
on Thu, 18 Jun 1998, Avanti wrote:
>Well I will not be cynical, it still seems a bit confusing but if the
>customer benefits I will take your word for it.
Please don't - read about it at http://www.cellnet.co.uk/ and work out
your own personal savings. You may be just as well off or you may find
that you are now covered for intermittent low usage if you're on a high-
usage tarrif. I hope the details I posted helped make things clearer
for some people, although the above web site gives the official word on
it.
Chris Lawrence
In news article <7GpwukAw...@bona.demon.co.uk>
on Thu, 18 Jun 1998, Martin Jay wrote:
>>Has anyone got any comments on this promotion? It does seem to be a
>>fantastic first for any network which can only result in savings for the
>>user.
>And best of all it's so easy to understand. :-)
;-) It is actually - just that reading a load of numbers in one go is
hard to digest. Also, much of the above was just me trying to
crystalise the precise details - it should be fairly self-explanitory
once you get your statement.
>10% off here, 50% of there, plus %3 and a further 3%-15% off everything.
>Why didn't Cellnet simply cut the cost of calls to something like
>30p/min peak and 5p/min off peak? I think we all know the answer.
What do you think the answer is? I asked this very question today and
the answer was that Cellnet did not want to make price cuts such as you
describe - they wanted to reward loyal customers and also remove the
problem of being locked into a particular tarrif. The savings for the
consumer are considered to be deeper than (possibly short term) price
cuts, in that they benefit the customer at a much more basic level.
>I believe Cellnet have now come up with the most complicated tariff
>structure of any of the networks.
I disagree - quite the opposite, I feel - tariff structures are no
longer a big issue with the 'lowest bills policy' under First in
Fairness.
> Let's not forget that the majority of
>these reductions only apply to ten numbers that are nominated by the
>customer.
There are two reductions which aren't in this category and a further
reduction on these numbers - and this reduction is quite high. It's all
a saving to you - what's the problem?
>I'm sure that all Cellnet users will see their bills reduce, but I also
>suspect that all Vodafone user will too, yet Vodafone's tariff
>reductions are much easier to understand.
Which part don't you understand?
o You continue to pay your bills, as normal, just like you always have
done.
o Every three months you are refunded money.
o You save 3% on all calls you make.
o You save another 3% on all calls you make if you promise to stay a
year (and greater savings still if you intend to stay longer).
o You save 10% (peak calls) or 50% (off-peak calls) on ten selected
numbers.
o If another tariff turns out to be cheaper in any given month, you are
refunded the difference.
Perfectly simple. But there's no obligation to join it. If you're
unhappy with it, don't get involved and you will not be sent any
refunds.
Mark Powell
In article <thCNtxBE...@spacetime.demon.co.uk>,
Chris Lawrence <ne...@spacetime.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In news article <7GpwukAw...@bona.demon.co.uk>
>on Thu, 18 Jun 1998, Martin Jay wrote:
>>>fantastic first for any network which can only result in savings for the
>>>user.
>
>;-) It is actually - just that reading a load of numbers in one go is
>hard to digest. Also, much of the above was just me trying to
>crystalise the precise details - it should be fairly self-explanitory
>once you get your statement.
It cannot really be considered an easy it understand tariff. I understand
it, but still think it is complicated.
Whether it works for Cellnet remains to be seen.
Let's face it though, the refunds every 3 months is just cynical. Up
to 3 months interest on your discounts, for Cellnet.
It's just going to be impossible to calculate whether your bill is correct
or not. Especially being able to change your 10 numbers at any time, but
only getting the refund at a later date! Looks like Cellnet are going to
have to pull in some super-computing power just to process bills :)
>> Let's not forget that the majority of
>>these reductions only apply to ten numbers that are nominated by the
>>customer.
>
>There are two reductions which aren't in this category and a further
>reduction on these numbers - and this reduction is quite high. It's all
>a saving to you - what's the problem?
3% !! Come on that's nothing on 37p/min. I'm certainly not going to commit
to Cellnet for any period over a 1 year SIM, so any other discount apart
from 1st4Families will not apply.
Are the discounts also tiered rather than applied at once?
From the website:
"The 3% First in Fairness Lifetime Award is deducted from all standard
call charges."
"The 10% or 50% First for Families or First for Firms
(as appropriate) discount is deducted after the Lifetime Award deduction."
Thus, a 10 min off peak call costing 100p will discounted by 3% to
97p
then if it's one of your 10 numbers, by another 50% to
48.5p
[further blurred at this point by the Call Inclusive value over the
3 months being removed], but for the sake of arguement [see how
complicated it is :)]
then the loyalty bonus of, lets say, 15% to
41.225p
A grand net saving of 58.775% !! Surely the nice sales man in the shop
told you, that the maximum saving was 68%?
>>I'm sure that all Cellnet users will see their bills reduce, but I also
>>suspect that all Vodafone user will too, yet Vodafone's tariff
>>reductions are much easier to understand.
>
>Which part don't you understand?
>
>o You continue to pay your bills, as normal, just like you always have
> done.
>o Every three months you are refunded money.
>o You save 3% on all calls you make.
It's not enough. 97% of 37p/min is ludicrous.
>o You save another 3% on all calls you make if you promise to stay a
> year (and greater savings still if you intend to stay longer).
>o You save 10% (peak calls) or 50% (off-peak calls) on ten selected
> numbers.
>o If another tariff turns out to be cheaper in any given month, you are
> refunded the difference.
>
>Perfectly simple. But there's no obligation to join it. If you're
>unhappy with it, don't get involved and you will not be sent any
>refunds.
Of course, I will join it. However, I think Cellnet are trailing the market.
Granted, I've been wrong before.
--
Mark Powell - System Administrator (UNIX) - Clifford Whitworth Building
A.I.S., University of Salford, Salford, Manchester, UK.
Tel: +44 161 295 5936 Fax: +44 161 295 5888
Email: M.S.P...@ais.salfrd.ac.uk finger ma...@ucsalf.ac.uk (for PGP key)
NO SPAM please: Spell salford correctly to reply to me.
Chris Lawrence
In news article <6mdm2e$b...@bbcnews.rd.bbc.co.uk>
on Fri, 19 Jun 1998, Ian Parker wrote:
>Then of course there is the Call Saver Option - will they refund your
>£2.50 per month if you don't make enough peak local calls.....(or C to C
>calls)
Call Saver is simply added up and applied to your calls just as it
always is, for all the other tariffs too, and you will be sent the
difference if you weren't on the cheapest one in any month. I expect
that any calls to your selected numbers which have been reduced to off-
peak charges by Call Saver will count as off-peak calls to your selected
numbers.
Therefore, instead of paying peak charges to a number without Call
Saver, WITH Call Saver AND with the number as one of your ten selected
numbers, you would pay half of the off-peak charges to that number all
the time.
If in doubt, phone up and ask them.
Mark Powell
In article <9aN5TWA4...@spacetime.demon.co.uk>,
Chris Lawrence <ne...@spacetime.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Therefore, instead of paying peak charges to a number without Call
>Saver, WITH Call Saver AND with the number as one of your ten selected
>numbers, you would pay half of the off-peak charges to that number all
>the time.
Great we're down to 4.85p/min or are we?
>If in doubt, phone up and ask them.
All this phoning up and checking this and that. There is simply too much
to remember.
Martin Jay
>>I'm sure that all Cellnet users will see their bills reduce, but I also
>>suspect that all Vodafone user will too, yet Vodafone's tariff
>>reductions are much easier to understand.
>Which part don't you understand?
>o You continue to pay your bills, as normal, just like you always have
> done.
>o Every three months you are refunded money.
>o You save 3% on all calls you make.
>o You save another 3% on all calls you make if you promise to stay a
> year (and greater savings still if you intend to stay longer).
>o You save 10% (peak calls) or 50% (off-peak calls) on ten selected
> numbers.
>o If another tariff turns out to be cheaper in any given month, you are
> refunded the difference.
Do you work for Cellnet? Is your e-mail alias postm...@cellnet.co.uk?
Okay, here's one for you...
I subscribe to Cellnet's Call Saver option. If I sign up with Cellnet
on their First for Fairness thing how much will a local (or Cellnet to
Cellnet) call made during a weekday peak time slot to one of my ten
selected numbers cost?
Other than the Call Saver problem I mention above I do actually
understand the Cellnet First for Fairness tariffs and I posted about it
some time ago so you can check if you wish.
I'm afraid I still believe First for Fairness is complicated though. If
I make a call using Vodafone during a weekday morning I know the call
will cost me 35p/min. If I make a call via Vodafone in the evening or
at the weekend I know it will cost 5p/min. That's very easy for anyone
to understand. Now work out the cost of these calls made via Cellnet
without using paper and pencil or a calculator/computer!
--
Martin Jay
Martin Jay
In article <6mdm2e$b...@bbcnews.rd.bbc.co.uk>, Ian Parker
<ian.p...@bbc.co.uk> writes
>>And best of all it's so easy to understand. :-)
>Then of course there is the Call Saver Option - will they refund your
>£2.50 per month if you don't make enough peak local calls.....(or C to C
>calls)
Good point. Somehow I doubt it though.
