News - EE fails to capitalise on its 4G exclusivity

[kingpotnoodle]

EE's LTE is theoretically speed comparable to BT Infinity...

How in hell do you really think you'll get a fixed line comparable speed with unlimited or voluminous data for a lower price than Infinity? Really? Dream on!

[Biscuit]

Buy it from 3...

Point is noone does want to pay for it, there isnt the demand for it, they got it wrong. Comparing it to another service where there is a demand and the prices have been paid is pointless.

People have voted with their wallets... end of story.

Quote from this article

“If the price of a service is well above a consumer’s income or disposable spending levels then they are simply not going to buy it,” says Jaco Fourie, senior BSS expert at Ericsson. “If you have more than 100 per cent penetration in a market then you might get a bump from the early adopters when you first launch [a new technology] but when you get to the mass market you will grow at GDP—end of story.”

[kingpotnoodle]

True, but thats how they advertise it. They say its appropriate for fast HD streaming then don't give you enough monthly bandwidth to actually do it.

It's badly advertised, it's got worse allowances than 3G per £, the deals are pants. But to suggest (as some seem to) that for the same price (or less) what EE should do is make it nigh-on unlimited data is unworkable given the reality of mobile phone networks.

LTE will eventually improve data coverage, reduce dead spots and create more reliable networks... it won't in the near term mean we can all go around watching cats on Youtube 24/7, people who think it will fell for the marketing bollocks.

[Biscuit]

It's badly advertised, it's got worse allowances than 3G per £, the deals are pants. But to suggest (as some seem to) that for the same price (or less) what EE should do is make it nigh-on unlimited data is unworkable given the reality of mobile phone networks.

Well i think another harsh reality of this is that people probably wont care until the deals they get with it are inline with the deals they get on 3G now. Slowly more and more people will seep across as the competition between providers increases and prices go down, but 3G is enough for most things you want to do on the move. I would take lower speeds with no limits over high speeds with pathetic limits any day of the week, especially when the no limits is cheaper!

Anyway, this isnt about what we expect, this is about what EE expected, which was a rush of people paying through their nose for a new technology regardless of the price. If either the limits, or the prices (or both) had been more sensible they would have done a lot more business.

LTE will eventually improve data coverage, reduce dead spots and create more reliable networks... it won't in the near term mean we can all go around watching cats on Youtube 24/7, people who think it will fell for the marketing bollocks.

Indeed they did.... or didn't as the case seems to be

[watercooled]

EE's LTE is theoretically speed comparable to BT Infinity...

How in hell do you really think you'll get a fixed line comparable speed with unlimited or voluminous data for a lower price than Infinity? Really? Dream on!

What's the point in a higher speed network if you can't do anything remotely high-bandwidth on it? Any way you cut it, the prices EE are charging for any tier of data are a joke. 'Unlimited' on mobile networks will have an asterisk after it, leading to a FUP saying reasonable use of mobile applications, not abusing it with tethering etc. I don't think anyone's expecting completely unlimited usage for cheaper than VDSL, in fact expecting 'unlimited' mobile use is completely reasonable for the price they're expecting, or even a few tens of GB cap.

With a 500MB data cap and current pricing, I don't really see the point of LTE over HSPA unless you must have teh latest thing. If their back-end can't handle more than a few people updating social networking sites, why advertise HD video streaming, as others have said?

[Hicks12]

I pay £15 for my broadband once you cut out tv and other things, thats for a 60Mb/s line with no limits (none that cause me to pay more!), you really cant compare to different services so lets go back to the actual issue.

If you cant use this high speed network for videos and stuff what is the point? Do you need 50mb/s for loading webpages? No you dont, the point is EE is really advertising it as this solution to mobile video and general data usage, with 3g I can get unlimited data for A pittance compared to EE and yet with 3g I can if I really wanted to watch netflix and stuff,all I need is a good signal which EE dont provide lol.

[Jonj1611]

Apart from what everyone else has said, the EE website is truly dreadful, its an awful experience and not one I would like to repeat using. I have moved to Three, fairwell EE or T-Mobile or Orange or whoever the hell you are now.

[Noli]

So I think we're all agree then.

They're idiots who have offensively assumed that their potential customers are stupid when they're not and everyone can see what's going on.

[crossy]

So I think we're all agree then. They're idiots who have offensively assumed that their potential customers are stupid when they're not and everyone can see what's going on.

