Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
O2 in UK: A bunch of c****!
- Thread starter lefse
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They changed their policy because they found that there are many many other ways to promote competition to benefit consumers in terms of price, consumer choice and entry barriers.
It may be "a" barrier, but it is not "the" barrier.
As I said earlier, a contract is a contract --- they told you beforehand that they are selling you a "never to be unlock" iphone, it's your choice to buy it or not.
I hear what you are saying , and while I agree it looks black and white here , after OFTEL became OFCOM , they were definately implying in their imformation that networks had an obligation to provide unlocking , but were entitled to charge for it , and antitled to impose penalties during the contracted period (not after) - The reason I am so sure is because I had to actually mail links from their site to Orange to get them to sell me an unlock code ! - Unfortunately I no longer have the E-mails so I can't provide the links .
I agree though , the 2002 Policy does not indicate that there is any requirement from the Networks to unlock. Not sure what that info was doing on their site in that case , and I suspect it was removed at the time of the 2007 review .
I wish I still had those mails / links !
Oh and according to http://bit.ly/Wfg44 those of us stuck with edge won't be able to use push notifications without it stopping incoming calls coming through!
I can't wait until other networks get the iPhone! I'm sticking with my 3G and hopefully by january 2010 when my contract is up a decent network will have it. If not I'll move to vodafone and use ultrasn0w ;-)
I can't wait until other networks get the iPhone! I'm sticking with my 3G and hopefully by january 2010 when my contract is up a decent network will have it. If not I'll move to vodafone and use ultrasn0w ;-)
They do support it. My point being that their coverage of basic 3G is very poor, compaired with the over UK networks. It's very rare I get 3G coverage, on vodafone and 3 I got HSPDA most of the time, Failing that regular 3G, everywhere I went.
I think you meant this:
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/archive/Oftel/consumer/advice/faqs/mobfaq3.htm
Notice the date of the faq --- Nov 2002 --- which is the same as the long version of the policy paper.
The FAQ was badly written. It just said that you can always ask the carrier for the unlock code (but the unwritten part is that the carrier can always refuse to give you the unlocking code).
Even the short FAQ has the same conclusion as the long version of the 2002 policy paper:
"There are now no specific guidelines relating to the mobile companies' policies, in terms of the length of locking period and the charges for unlocking. Oftel decided that setting particular conditions for SIM locking would be less effective than customer pressure on the mobile companies: properly informed customers can select a provider bearing in mind the importance of locking restrictions to them, rather than Oftel setting"
Does not change the fact that it is immoral, and looks like it has been written by a gang of heartless, crooked CEO's representing the carriers.
What an utter diabolical practice this is.
Somehow, these diabolical practices by these heartless crooked CEO's and utter useless civil servants at Ofcom --- give you the best iphone deal in the G7 (perhaps even in the entire first world).
Irrelevant.
The prices aren't the problem. In fact, I myself find them more than decent when (as you say) compared to other countries.
But you still cannot travel abroad without being slaughtered by insane roaming charges. This is the problem with locking the handset forever to _one_ carrier.
Also, it doesn't do much good for competition internally. Though that's not the main point here.
Then the simlock issue is entirely irrelevant.
It's the multinational carriers like Vodafone/T-Mobile/Orange/Telefonica who has operations in dozens of countries in Europe --- but refuse to give you an affordable roaming tarriff. The EC is trying to engage this issue head-on with the carriers on roaming tarriff, the simlock issue is a sideshow --- irrelevant to the main issue.
How is it irrelevant? Say you often stay abroad for a month at a time (or less); it would make much more sense to buy a foreign sim, than two identical phones, or wait for legislation that decreases the roaming charges further.
And that's just the traveling-aspect... Something tells me that the good deals O2 gives you, have to do with the fact that you can never ditch them. You will forever be an O2-customer with your current phone.
....and the phone is, for most people, ridiculously expensive to begin with - compared to other goods, such as notebook computers.
It would make more sense to buy or borrow a beat-up used mobile phone for travelling. Doesn't look particular smart thing to do to dress and look like a tourist abroad, holding an expensive camera and a iphone.
Ofcom's job is to make sure Brits get enough competition to ensure the best domestic mobile tarriffs. There are many many ways to do that --- and Ofcom has chosen their method and it appears that they have done a great job.
Your way benefits the gadget geeks. Their way benefits every Brits 50 weeks out of the 52 weeks in a year --- not really their job to make sure your yearly 2 week vacation gets cheap mobile tarriff abroad.
By price alone, O2 gives a pretty good iPhone-deal compared to other markets. But that doesn't mean there is enough competion in the British market overall. We were only discussing the iPhone. Remember?
Ofcom's not there to only see to good iPhone-contracts.
How can you prove that prices wouldn't be even lower overall with handsets unlocked after the contract period is over? And where does it say that britain has the cheapest prices overall in, say, the EU?
When it comes to looking like a tourist abroad, I'll leave you to it
.Though seriously, your argument is so relative that it is slightly silly:
It's probably more dangerous to walk around in Croydon than on the countryside in France or Italy - or any city.. It all depends. Further on, stating that one should use cheap electronics when abroad, due to fear of getting mugged, is laughable at best. There is a civilized world outside the UK too.
Ofcom could easily provide UK carriers with fiercer competition, though part of the problem must be industry lobbying. There is obviously no argument for allowing carriers to keep handsets locked beyond the contract period, other than giving carriers more dough...
...which is fine, if you're a carrier, and not a consumer commenting on Macrumors.com.
The main reason why UK mobile service is much cheaper than the rest of Europe (not counting cost of living differences) --- is because UK has 5 national carriers. That is enough to make the iphone the cheapest in the G7.