When I spoke with Cellnet they also mentioned that they wouldn't
calculate the ten number you spend the most money calling automatically.
Wouldn't doing this have made their wonderful new pricing plan even more
'fair'.?
Has anyone managed to find out how the savings will affect calls made
with the Call Saver option?
--
Martin Jay
Chris Lawrence
In news article <6mduvr$214$1...@plato.salford.ac.uk>
on Fri, 19 Jun 1998, Mark Powell wrote:
>All this phoning up and checking this and that. There is simply too much
>to remember.
Oh dear. Phone up, register your ten numbers and use your phone as
normal. Every three months let them send you some money.
Chris Lawrence
In news article <6mdunu$1mq$1...@plato.salford.ac.uk>
on Fri, 19 Jun 1998, Mark Powell wrote:
>Let's face it though, the refunds every 3 months is just cynical. Up
>to 3 months interest on your discounts, for Cellnet.
Yet you say further down that these are too small anyway.
>It's just going to be impossible to calculate whether your bill is correct
>or not.
It's NOT going to be impossible - your bills stay exactly the same as
they are now.
> Especially being able to change your 10 numbers at any time, but
>only getting the refund at a later date! Looks like Cellnet are going to
>have to pull in some super-computing power just to process bills :)
I daresay they've worked out just what sort of system they need.
>>> Let's not forget that the majority of
>>>these reductions only apply to ten numbers that are nominated by the
>>>customer.
>>
>>There are two reductions which aren't in this category and a further
>>reduction on these numbers - and this reduction is quite high. It's all
>>a saving to you - what's the problem?
>
>3% !! Come on that's nothing on 37p/min.
Wrong - 50% - you talked about the First for Families numbers and I
commented that there are two reductions not in that category and a (high
- ie, 50%) reduction on those IN that category.
> I'm certainly not going to commit
>to Cellnet for any period over a 1 year SIM, so any other discount apart
>from 1st4Families will not apply.
That's your choice. In future people will certainly commit for at least
one year anyway so they'll get a further 3% dicount on all calls. And
since number portability changes the definition of "commitment", I
suspect that people will be happy to commit for five years - I am very
happy with Cellnet and would do just that. If you withdraw early you
pay back the difference anyway so there is still no penalty.
Also, you will be able to take the First for Families discount and the
First in Fairness Award straight away, so your above comment is not
correct.
>Are the discounts also tiered rather than applied at once?
>From the website:
>
>"The 3% First in Fairness Lifetime Award is deducted from all standard
>call charges."
>"The 10% or 50% First for Families or First for Firms
>(as appropriate) discount is deducted after the Lifetime Award deduction."
>
>Thus, a 10 min off peak call costing 100p will discounted by 3% to
>
>97p
>
>then if it's one of your 10 numbers, by another 50% to
>
>48.5p
>
>[further blurred at this point by the Call Inclusive value over the
>3 months being removed], but for the sake of arguement [see how
>complicated it is :)]
>then the loyalty bonus of, lets say, 15% to
>
>41.225p
>
>A grand net saving of 58.775% !! Surely the nice sales man in the shop
>told you, that the maximum saving was 68%?
Not quite correct (and nor was I earlier on). I've just phoned up and
checked this all through with them. For a start, the maximum saving is
quote as 66.7%, not 68% (I had misread it as 67.7% and taken 68% to be
that rounded up).
The Families and Lifetime Award discount are taken from the _gross_ call
cost. The Freedom discount is taken from the _net_ call cost. This
also matches up with what I was told yesterday - the website is
therefore wrong to say that the Families is deducted _after_ the
Lifetime Award - it should be _as well as_. I've bought the matter to
their attention (for all the good it will do).
So after the 1st July, a one minute call costing 10p, will have the
Families discount and Lifetime Award reduce it by 53% to 4.7p. The
Freedom discount reduces THAT by 15% to 3.995p - which is where they get
"4p per minute" from. Since that one minute call currently costs 12p,
the new cost is 33.29% of the old cost - a saving of 66.71%.
I think Cellnet are being slightly disingenuous by using the current
call costs to enhance the percentage savings figures, although you could
argue that they are simply applying the savings from the whole package
to the cost of calls now - which is fair enough I suppose. In
otherwords, They don't make it too clear that they are also cutting call
costs from the 1st July (12p/min -> 10p/min, 40p/min -> 37p/min).
>>o You save 3% on all calls you make.
>
>It's not enough. 97% of 37p/min is ludicrous.
It depends - it's a free saving on top of call cost reductions.
>>Perfectly simple. But there's no obligation to join it. If you're
>>unhappy with it, don't get involved and you will not be sent any
>>refunds.
>
>Of course, I will join it. However, I think Cellnet are trailing the market.
>Granted, I've been wrong before.
I think they've come up with an innovative idea but when you analyse it
it's more for heavier users and loyal customers. I'd like to see the
casual user able to pay less for having the phone do nothing - but I
suppose there are pay as you go packages for that sort of person.
Martin Jay
In article <6mdunu$1mq$1...@plato.salford.ac.uk>, Mark Powell
<ma...@salfrd.ac.uk> writes
>It's just going to be impossible to calculate whether your bill is correct
>only getting the refund at a later date! Looks like Cellnet are going to
>have to pull in some super-computing power just to process bills :)
I discussed this with Cellnet last week. It appears that it's only
possible to change your ten numbers once every three months.
Apparently Cellnet have a computer that will check bills at the
beginning of January, April, July and October. The ten numbers you've
chosen will then have the 10% and 50% discounts applied to them for the
full three month period.
This means you can nominate ten numbers on 30 September and receive
discounts on them for July, August and September.
Well, that's what Cellnet tell me anyway. :-)
--
Martin Jay
Avanti
The more I read about this , the less I like it, so you want to get the
most from your discounts and after recieving month 3 bill , realise that
you need to change your F&F numbers, wait 3 months for the next bill
before the discount commence, recieve the discount in month 9.
A.Hirsch
>
> Call Saver is simply added up and applied to your calls just as it
> always is, for all the other tariffs too, and you will be sent the
> difference if you weren't on the cheapest one in any month. I expect
> that any calls to your selected numbers which have been reduced to off-
> peak charges by Call Saver will count as off-peak calls to your selected
> numbers.
>
> Therefore, instead of paying peak charges to a number without Call
> Saver, WITH Call Saver AND with the number as one of your ten selected
> numbers, you would pay half of the off-peak charges to that number all
> the time.
Incorrect. Although a call may be charged at the off peak rate , if it is
made at peak time it will receive peak time family discount of 10% NOT 50%
> If in doubt, phone up and ask them.
I have many times and I even got someone at BT mobile to speak to a
coordinator at Cellnet to clarify this point. He phoned back an hour later
and gave the answer as I have written above. I have spoken to around 6 ppl
at Cellnet and have been given the same answer every time.
Avanti
Chris Lawrence wrote:
>
> In news article <6mduvr$214$1...@plato.salford.ac.uk>
> on Fri, 19 Jun 1998, Mark Powell wrote:
>
> >All this phoning up and checking this and that. There is simply too much
> >to remember.
>
> Oh dear. Phone up, register your ten numbers and use your phone as
> normal. Every three months let them send you some money.
>
> --
> Chris http://www.spacetime.demon.co.uk/index.htm ICQ 9898144
> Liverpool, UK Please replace 'news' with 'news00' to reply by email
Sorry Chris, I know you are enthusiastic about this scheme, what
dissapoints me the most about the scheme is that its the discounts that
is mainly quoted as opposed to the price that you pay,it reminds me of
the fixed line players advertising terms 'save on BT's standard rate'
but who in reality does pay BT's standard rate for a call?
Light users get a discount
Heavy users buy into premier line or option 15 or whatever it is called
nowadays, in between that F&F discounts would apply.
My head hurts now , so I am off for some beer and a game of chess.
Martin Jay
In article <7UoYA3As...@spacetime.demon.co.uk>, Chris Lawrence
<ne...@spacetime.demon.co.uk> writes
>>All this phoning up and checking this and that. There is simply too much
>>to remember.
>Oh dear. Phone up, register your ten numbers and use your phone as
>normal. Every three months let them send you some money.
How do you know whether they've sent you the correct amount of money if
you can't work out what you should have been charged?
--
Martin Jay
Chris Lawrence
In news article <5Ucr$pAVQni1EwK$@bona.demon.co.uk>
on Fri, 19 Jun 1998, Martin Jay wrote:
>Do you work for Cellnet? Is your e-mail alias postm...@cellnet.co.uk?
;-) I'm the first to criticise them. People seem to have classed me as
"defending that awful Cellnet" for some reason. All I've done is
attempt to clarify the promotion. There _is_ also a certain element of
Cellnet-bashing to some of the responses (as is the case with all
popular networks and companies) unfortunately.
>I subscribe to Cellnet's Call Saver option. If I sign up with Cellnet
>on their First for Fairness thing how much will a local (or Cellnet to
>Cellnet) call made during a weekday peak time slot to one of my ten
>selected numbers cost?