UK carriers DO offer unlocking codes for a fee (other than the occasional iphone or blackberry storm) --- for business reasons to their customers. They don't have to do it according to Ofcom policy, but they do offer it anyway.
Hong Kong still has the cheapest iphone in the whole world --- the reason --- they have 6 carriers. Hong Kong has an exclusive iphone carrier and does not have any simlocking regulations --- yet Hutchison 3 HK sells the iphone completely unlocked at a price that is the cheapest in the world.
The other extreme is France --- where they have all kinds of regulations on how and when unlocking codes are given by the carriers, that their courts killed the iphone exclusivity --- yet their iphone prices and plans sucked big time. Why? Because France has only 3 national carriers, all French owned, zero foreign competition inside France.
Aside from the iphone being the exception, both American national GSM carriers (AT&T and T-Mobile USA) offer unlocking codes for free after 30-90 days of using their service. They both do it voluntarily --- zero government regulation forcing them to do so.
The whole reason why Ofcom changed their policy back in 2002 is that there are many other methods to increase competition that are more effective.
Thanks for replying - but,
Hong Kong is on the doorstep to China. That's why they are unlocked - Apple decides. Rather simple. Further on it seems "cheap" to us, because you don't adjust for cost of living/purchase power parity.
As you know, the people actually making the iPhone in China, does not earn enough to buy them. That's why they are being produced in Asia. Cheap labour.
Norway's got a population of 4.8 million people and only two major GSM carriers (the rest buy air-time from the two big ones). But the law prevents carriers from making contracts that span over more than 12 months. Also, after that period carriers are obligated by law to unlock handsets.
If you adjust for median income/purchase power, Norway's way better off than most countries. Britain too. And of course, Norwegians can sell/use their phones for whatever they want after the first 12 months.
Oh, and btw, zero foreign competition.
Your only valid example is France, and though I'm sure you're right there is a lack of competition there: the high-end iPhone 3G 16GB cost £483 (unlocked, contractless), low-end 3G 8GB £404.
Compare that to the £380 iPhone 3g 8GB (when it first came out) PAYGO in UK - locked, forever.
Not too bad?
I won't specualte as to why some companies will unlock their handsets, even if not required to do so by law. But it's not interesting, with respect to the fact that locking do occur in some cases, and prevents competition.
I'm still waiting for proof as to what makes unlocking-practices bad for prices. Though I'm not holding my breath. Of course, there are other measures, though you mention _zero_. But that does not negate the fact that being able to unlock your device after the contract expires, will eventually increase competition and give lower prices.
Hong Kong is doorstep to China so that all those unlocked iphones are exported to China --- causing Apple to be unable to sign a distribution deal with any of the mainland Chinese carriers.
Who said it's Apple's decision to unlock the iphone in Hong Kong? The exclusive iphone carrier decides whether they sell the iphones unlocked or not.
Norway's iphone plans are obscene --- this is why competition matters and in a duopolistic Norway, it sucks big time.
http://forums.macosxhints.com/showthread.php?t=91195
Don't need government regulation to force unlocking codes because sufficient competition will force the carriers to offer unlocking codes voluntarily.
Who said it's Apple's decision to unlock the iphone in Hong Kong? The exclusive iphone carrier decides whether they sell the iphones unlocked or not.
Norway's iphone plans are obscene --- this is why competition matters and in a duopolistic Norway, it sucks big time.
http://forums.macosxhints.com/showthread.php?t=91195
Don't need government regulation to force unlocking codes because sufficient competition will force the carriers to offer unlocking codes voluntarily.
Apple haven't been able to make a deal with a Chinese carrier after at least two years with negotiations. That's why they have chosen to go the unlock-route with its official Apple Store in Hong Kong. Better to sell some unlocked handsets without the nice revenue-sharing, then nothing at all.
Your Norway-numbers are outdated. Today you can get an iPhone 3G 8GB for £90 on a 12 month £35 per month contract with free data.
The initial packages you linked to were obscene, because Apple only wanted one carrier. Then they understood how stupid that was. Apple's monopoly-granting is bad in itself, but it can potentially make them ********s of money. This time, however, it went too far.
Your argument goes like this: If O2 gets more competition from others, they will freely unlock potentially lucrative iPhones and lose money.
The harder the competition, the more eager carriers will be to unlock devices so that they can lose money, instead of locking customers in to more expensive deals.
This is ludicrous nonsense. Listen to your own words.
And even if you were right (which you are not), a law forbidding permanent locking would not harm.
Hong Kong has always been offered completely unlocked iphone from the beginning --- when mainland Chinese carriers were each boosting that they were "negotiating" with Apple. And carriers don't make money on the hardware, they make money off the service plans --- so your theory makes zero sense that the exclusive iphone carrier in Hong Kong is trying to make money from selling unlocked iphones in mainland China.
If you read the comment from the thread I cited --- Norway's iphone data plan was obscene, but it was commented by a member in the second comment that this obscene plan UNFORTUNATELY is still better than other Norway data plans. That's the power of lack of competition.
It makes perfect sense --- in the US, there were no iphone premium on their data plans (i.e. AT&T charges the same as other smartphone data plans). The only reason is that there are enough competition from a strong competitor (Verizon who was strong enough to say no to Apple). It just so happens that the best iphone plans come from Hong Kong (6 carriers), UK (5 carriers), US (4 carriers) --- and the worst complainers come from Norway (2 carriers), France/Canada (3 carriers).
Do you really think that today's AT&T announcement that they loosen up their iphone upgrading policy is due to a few angry twitters? No, it is really about yestersday's announcement by RIM that the new Blackberry Tour will be launched this summer for both Verizon and Sprint --- the same July/Aug/Sept that were loosened up by AT&T's new iphone upgrading policy.