I've just been on and spoken with someone and he explained it (and
explained it very well indeed - thanks Gary!). Call Saver still applies
as normal and still reduces peak calls to off-peak rates. If that
number is also one of your ten Families numbers, it is discounted
according to when the call was made. So a peak rate call would be
charged at off-peak rates and discounted by a further 10%. The same
call made later on when it's off-peak would still be charged at off-peak
rates and be discounted by a further 50%.
>Other than the Call Saver problem I mention above I do actually
>understand the Cellnet First for Fairness tariffs and I posted about it
>some time ago so you can check if you wish.
I've seen articles in the past on it - I was merely adding to the pool
of knowledge and speculating at where Cellnet are aiming with it.
>I'm afraid I still believe First for Fairness is complicated though. If
>I make a call using Vodafone during a weekday morning I know the call
>will cost me 35p/min. If I make a call via Vodafone in the evening or
>at the weekend I know it will cost 5p/min. That's very easy for anyone
>to understand. Now work out the cost of these calls made via Cellnet
>without using paper and pencil or a calculator/computer!
But you don't have to. This all reminds me of the changeover from
imperial weights and measures to metric ones - all the old people going
on about how complicated it was to buy 2.2 litres of milk instead of a
pint - it's the same shape and sized carton of milk. The point is you
opt into any of the savings you like, use the phone as normal, get
billed as normal and let the discounts and refunds come rolling back to
you as you go.
I think Cellnet could be crystal clear about how the savings work in
conjunction with other things such as prepaid deals and Call Saver, but
in reality I think you just treat them as normal and apply the savings
as explained, if indeed you wish to break it all down.
Chris Lawrence
In news article <8kCqTuAu...@bona.demon.co.uk>
on Fri, 19 Jun 1998, Martin Jay wrote:
>When I spoke with Cellnet they also mentioned that they wouldn't
>calculate the ten number you spend the most money calling automatically.
>Wouldn't doing this have made their wonderful new pricing plan even more
>'fair'.?
You can choose your numbers one per quarter (and as much as you want to
start with, before the 1st July). When you do so, your savings are
calculated for the whole quarter. This has the advantage that you don't
have to predict your numbers in advance.
Phone up and select ten likely numbers now before the 1st July. Before
the 1st October (when the Check Up arrives for Jul/Aug/Sep), if you've
called some numbers much more than you thought, phone up and change
them. The Check Up will use them, so you can simply go by the numbers
you've called rather than having to guess the numbers you will call.
Three months later do the same again in time for the next Check Up, etc.
I think that makes it even fairer still.
Paul Harris
>
>97p
>
>then if it's one of your 10 numbers, by another 50% to
>
>48.5p
>
>[further blurred at this point by the Call Inclusive value over the
>3 months being removed], but for the sake of arguement [see how
>complicated it is :)]
>then the loyalty bonus of, lets say, 15% to
>
>41.225p
>
>A grand net saving of 58.775% !! Surely the nice sales man in the shop
>told you, that the maximum saving was 68%?
>
nice people who sell Gas and Electricity (off topic I know) who told me
that if I bought both from the one source I would save 15% on one and
25% on the other. They asked me to sign up straight away as this would
give me a 40% saving on my combined bill! Maths has changed since I was
at school.
Seems to me that the savings are not the be all of this they are giving
the 3 months rebate as a means of retention.
--
Paul Harris
$newsmaster$<at>harrisp<dot>demon<dot>co<dot>uk
Chris Lawrence
In news article <358AA6...@virgin.com>
on Fri, 19 Jun 1998, Avanti wrote:
>Chris Lawrence wrote:
[...]
>Sorry Chris, I know you are enthusiastic about this scheme, what
>dissapoints me the most about the scheme is that its the discounts that
>is mainly quoted as opposed to the price that you pay,
I think that Cellnet could be a lot clearer about how the discounts and
the existing schemes fit together. But I expect that's what the free
helpline is for. If people can't be bothered to 'RTFM' by enquiring
then they've got a cheek to lazily expect their particular situation to
be explicity explained. In reality I don't think there's that many
combinations anyway.
>it reminds me of
>the fixed line players advertising terms 'save on BT's standard rate'
>but who in reality does pay BT's standard rate for a call?
All companies market things to impress the maximum savings. One2One do
it with their tedious "Another reason to have a one-to-one" adverts.
Take such figures with a pinch of salt and find out the facts before
commenting (that is not aimed at you personally but at people in
general).
>Light users get a discount
>Heavy users buy into premier line or option 15 or whatever it is called
>nowadays, in between that F&F discounts would apply.
Cellnet are a company and aren't doing this utimately out of the
goodness of their hearts. They're doing it to increase their profits.
All companies exist for that reason.
>My head hurts now , so I am off for some beer and a game of chess.
I'd hate to think how much your head has to hurt before chess relaxes
it!
Chris Lawrence
In news article <358AA3...@virgin.com>
on Fri, 19 Jun 1998, Avanti wrote:
>Martin Jay wrote:
>> This means you can nominate ten numbers on 30 September and receive
>> discounts on them for July, August and September.
>>
>> Well, that's what Cellnet tell me anyway. :-)
Martin's right.
>The more I read about this , the less I like it, so you want to get the
>most from your discounts and after recieving month 3 bill , realise that
>you need to change your F&F numbers, wait 3 months for the next bill
>before the discount commence, recieve the discount in month 9.
Nope.
| ---------------------- Choose ten numbers now
|
1st July ------------------ 'First' scheme goes live
|
|
1st August
|
|
1st Septempber
|
(last week in September) -- Look at last three bills and ammend numbers
1st October --------------- Discounts given on these numbers for the
| last three bills received.
|
1st November
|
|
1st December
|
(last week in December) ---- Look at last three bills and ammend numbers
1st January ---------------- Discounts given on these numbers for the
| last three bills received.
etc
Chris Lawrence
In news article <VkEb2bAF...@bona.demon.co.uk>
on Fri, 19 Jun 1998, Martin Jay wrote:
>>Oh dear. Phone up, register your ten numbers and use your phone as
>>normal. Every three months let them send you some money.
>
>How do you know whether they've sent you the correct amount of money if
>you can't work out what you should have been charged?
I _can_ work out how much I should have been charged (or more
accurately, how much discount I'm entitled to - I'm still 'charged' the
same).
However I'm quite happy to nominate my numbers, select my discounts and
leave the system to it, in much the same way that I don't walk round the
supermarket with a calculator but leave it to the cashiers.
Chris Lawrence
In news article <01bd9ba8$4a6e5e40$833b70c2@hirsch>
on Fri, 19 Jun 1998, A.Hirsch wrote:
>> Therefore, instead of paying peak charges to a number without Call
>> Saver, WITH Call Saver AND with the number as one of your ten selected
>> numbers, you would pay half of the off-peak charges to that number all
>> the time.
>Incorrect. Although a call may be charged at the off peak rate , if it is
>made at peak time it will receive peak time family discount of 10% NOT 50%
Yes, you're absolutely right - I queried this myself after seeing the
nth person mention it in here and it was explained just the same.
> I have many times and I even got someone at BT mobile to speak to a
>coordinator at Cellnet to clarify this point. He phoned back an hour later
>and gave the answer as I have written above. I have spoken to around 6 ppl
>at Cellnet and have been given the same answer every time.
It seems as though the people on the First number have been trained to
say how great this all is and to deal with general questions - I get the
impression that they're not used to being put on the spot with very
specific questions from people who are obviously very aware of what's
going on - but then there used to be a time when BT thought you were a
hacker if you tried to get the line optimised for a modem, so it's
certainly not a new attitude...
Avanti
Chris Lawrence wrote:
>
> Nope.
[logical explanation snipped]>
When I recieve my 1st telecom statement it breaksdown the call pattern,
I think Cellnet would be wise to just give the F&F discount on the most
revenue called numbers.
Avanti
Chris Lawrence wrote:
>
> I think that Cellnet could be a lot clearer about how the discounts and
> the existing schemes fit together. But I expect that's what the free
> helpline is for. If people can't be bothered to 'RTFM' by enquiring
> then they've got a cheek to lazily expect their particular situation to
> be explicity explained. In reality I don't think there's that many
> combinations anyway.
But this is what I mean , people don't generally RTFM.
>
> All companies market things to impress the maximum savings. One2One do
> it with their tedious "Another reason to have a one-to-one" adverts.
> Take such figures with a pinch of salt and find out the facts before
> commenting (that is not aimed at you personally but at people in
> general).
Yes I know that but it is bad press from misunderstandings and hidden
costs that show poor light on any company, how many people are going to
choose Cellnet over Vodafone on the premise of the 'FROM 4P/MIN' only to
find that they are not being charged this mystical low charge on any but
10 numbers.Where as Vodafone's 5p/min applies to most UK numbers.
>
> Cellnet are a company and aren't doing this utimately out of the
> goodness of their hearts. They're doing it to increase their profits.
> All companies exist for that reason.
I agree, but by removing hidden charges customers will gain trust and
feel less ripped off, I feel Cellnet could have offered a better 'man in
the street' deal, which still maximises their profits and does not lose
market confidence by complicating tariffs.
>
> I'd hate to think how much your head has to hurt before chess relaxes
> it!
It was the look on my opponents faces as they started to realise that
their position was hopeless to winning the game that was relaxing,
although this morning my head hurts more than yesterday, who invented
hangovers?
Avanti
Chris Lawrence wrote:
>
[snip]
>There _is_ also a certain element of
> Cellnet-bashing to some of the responses (as is the case with all
> popular networks and companies) unfortunately.
I don't think anyone was 'bashing ' Cellnet it's just the 1st for
fairness , is 1st to be the most complicated tariff arrangement I can
recall,
Avanti
Chris Lawrence wrote:
>
> You can choose your numbers one per quarter (and as much as you want to
> start with, before the 1st July). When you do so, your savings are
> calculated for the whole quarter. This has the advantage that you don't
> have to predict your numbers in advance.
>
and as such would be more unlikely to predict how they are going to use
the phone?
phil henry
The Cellnet failure is not to have come up with a
simple solution to meeting its objectives of building
customer relationships and loyalty, reducing churn
and growing revenue. Looking at recent results, it
would seem it still has a lot to do internally to reduce
costs, improve sales channels, remove inefficiencies,
improve distribution, build brand image and improve
customer service.
Chris Lawrence
In news article <358b9398...@news.demon.co.uk>
on Sat, 20 Jun 1998, phil henry wrote:
>The Cellnet failure is not to have come up with a
>simple solution to meeting its objectives of building
>customer relationships and loyalty, reducing churn
>and growing revenue.
Don't you think that the First promotion is aimed in that direction?
It's the loyal customers who get the higher discounts and thus reduce
churn. I do think there's more that could be done for the lower usage
users, but then this could be said of very many companies in all areas -
the higher user tends to get the kickbacks.
> Looking at recent results, it
>would seem it still has a lot to do internally to reduce
>costs, improve sales channels, remove inefficiencies,
>improve distribution, build brand image and improve
>customer service.
I think that Cellnet have become slightly complacent in their old age.
The latest reports have probably given them a well-needed kick up the
arse.
--
Chris http://www.spacetime.demon.co.uk/index.htm ICQ 9898144
Liverpool, UK Please replace 'news' with 'news00' to reply by email
"...and what did you say your username was, Emlyn?" - Frank BOFH
Chris Lawrence
In news article <358B94...@virgin.com>
They will look at their last three bills and use the appropriate numbers
just like anyone else, I expect.
Chris Lawrence
In news article <358B92...@virgin.com>
on Sat, 20 Jun 1998, Avanti wrote:
>> helpline is for. If people can't be bothered to 'RTFM' by enquiring
>> then they've got a cheek to lazily expect their particular situation to
>> be explicity explained. In reality I don't think there's that many
>> combinations anyway.
>
>But this is what I mean , people don't generally RTFM.
People are generally lazy and expect things for nothing. By finding out
what's going on, you (ie, one in general) is in a much better position
to comment and judge.
>> Take such figures with a pinch of salt and find out the facts before
>> commenting (that is not aimed at you personally but at people in
>> general).
>
>Yes I know that but it is bad press from misunderstandings and hidden
>costs that show poor light on any company, how many people are going to
>choose Cellnet over Vodafone on the premise of the 'FROM 4P/MIN' only to
>find that they are not being charged this mystical low charge on any but
>10 numbers.
Don't forget that it needs the 5 year promise to stay, too.
>Where as Vodafone's 5p/min applies to most UK numbers.
Indeed - but it's like seeing an advert for a garage where they show you
the very best cars all sparkling and gleaming and then say "Cars from
just UKP2995 on the road". You'd have to be naive to expect one of the
ones they'd just shown for that price. If people are taking the lowest
possible figures at face-value and wondering why they don't actually get
them, they only have their own naivety to blame, IMO. If in doubt, talk
to people. Cellnet give a couple of examples in the First literature
and the idea is obviously that the customer can see how it applies and
thus apply it to their own situation, or even just let it take care of
itself.
>> Cellnet are a company and aren't doing this utimately out of the
>> goodness of their hearts. They're doing it to increase their profits.
>> All companies exist for that reason.
>
>I agree, but by removing hidden charges customers will gain trust and
>feel less ripped off,
There are no hidden charges, there is nothing ulterior about it.
> I feel Cellnet could have offered a better 'man in
>the street' deal, which still maximises their profits and does not lose
>market confidence by complicating tariffs.
I agree, it seems that the tariff checks act more as a safety net for
people whose usage for a particular month is away from the 'norm' for
their tariff. The largest benefit seems to be to high-end users and
those who say they wish to stay. A further straightforward change would
be nice for the typical user (is there such a thing?) but maybe the
small price cut is counted there.
>> I'd hate to think how much your head has to hurt before chess relaxes
>> it!
>
>It was the look on my opponents faces as they started to realise that
>their position was hopeless to winning the game that was relaxing,
You can play chess by SMS with Locust's computer (if you're on Orange) -
has anyone actually done this, and even beaten it?
>although this morning my head hurts more than yesterday, who invented
>hangovers?
The bottled water and Asprin industry ;)
Peter Gaunt
In article <$U8HKVA9...@spacetime.demon.co.uk>, Chris Lawrence
<URL:mailto:ne...@spacetime.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> They will look at their last three bills and use the appropriate numbers
> just like anyone else, I expect.
Well, in practice (or is it practise?) you'd look at your two previous
bills. If you wait for the third you'll be too late as they'll already have
calculated your discounts. Or so I was told when I asked. There is thus
always one bill out of three you can't use in your calculations (especially
if your calling pattern is irregular). I was also told "you're not supposed
to do that [change the numbers just before discount time] but there's
nothing to stop you". How many people though are going to remember to look
through their bills every three months and then phone Cellnet? I'd hazard a
guess at not many.
BTW, just what *is* the correct number to phone for setting up all this? The
number I phoned (which I got from this ng) was 0800 400 498 (where did it
come from?) but the few press ads I've seen all say 0800 40 50 30.
--
Pete <URL:http://www.beard.demon.co.uk/>
==== +44 (0)411 501 757
*** Remove -NO-SPAM- from address to reply by email
Why are there no grey M&M's?
Mike Zanker
>They will look at their last three bills and use the appropriate numbers
>just like anyone else, I expect.
Sorry if you covered this (there's a lot of information in this thread
to take in in one go!) but do you know if Cellnet intend to include a
detailed calculation with your quarterly discount?
Mike
--
Mike Zanker, Milton Keynes, UK
Replace "abuse" with "mike" when replying by e-mail
Chris Lawrence
In news article <ant201749b49$F...@beard.demon.co.uk>
on Sat, 20 Jun 1998, Peter Gaunt wrote:
>> They will look at their last three bills and use the appropriate numbers
>> just like anyone else, I expect.
>Well, in practice (or is it practise?) you'd look at your two previous
>bills. If you wait for the third you'll be too late as they'll already have
>calculated your discounts.
Not so here - my bills arrive around the 10th of each month, giving me a
further twenty or so days (I'd do it earlier to be on the safe side) to
phone up and change my numbers if required.
> Or so I was told when I asked. There is thus
>always one bill out of three you can't use in your calculations (especially
>if your calling pattern is irregular).
That isn't right - even if you didn't get the last bill in time, it
would count, along with the next two for the next Check Up. Each Check
Up covers three bills.
> I was also told "you're not supposed
>to do that [change the numbers just before discount time] but there's
>nothing to stop you".
I was told precisely the opposite - "Phone up and change your numbers
just before your Check Up and the savings will count from your last
three bills". If you weren't meant to do it there _would_ be something
to stop you, so you certainly can do it.
> How many people though are going to remember to look
>through their bills every three months and then phone Cellnet? I'd hazard a
>guess at not many.
I have some fairly standard numbers so I'll be more or less correct
straight away. However I'll remember to do it when the time comes.
I've also got to remember to send off my form for six months subs free,
come December.
>BTW, just what *is* the correct number to phone for setting up all this? The
>number I phoned (which I got from this ng) was 0800 400 498 (where did it
>come from?) but the few press ads I've seen all say 0800 40 50 30.
I called 0800 114433 which is the number printed repeatedly throughout
the First literature I received by post. Cellnet's Customer Care line
on 100 quotes 0800 405030. The former definitely works because I've set
up most of my details already. I suspect they get through to the same
place in the end.
Peter Gaunt
In article <4cUYCQAa...@spacetime.demon.co.uk>, Chris Lawrence
<URL:mailto:ne...@spacetime.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> That isn't right - even if you didn't get the last bill in time, it
> would count, along with the next two for the next Check Up. Each Check
> Up covers three bills.
Quite correct, it does cover three bills. However, I was told that if you
*wait* for the third bill to *arrive* it will be too late to use the numbers
in it to change your Families numbers. The discounts will already have been
processed and so if you've called a non-Families number a lot in the last
month then you won't get the chance to stick it on your list. What I was
told is as valid as what you were told. I suspect it's yet another example
of the people on the other end of the phone not having been properly
trained.
> I called 0800 114433 which is the number printed repeatedly throughout the
> First literature I received by post. Cellnet's Customer Care line on 100
Has anyone else not received any literature on this? I haven't (I'm with
Call Connections).
--
Pete <URL:http://www.beard.demon.co.uk/>
==== +44 (0)411 501 757
*** Remove -NO-SPAM- from address to reply by email
Opinions founded on prejudice are always sustained
with the greatest violence. (Hebrew Proverb)
lansbury
>
>I've just been on and spoken with someone and he explained it (and
>explained it very well indeed - thanks Gary!). Call Saver still applies
>as normal and still reduces peak calls to off-peak rates. If that
>number is also one of your ten Families numbers, it is discounted
>according to when the call was made. So a peak rate call would be
>charged at off-peak rates and discounted by a further 10%. The same
>call made later on when it's off-peak would still be charged at off-peak
>rates and be discounted by a further 50%.
>
When I asked the question I was told that the discount as 50% at all
times. The calls were classed as off peak calls so the 50% discount
always applied to them./
Seems Cellnet staff don't understand the thing either.
Dave Hedges
lansbury
>
>They will look at their last three bills and use the appropriate numbers
>just like anyone else, I expect.
That assumes that you have paid the extra two pounds fifty for
itemised billing. If you do that it increases the cost of the
occasional user tariff by 14.28%.
That wipes a chunk out of the discounts. :-)
Having said that I was pushed to come up with ten numbers I would
phone on a regular basis.
Dave Hedges
Chris Lawrence
In news article <358cca24...@news.ukonline.co.uk>
on Sun, 21 Jun 1998, lansbury wrote:
>When I asked the question I was told that the discount as 50% at all
>times. The calls were classed as off peak calls so the 50% discount
>always applied to them./
>
>Seems Cellnet staff don't understand the thing either.
That does seem to be part of the problem. The above is how I'd assumed
it to work, so maybe this person is just assuming rather than finding
out too.
It would be interesting to see what happens when someone refuses to pay
a bill because they were told that the calls would be given a 50%
discount, thus causing them to use those numbers more than they would
have done.
Chris Lawrence
In news article <ant210531313$F...@beard.demon.co.uk>
on Sun, 21 Jun 1998, Peter Gaunt wrote:
>> That isn't right - even if you didn't get the last bill in time, it
>> would count, along with the next two for the next Check Up. Each Check
>> Up covers three bills.
>Quite correct, it does cover three bills. However, I was told that if you
>*wait* for the third bill to *arrive*
I understand now.
> it will be too late to use the numbers
>in it to change your Families numbers. The discounts will already have been
>processed and so if you've called a non-Families number a lot in the last
>month then you won't get the chance to stick it on your list.
Yet I was told the exact opposite.
> What I was
>told is as valid as what you were told.
Indeed.
> I suspect it's yet another example
>of the people on the other end of the phone not having been properly
>trained.
I think this sort of contradictory information is appalling. Cellnet do
themselves no favours by not understanding how the promotion works
themselves. When I phoned up to query how a reduction from 10p to 4p
could be classed as a 66.7% dicount, the woman couldn't answer but she
repeatedly mumbled "It does come out as a 66.7% discount". I asked her
to tell me what 4 was as a percentage of 10 and, seeing what I was going
to say, kept saying "I can see what you mean but it does come out as
66.7%".
In the end I asked her to run through it step by step and she could
obviously only get it to 4p and she KNEW that this was only a 60%
discount and yet she STILL insisted that it came out as 66.7%. In the
end, unable to handle this obvious internal conflict between what she
could see to be right and what she'd been told was right, went off for
ten minutes to work it out with her supervisor.
I can only imagine that it took ten minutes because her supervisor was
giving her the same treatment and she was saying "No, he won't accept
that but he's right" - ie, other people didn't understand either. The
answer, which I worked out while I was waiting anyway, is that the
saving is from the price now, which is 12p, not the new price of 10p.
>Has anyone else not received any literature on this? I haven't (I'm with
>Call Connections).
--
Chris Lawrence
In news article <358ced7...@news.ukonline.co.uk>
on Sun, 21 Jun 1998, lansbury wrote:
>>They will look at their last three bills and use the appropriate numbers
>>just like anyone else, I expect.
>That assumes that you have paid the extra two pounds fifty for
>itemised billing. If you do that it increases the cost of the
>occasional user tariff by 14.28%.
It's only 1.99 for mine.
>That wipes a chunk out of the discounts. :-)
Indeed - but this is always the case where itemised billing is
chargeable and applies as much now as it will later on.
>Having said that I was pushed to come up with ten numbers I would
>phone on a regular basis.
Everyone's usage pattern is different - I call a set group of numbers
very frequently. Friends and Family would be no good for you either.
Peter Gaunt
In article <z+g6KVAJ...@spacetime.demon.co.uk>, Chris Lawrence
<URL:mailto:ne...@spacetime.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In news article <358ced7...@news.ukonline.co.uk>
> on Sun, 21 Jun 1998, lansbury wrote:
> >That assumes that you have paid the extra two pounds fifty for
> >itemised billing. If you do that it increases the cost of the
> >occasional user tariff by 14.28%.
>
> It's only 1.99 for mine.
It's only 1.00 for mine (inc VAT).
--
Pete <URL:http://www.beard.demon.co.uk/>
==== +44 (0)411 501 757
*** Remove -NO-SPAM- from address to reply by email
It is only shallow people who do not judge by appearances.
Avanti
lansbury wrote:
[snip]
> That assumes that you have paid the extra two pounds fifty for
> itemised billing. If you do that it increases the cost of the
> occasional user tariff by 14.28%.
>
> That wipes a chunk out of the discounts. :-)
>
[snip]
> Dave Hedges
Good point, in fact a very good point made there.
A.Hirsch
Chris Lawrence <ne...@spacetime.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
<DfrmyPAn...@spacetime.demon.co.uk>...
> In news article <358cca24...@news.ukonline.co.uk>
> on Sun, 21 Jun 1998, lansbury wrote:
>
> >When I asked the question I was told that the discount as 50% at all
> >times. The calls were classed as off peak calls so the 50% discount
> >always applied to them./
> >
> >Seems Cellnet staff don't understand the thing either.
>
CHARGED at off peak rate not classed. So you can make a call at peak time
which is charged at the off peak rate but receives a 10% discount because
it is made during a peak period.
Mark C Hudson
Chris Lawrence wrote in message ...
>In news article <8kCqTuAu...@bona.demon.co.uk>
>You can choose your numbers one per quarter (and as much as you want to
>start with, before the 1st July). When you do so, your savings are
>calculated for the whole quarter. This has the advantage that you don't
>have to predict your numbers in advance.
>
>the 1st October (when the Check Up arrives for Jul/Aug/Sep), if you've
>called some numbers much more than you thought, phone up and change
>them. The Check Up will use them, so you can simply go by the numbers
>you've called rather than having to guess the numbers you will call.
>
>Three months later do the same again in time for the next Check Up, etc.
>I think that makes it even fairer still.
What a lot of hassle! Why can't I just
a) make calls
b) Pay the going rate
and still get a good deal, not needing to worry about which schemes I'm
signed up to, whether I remembered to phone up and change my 10 most
commonly called numbers, or whether the 15th falls on a Saturday in any
particular month. Sorry but Cellnet's First scheme is totally crazy (IMO) -
yes I'll save money if I take advantage of it, but why not just simplify the
tariffs in the first place so that people save money over the previous
prices?
Mark
Mark Powell
In article <J3IkIHBu...@spacetime.demon.co.uk>,
Chris Lawrence <ne...@spacetime.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Phone up and select ten likely numbers now before the 1st July. Before
>the 1st October (when the Check Up arrives for Jul/Aug/Sep), if you've
>called some numbers much more than you thought, phone up and change
>them. The Check Up will use them, so you can simply go by the numbers
>you've called rather than having to guess the numbers you will call.
Why not ring just before October? If you truely can look over your
last three bills and get the 10 numbers updated prior to being given
your refund, then why ring before July?
What a joke. The heavy user has to go through three large bills
(as you said it would benefit the heavy user most and they will have
the largest bills.) Then add up how many times they call each number.
Sorry it's just a joke.
--
Mark Powell - System Administrator (UNIX) - Clifford Whitworth Building
A.I.S., University of Salford, Salford, Manchester, UK.
Tel: +44 161 295 5936 Fax: +44 161 295 5888
Email: M.S.P...@ais.salfrd.ac.uk finger ma...@ucsalf.ac.uk (for PGP key)
NO SPAM please: Spell salford correctly to reply to me.
Chris Lawrence
In news article <6mln0n$pu7$1...@clyde.open.ac.uk>
on Mon, 22 Jun 1998, Mark C Hudson wrote:
[snip]
>yes I'll save money if I take advantage of it, but why not just simplify the
>tariffs in the first place so that people save money over the previous
>prices?
They wanted to come up with something totally different - so they did.
At least you'll always pay the amount that you would pay on the cheapest
tariff, for any month - being on the wrong tariff will no longer be an
issue.
Chris Lawrence
In news article <6mlph4$smg$1...@plato.salford.ac.uk>
on Mon, 22 Jun 1998, Mark Powell wrote:
>Why not ring just before October? If you truely can look over your
>last three bills and get the 10 numbers updated prior to being given
>your refund, then why ring before July?
If you don't phone up before July you won't be registered on the scheme
- do it now.
>What a joke. The heavy user has to go through three large bills
>(as you said it would benefit the heavy user most and they will have
>the largest bills.) Then add up how many times they call each number.
>Sorry it's just a joke.
Oh FFS! Okay then, the expression "go through bills" is another way of
saying "be aware of numbers used a lot" - you do that as you go.
Christ, some people are trying their best to make this appear much
harder than it is!
Avanti
Chris Lawrence wrote:
[snip]
> They wanted to come up with something totally different - so they did.
I agree with you 100% there, I hope none of the other networks follow
suit.
Chris Lawrence
In news article <358EB3...@virgin.com>
on Mon, 22 Jun 1998, Avanti wrote:
>> They wanted to come up with something totally different - so they did.
>
>I agree with you 100% there, I hope none of the other networks follow
>suit.
;-) We'll have to see how it turns out for them in the long term.
It'll be interesting to see what new users make of it all and whether it
helps more users stay loyal.
Mark Powell
In article <gKX+3YAV...@spacetime.demon.co.uk>,
Chris Lawrence <ne...@spacetime.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In news article <6mlph4$smg$1...@plato.salford.ac.uk>
>on Mon, 22 Jun 1998, Mark Powell wrote:
>
>>Why not ring just before October? If you truely can look over your
>>last three bills and get the 10 numbers updated prior to being given
>>your refund, then why ring before July?
>
>If you don't phone up before July you won't be registered on the scheme
>- do it now.
You gotta be kidding me. This all singing dancing discount scheme doesn't
even apply, unless you call them before a cut-off day?
>>What a joke. The heavy user has to go through three large bills
>>(as you said it would benefit the heavy user most and they will have
>>the largest bills.) Then add up how many times they call each number.
>>Sorry it's just a joke.
>
>Oh FFS! Okay then, the expression "go through bills" is another way of
>saying "be aware of numbers used a lot" - you do that as you go.
>Christ, some people are trying their best to make this appear much
>harder than it is!
I just don't share your enthusiasm, Chris. You seem to be a long time
Cellnet user and have been presented with a scheme that reduces your
bills. I've only recently got a Cellnet deal and I'm unimpressed
with the pricing. This new "money saving" scheme seems cynical. Okay,
it'll save money, but it is not simple and is it not easy to
understand. Look at the size of this thread. I do not think you
would see such discussion on what a call on the new Vodafone
tariffs will cost you. It's plain to see there. Cellnet has blurred
it's pricing so much it'll take a minute or two before a call to
work out what exactly you're going to be charged. And then you'd
probably be wrong. "Oh yes, 10p/min 66.7% discount......"
lansbury
>
>It would be interesting to see what happens when someone refuses to pay
>a bill because they were told that the calls would be given a 50%
>discount, thus causing them to use those numbers more than they would
>have done.
I wish I had taken the name of the person who gave me the misleading
information because it tipped the balance in choosing Cellnet over
Vodafone when I open the account last week. In fact I would go as far
as to say it was the deciding factor in cancelling the one2one
contract.
If I could pin the comment down to a person the matter would be taken
further. But I can't prove I was told it.
Dave Hedges
E-mail: lans...@zerospam.com
lansbury
On 22 Jun 1998 02:15:18 -0100, "A.Hirsch" <hir...@dircon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>CHARGED at off peak rate not classed. So you can make a call at peak time
>which is charged at the off peak rate but receives a 10% discount because
>it is made during a peak period.
Yes I appreciate that now but is was not what Cellnet told me. The
point I was making to Chris is that Cellnet's own staff don't
understand the new tariff
Dave Hedges
E-mail: lans...@zerospam.com
lansbury
>
>Everyone's usage pattern is different - I call a set group of numbers
>very frequently. Friends and Family would be no good for you either.
It is the flexibility to change the numbers each quarter that is good
for me. I call six numbers a lot and can adjust the other four to get
the best price overall.
It is just without itemised billing I have to make an educated guess
at the last four. Paying the extra for the itemised billing I doubt is
worthwhile.
As you say horses for courses
Dave Hedges
E-mail: lans...@zerospam.com
Chris Lawrence
In news article <3591548d...@news.ukonline.co.uk>
on Tue, 23 Jun 1998, lansbury wrote:
>It is the flexibility to change the numbers each quarter that is good
>for me. I call six numbers a lot and can adjust the other four to get
>the best price overall.
Sounds sensible.
>It is just without itemised billing I have to make an educated guess
>at the last four. Paying the extra for the itemised billing I doubt is
>worthwhile.
Fair point - if you don't use the numbers enough to be able to keep
track of them without the bill (ie, I know which numbers not on my list
I've used a lot because I automatically feel concern when using them)
then it could be tricky (with or without bill) to pinpoint them. I also
get itemised billing anyway which makes this a moot(er) point for me.
Paul Harris
In article <6mnpjv$771$1...@plato.salford.ac.uk>, Mark Powell
<ma...@salfrd.ac.uk> writes
>>If you don't phone up before July you won't be registered on the scheme
>>- do it now.
>
>You gotta be kidding me. This all singing dancing discount scheme doesn't
>even apply, unless you call them before a cut-off day?
I too am a long time user of Cellnet through BT Mobile and have seen
nothing from them as yet about the scheme. *I have only stuck with them
as I wanted to keep my number* (I started because the coverage was
supposedly better).
>
<snip>
>
>I just don't share your enthusiasm, Chris. You seem to be a long time
>Cellnet user and have been presented with a scheme that reduces your
>bills. I've only recently got a Cellnet deal and I'm unimpressed
>with the pricing. This new "money saving" scheme seems cynical. Okay,
>it'll save money, but it is not simple and is it not easy to
>understand. Look at the size of this thread. I do not think you
>would see such discussion on what a call on the new Vodafone
>tariffs will cost you. It's plain to see there. Cellnet has blurred
>it's pricing so much it'll take a minute or two before a call to
>work out what exactly you're going to be charged. And then you'd
>probably be wrong. "Oh yes, 10p/min 66.7% discount......"
>
I must admit that I am not a heavy user as I recv far more calls than I
make and don't take an itemised bill. I suspect that it will be like BT
F&F it's a pain to have to keep changing the numbers and then it doesn't
apply immediately with that, this seems a little better but a simpler
system where we all knew what we were paying would have been better.
>
--
Paul Harris
$newsmaster$<at>harrisp<dot>demon<dot>co<dot>uk
Avanti
Chris Lawrence wrote:
>
> In news article <358EB3...@virgin.com>
> on Mon, 22 Jun 1998, Avanti wrote:
>
> >> They wanted to come up with something totally different - so they did.
> >
> >I agree with you 100% there, I hope none of the other networks follow
> >suit.
>
> ;-) We'll have to see how it turns out for them in the long term.
> It'll be interesting to see what new users make of it all and whether it
> helps more users stay loyal.
>
I agree, but today I have just learned about Orange's tariff changes
which are a bit easier to understand and now beleive the believe the
competiton will haave their work cut out, ie off peak 5p/min inc vat no
nomination of numbers,no minimum charge.
Mike Zanker
In article <YMttOHAf...@harrisp.demon.co.uk>, Paul Harris
<pa...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
>I too am a long time user of Cellnet through BT Mobile and have seen
>nothing from them as yet about the scheme.
I've only been with them (and Cellnet) six months but I got TWO
information packs with application forms for Cellnet First today!
Paul Harris
In article <5XQWpHAv9$j1E...@jemima.demon.co.uk>, Mike Zanker
<ab...@jemima.demon.co.uk> writes
>
>I've only been with them (and Cellnet) six months but I got TWO
>information packs with application forms for Cellnet First today!
>
Robin Bowes
lansbury wrote:
>
> On Sun, 21 Jun 1998 17:05:59 +0100, Chris Lawrence
> <ne...@spacetime.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >
> >It would be interesting to see what happens when someone refuses to pay
> >a bill because they were told that the calls would be given a 50%
> >discount, thus causing them to use those numbers more than they would
> >have done.
>
> I wish I had taken the name of the person who gave me the misleading
> information because it tipped the balance in choosing Cellnet over
> Vodafone when I open the account last week. In fact I would go as far
> as to say it was the deciding factor in cancelling the one2one
> contract.
>
> If I could pin the comment down to a person the matter would be taken
> further. But I can't prove I was told it.
I rang up today and asked the very same question - If I have Call Saver,
and make a call to a local number (ie charged at off-peak rate) and that
number is also in my First for Family list, will I be eligible for 50%
further discount (off-peak First for Family rate) or 10% (Peak First for
family rate) ?
After shuffling off to ask her manager, the person I was speaking to
assured me it would be 50%, ie the call would cost 10p per minute
(assuming new rates) less 3% (First in Fairness) less 50% (First for
Family) = 4.85p per minute.
Methinks I'll call back tomorrow and try and get it in writing, or at
least get a name.
Robin
--
Two rules to success in life:
1.Don't tell people everything you know.
-- Sassan Tat
Remove ".nospam" from email address to reply.
http://www.redbreast.mcmail.com
Robin Bowes
Chris Lawrence
In news article <3592D3F2...@nospam.mcmail.com>
on Thu, 25 Jun 1998, Robin Bowes wrote:
>I rang up today and asked the very same question - If I have Call Saver,
>and make a call to a local number (ie charged at off-peak rate) and that
>number is also in my First for Family list, will I be eligible for 50%
>further discount (off-peak First for Family rate) or 10% (Peak First for
>family rate) ?
>
>After shuffling off to ask her manager, the person I was speaking to
>assured me it would be 50%,
Make sure you have also specified clearly that you're talking about
making this call during peak time, ie, when Call Saver will be applying.
This covers you then.
> ie the call would cost 10p per minute
>(assuming new rates) less 3% (First in Fairness) less 50% (First for
>Family) = 4.85p per minute.
10p/min - 53% = 4.7p/min
>Methinks I'll call back tomorrow and try and get it in writing, or at
>least get a name.
Please get it in writing as I'm sure you will then have proof and legal
redress.
Robin Bowes
Chris Lawrence wrote:
>
> In news article <3592D3F2...@nospam.mcmail.com>
> on Thu, 25 Jun 1998, Robin Bowes wrote:
>
> >After shuffling off to ask her manager, the person I was speaking to
> >assured me it would be 50%,
>
> Make sure you have also specified clearly that you're talking about
> making this call during peak time, ie, when Call Saver will be applying.
> This covers you then.
I rang back today and spoke to a Rachel Hutchinson who assured me that
the 50% discount would apply.
> > ie the call would cost 10p per minute
> >(assuming new rates) less 3% (First in Fairness) less 50% (First for
> >Family) = 4.85p per minute.
>
> 10p/min - 53% = 4.7p/min
I was also told that the discounts would be applied successively, eg:
10p/min - 3% = 9.7p/min (First in Fairness)
9.7p/min - 50% = 4.85p/min (First for Families)
etc. (ie First in Freedom discounts next)
> Please get it in writing as I'm sure you will then have proof and legal
> redress.
I'll try.
Robin
Chris Lawrence
In news article <35939719...@eoc.org.uk>
on Fri, 26 Jun 1998, Robin Bowes wrote:
>I rang back today and spoke to a Rachel Hutchinson who assured me that
>the 50% discount would apply.
Excellent! The punter can't be expected to double-check for their
mistakes, and you've more than done your bit.
>> 10p/min - 53% = 4.7p/min
>I was also told that the discounts would be applied successively, eg:
>
>10p/min - 3% = 9.7p/min (First in Fairness)
>9.7p/min - 50% = 4.85p/min (First for Families)
>etc. (ie First in Freedom discounts next)
After checking this with three independent people, the 'official' word
is that the Fairness Award and Families discount are from the -gross-
call charges, the Freedom discount is then taken from the -net-.
So (using max discounts),
Sub.t = 10p/min - (50% Families + 3% F.Award)
Total = Sub.t - 15% Freedom
Sub.t = 10p/min - 53% = 4.7p/min
Total = 4.7p/min - 15% = 3.995p/min
This is where they get "4p/min" from and it comes to 66.7% of the
current 12p/min, hence that saving quoted as the max.
Of course, your 'official' word is no less official than mine, but I'm
more confident of the method I mention because the results tally with
the literature and independent people have agreed on it.
I find it absolutely appalling that staff don't understand understand
this promotion themselves and are allowed to pass disinformation on to
the public.
>> Please get it in writing as I'm sure you will then have proof and legal
>> redress.
>
>I'll try.
I have a feeling that the mistake will mysteriously come to light if you
do, but please do anyway.
A.Hirsch
> I rang up today and asked the very same question - If I have Call Saver,
> and make a call to a local number (ie charged at off-peak rate) and that
> number is also in my First for Family list, will I be eligible for 50%
> further discount (off-peak First for Family rate) or 10% (Peak First for
> family rate) ?
>
> After shuffling off to ask her manager, the person I was speaking to
> assured me it would be 50%, ie the call would cost 10p per minute
> (assuming new rates) less 3% (First in Fairness) less 50% (First for
> Family) = 4.85p per minute.
>
It beats me why you seem to get that answer every time whereas every time I
ask the question I get the converse answer. One person gave me your answer
but when they double checked with a supervisor they were corrected. Make
sure you stress that the call is made at peak time and see what they come
up with.
camva...@gmail.com
> I've just spent a while on the phone talking to one of the managers in
> the Cellnet First promotions scheme. Here is how it works.
>
>
>
> Your bill comes in and, with your free call allowance, comes to a total
> of X (X may be 0 if you've not gone over your call allowance). You pay
> all bills as normal. Every three months you receive a 'statement'
> which shows the following:
>
> For each month, listed separately:
>
> First in Fairness: 3% discount on all calls made. If it would have been
> cheaper for you to have been on another tariff, you are given a refund
> for the difference. The 3% discount on all calls and any refund is
> totalled - call this amount A.
>
> First for Families/Firms: You are shown how many calls you made, off-
> peak and peak, to any of your ten chosen numbers. A 10% discount is
> applied to the peak group and a 50% discount is applied to the off-peak
> group. The savings for these groups are totalled - call this amount B.
>
> A and B are totalled and this amount is offset against your free call
> allowance for the **tariff you're on** (since this is how you actually
> paid your bills), NOT the better tarrif you could have been on. In
> other words, a percentage saving on a free call is zero and you get
> nothing back for savings on your free calls. Having offset A plus B
> against your free call allowance, there is a difference left over - call
> this amount C (C may well be zero if the savings so far take your bill
> under your free call allowance, as explained above).
>
> First in Freedom: All your calls are discounted by Z%, where Z depends
> on how long you have promised to stay with Cellnet ON YOUR CURRENT
> MOBILE ACCOUNT (if you take up a new SIM-only deal or whatever, the term
> is restarted, just as when you take up a new account you have to wait
> all over again before you can have international roaming, etc). Call
> this amount D. C and D are totalled to give the final amount E.
>
> You are refunded E, either to your bank account or to your airtime
> account. Remeber that this happens for each month, so each Check Up
> should contain all of the above for three months (they may be grouped
> together even though this is how it breaks down). The refunds may take
> your bill down to nothing each month and will certainly save you money.
> You still pay all bills as normal and are given all refunds on three
> bills at a time every three months.
>
> Even if you have a pre-paid deal you can still be refunded money for
> being on the wrong tariff. This is because your bill includes monthly
> subs just like everyone else's, even if it is immediately cancelled
> because you've pre-paid. If you think this can't be right (because you
> seem to be getting a refund on something for nothing) remember that you
> always had this saving anyway, by buying a pre-paid deal, whether it was
> a bundle package or just a SIM-only deal for 30 quid last year.
>
> If you have not received a Cellnet First brochure, it's because they are
> waiting for your service provider to opt into the scheme (they can't see
> anyone not doing so).
>
> If you have the option of the six extra months pre-paid (from the
> Nov/Dec/Jan promotion), then your account will be pre-paid into the
> middle of next year. Since it is now the middle of this year, it means
> that you will be with Cellnet on your current account for one year, from
> now. Therefore you can legitimately opt for a one year First in Freedom
> discount of 3% on all your calls.
>
> [Disclaimer: this is how I understand the promotion to work after asking
> a *lot* of questions. I may have understood parts wrongly and the
> manager might have passed wrong information on to me. If in doubt about
> something, double check with the Freefone number on 0800 114433]
>
>
>
> Has anyone got any comments on this promotion? It does seem to be a
> fantastic first for any network which can only result in savings for the
> user. For example, I will be saving 6% automatically (3% gross for
> First in Fairness and then 3% net for First in Freedom) with an extra
> 10% or 50% (gross) on ten designated numbers. Assuming that the savings
> don't reduce my bill below the free calls allowance, I still stand to
> get huge savings on the remainder. It almost seems like there should be
> a catch...
>
> It seems to be designed to reward customers for staying on the same
> account and therefore reduce churn. However, First in Fairness doesn't
> benefit some people - for example, those who are on the lowest tariff
> and pay monthly subs but who make very few calls. They still pay UKP
> 17.50 per month for the phone to sit there. Heavier users are refunded
> if they're not as heavy now and again, however.
>
> So it seems to be aimed at reducing churn and promoting heavier use
> overall, by providing a sort of 'safety net'. Probably great for the
> business sector; is it going to be good enough for the typical home user
> or are they still going to go for the sheer cheapness of SIM-only deals?
> I think so, but I welcome the changes anyway because nobody is losing
> out, even if not everyone gains.
> --
> Chris http://www.spacetime.demon.co.uk/index.htm ICQ 9898144
> Liverpool, UK Please replace 'news' with 'news00' to reply by email
22 years later i read this.
i remember working for cellnet dealership(cellnet didnt have actual direct shops) -this was the most complicated thing in the world and failed miserably.
Then they launched the cellnet easy life phone in 98/uphone in 99 and charged eye watering per minute charges,without line rental with a 30 day voucher,voda had the prepay system for years but cellnet hammered it,seling bucket loads -the days of big commission,slicked back hair were over ha ha great thread all these years later.
MissRiaElaine
> i remember working for cellnet dealership(cellnet didnt have actual direct shops) -this was the most complicated thing in the world and failed miserably.
> Then they launched the cellnet easy life phone in 98/uphone in 99 and charged eye watering per minute charges,without line rental with a 30 day voucher,voda had the prepay system for years but cellnet hammered it,seling bucket loads -the days of big commission,slicked back hair were over ha ha great thread all these years later.>
with quite a good per minute rate as I remember, at least in off peak.
That number has been ported to most networks over the years and is now
almost back home on O2.
--
Ria in Aberdeen
[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]
R. Mark Clayton
When this started I thought it disastrous as off course it spawned a whole legion of middle [wo]men all raking off commission.
This view was incorrect, because of course the intermediaries all competed with one another on price and quality of service, but more importantly they had sufficient buying power that they could and did drive down the wholesale price from the networks - giving them either greater margin and / competitive advantage.
This had the effect of hugely accelerating market penetration in the UK, and volume also brought down the cost of portable phones from ~£2k in 1986 to few hundred in 1990. In France they were still ~£2k with ridiculous geographic service.
With the introduction of Orange and 121 (now BT EE) competition improved and P&G services were introduced. The marginal cost of calls etc. is very low, so as network capacity increased the price of calls etc. steadily fell, with a completely unlimited connection now available for £20 per month or less.
1986
Rental £25pm, calls 25p/min (33p in London) - probably plus VAT
1999
Rental £7.50ppm, 50 minutes inclusive
Now
Rental <£5pm, >500 minutes included, unlimited texts, some inclusive data
or
[3] £8pm, unlimited calls and texts, 8GB data (easily enough for everything but heavy streaming)
camva...@gmail.com
mercury 121 initially and the newly launched hutchison whampoa Orange the pcn 1800mhz new networks .
We also took on cellops a voda reseller with bespoke excellent tariffs,great staff and an excellent building i visited in swindon.
An example of a reseller tariff was something like cellnet regular caller plus packaged at £25.39 a month inc itemised billing or £32.89 a month including insurance and £15 of free calls with a free ericsson ga628,case,car charger.
This tariff sold buckets and being comms lead salespeople we pushed hard i admit easily giving us £2k in comms alone on that hit.
we then saw voda buy uniqueair in 99 - the end was coming, they then bought cellops.
We worked with phones4u - they were an absolutely awful bunch for everyone - customer and salespeople - awful.
I got out and went to voda itself which was a great few years.
Orange over promised, were blinkered and their reps on the phone in gateshead couldn't understand something like the variance of building permeation/network topography with 1800mhz. i always remember on their kit boxes it had the tag "the futures bright blah blah" and also "by 2000 we aim to have 10,000 transmitters in the uk". they were also groundbreaking with "wildfire" their voice assistant.
121 were great people, cheap (one2weekend tariff), but in brighton at that time 96/97 (£17.50) coverage was alien. They did develop with their precept tariffs which were incredible "10p 2p" which was amazing.And free voicemail ha ha
1986
> Rental £25pm, calls 25p/min (33p in London) - probably plus VAT
>
> 1999
> Rental £7.50ppm, 50 minutes inclusive
£17.50+ itemised billing was ball park with orange doing an initial tariff like "everyday 20" for £15 a month with 20 OP mins per evening which around that time was amazing, yet still attracted a handset prive of £35+£35 connection to subsidise the phone. Yup orange charged connection.
Great chat, i almost feel like slicking back my hair again and buying a xk8 one moe time? not really :-)
Cam Vallance
R. Mark Clayton
Better luck with CPW. After a couple of years I found the candy bar N79 highly inconvenient and had more or less decided to fork out for a Nokia N8, when CPW suddenly [full page] advertised them for £257 unlocked (about half street price). I hot footed round to their then nearby store and bought one.
>
> I got out and went to voda itself which was a great few years.
>
> Orange over promised, were blinkered and their reps on the phone in gateshead couldn't understand something like the variance of building permeation/network topography with 1800mhz. i always remember on their kit boxes it had the tag "the futures bright blah blah" and also "by 2000 we aim to have 10,000 transmitters in the uk". they were also groundbreaking with "wildfire" their voice assistant.
>
> 121 were great people, cheap (one2weekend tariff), but in brighton at that time 96/97 (£17.50) coverage was alien. They did develop with their precept tariffs which were incredible "10p 2p" which was amazing.And free voicemail ha ha
>
>
> 1986
> > Rental £25pm, calls 25p/min (33p in London) - probably plus VAT
> >
> > 1999
> > Rental £7.50ppm, 50 minutes inclusive
>
> In 99 there simply was not a simple £7.50 tariff on the market
- the cheapest was singlepoint/fones4u 11.99 with 300 off peak voda to voda and home phone -the £7.50 would simply not pay for the price of say the 5110 at the time which unsubsidised was £250.
Well my first GSM phone (Motorola P7389 ~2000) was below retail and BTC locked it despite it being supposedly SIM free. There was a lengthy dispute once I found out (when I tried to lend it to a neighbour for a trip to the USA) resolved by them giving me an unlocked P7389 and an unlocked Ti250 in recompense.
> There were no 24 month contracts to attract the comms and no imei barring so the potential for fraud would be huge.
>
> £17.50+ itemised billing was ball park with orange doing an initial tariff like "everyday 20" for £15 a month with 20 OP mins per evening which around that time was amazing, yet still attracted a handset prive of £35+£35 connection to subsidise the phone. Yup orange charged connection.
>
> Great chat, i almost feel like slicking back my hair again and buying a xk8 one moe time? not really :-)
gordon comstock
the best deals indeed were to retain your kit and barter down the line rental every year. the sim only 500 minute deals for £50 were amazing - no kit,no hit and pop the IB on and then suggest insurance at £6 month suddenley a huge comms hit on a sale.
DMC? i remember them....
cloning>??? fucking bastards....
and those Motorola tribands?? 1900mhz 18/9 remember selling them to some how combat the CDMA weirdness that was america at the time.
All i can rememebr off the top of my head about cellnet social life was the POS and an off peak rate of 5p???
brilliant chat. now going to call my mate "hey dave remember cellnet social life?" :-)
R. Mark Clayton
> On Tuesday, 28 April 2020 19:17:19 UTC+1, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
>
>
> social life WOW !! i had forgotten tariff! sure it was a dying days of analogue tariff?? will have to call in an old colleague to bang heads, but i certainly do remember it and i stand corrected -but i think i may be right about it being analogue.
>
https://www.independent.co.uk/money/phoney-war-real-choices-1241695.html
>
>
> the best deals indeed were to retain your kit and barter down the line rental every year. the sim only 500 minute deals for £50 were amazing - no kit,no hit and pop the IB on and then suggest insurance at £6 month suddenley a huge comms hit on a sale.
However the tariff I negotiated in 2013 was not time limited like most of O2/BTC earlier tariffs, so I am still on it. Somehow I got a £5pm loyalty discount carried over on to one of their lowest tariffs, with the result that I almost never go outside the bundle: -
500mins, unlimited calls to other O2 and ten numbers, one month roll over
unlimited texts
but
only 250MB of data, which was ample on my N8, but inadequate on my S8.
>
>
> DMC? i remember them....
Companies House don't, so they must have disappeared or changed name over twenty years ago... Still this is what happens when you **** off customers.
DMC were allocated my contract by BTC in 1992, when Excell went bust. I was cut off for three days, but as I was in Belgium at the time did not notice.
>
>
> cloning>??? fucking bastards....
>
>
> and those Motorola tribands?? 1900mhz 18/9 remember selling them to some how combat the CDMA weirdness that was america at the time.
>
>
> All i can rememebr off the top of my head about cellnet social life was the POS and an off peak rate of 5p???
>
> brilliant chat. now going to call my mate "hey dave remember cellnet social life?" :-)
1986 Technophone MK1 (SN 32) pre-ordered off spec' £2k+VAT from Excell replaced under warranty by MK2
retired - loaned to MOSI 2006 - 2017
1992 Motorola Elite price forgotten from friend
failed - corrosion caused by sweat getting in given back to friend to Px.
2000 Motorola P7389 ~£80 from BTC - Locked when supposed to be SIM free.
Transferred to partner. Charging port ripped out when lent to a friend, although still works if a charged battery is put in it.
2000 Motorola P7389 free replacement from BTC unlocked & still working as are all below ex S7
2001 Motorola Ti250 free from BTC / O2 shop, kept in car with Voda SIM
~2006 Motorola Razr (for partner), also Motorola V3380? came with car and sold with it
2009 Nokia N79 ~£250 from Nokia shop - I found candy bar awkward and bought
2011 Nokia N8 £257 from CPW, lens cover damaged so replaced by S7
Lemma (2016 Acer Liquid Z5 £15 (yes fifteen!) from Scan for partner (sold £15 to friend 2020))
2017 Samsung Galaxy S7 ~£400 from Samsung shop -
major firmware slugs so replaced after legal threats by
2018 Samsung Galaxy S8 from Nokia shop
2020 Samsung Galaxy A40 from Nokia £186 (for partner)