T-Mobile/EE are driven by their marketing department, not engineering. E.g. the debacle over YouFix contracts for Android phones where either the SKU wasn't coming up on the CS folks' terminals and/or the internet provision would mysteriously "disappear" at the start of a new billing cycle.

My missus summed up this story as "so at the moment this 4G stuff is really only worth having if you're impatient enough to want that email a fraction of a second quicker ... or you just like showing off your latest toy to your pals". Don't think I'll disagree with that assessment.

[Brewster0101]

The day three enter the 4G market with their exact same price plans, is the day all other networks can forget about 4G

[kingpotnoodle]

The day three enter the 4G market with their exact same price plans, is the day all other networks can forget about 4G

I just don't believe this will happen, or their 4G will be over subscribed and no better than current HSDPA services.

If you make the wireless part higher bandwidth and/or more available (better coverage) then people will obviously use it more and so the fixed line backhaul has to also be enhanced and that doesn't come for free. I'm not sure how 3 expect to be able to profitably intro 4G for the same price as 3G (which has been driven right down by price wars) given that they're going to need to spend shedloads on equipment, have paid hundreds of millions on the licence and will need to enhance their whole network to cope. If it does happen I assume Hutchison have deep pockets are are going to use 4G as a loss leader to grow their customer base and profit later when the technology matures and running costs come down.

I really think EE are getting it all wrong, the advertising strategy of "watch HD movies on the move" is blatantly rubbish given the data caps and people have obviously seen through it. The pricing would be OK if it actually delivered on promises but it doesn't and so customers are sticking to 3G tariffs which they're thinking are "unlimited" although they never really are. 4G is in theory better even if the maximum bandwidth and monthly allowance was the same as 3G, there are reasons to upgrade if it's sold right.

EE are just making a headache for themselves by encouraging people to treat wireless services like a fixed line when it isn't, it's just not currently possible to deliver data as reliably and cheaply as a fixed line service can but so many people seem to think they should get cheap mobile internet that's as fast as they're home connection for less money! EE would be better making sure coverage was better and promoting the data services everywhere you are, internet, email, maps, apps, chat whatever angle. Certainly it fits the branding better, they're Everything Everywhere not EndlesslyBuffering Everywhere.

[Biscuit]

I just don't believe this will happen, or their 4G will be over subscribed and no better than current HSDPA services.

If you make the wireless part higher bandwidth and/or more available (better coverage) then people will obviously use it more and so the fixed line backhaul has to also be enhanced and that doesn't come for free. I'm not sure how 3 expect to be able to profitably intro 4G for the same price as 3G (which has been driven right down by price wars) given that they're going to need to spend shedloads on equipment, have paid hundreds of millions on the licence and will need to enhance their whole network to cope. If it does happen I assume Hutchison have deep pockets are are going to use 4G as a loss leader to grow their customer base and profit later when the technology matures and running costs come down.

This is where the public WILL FALL for the marketing. It doesn't matter if it will actually be any quicker in practice, if you put 3G = £15 and 4G = £15 then people will buy it, regardless of network limitations. I really dont think that the majority of the public are going to think, 'hmmm i think 3 are going to be oversubscribed so im going to pay £10 more and use the exclusive 4G EE/Vodaphone offer instead'
My impression of what 3 are doing is that they are not explicitly selling 4G as a separate product. So if you have a 4G phone and you are in a 4G area, you get 4G. The restrictions will be pretty much as they are on the current over-subscribed 3G networks but occasionally it might be a bit faster. Its just not an exclusive service.... simple.
I always thought this was how it was going to happen to be honest which is what shocked me when EE appeared with their bonkers contracts. This way round people don't expect a huge amount more than what they are used too, which is accurate because in practice when a country is as densely populated as the UK its unlikely they will get it.

What EE are doing is saying, 'LOOK AT HOW AWESOMELY BETTER THIS IS*, GIVE US ALL YOUR MONIES'




*in very small parts of the country

... EE would be better making sure coverage was better and promoting the data services everywhere you are, internet, email, maps, apps, chat whatever angle.

So all the services that have very little benefit from LTE?

[Spud1]

The day three enter the 4G market with their exact same price plans, is the day all other networks can forget about 4G

Until people remember just how awful 3's customer service is (even compared to EE's, which is an achievement!) and start complaining that their "4G" speeds are sub 5mb/s as their network quickly saturates. Being the only player to offer a half-decent price plan at the introduction of 4G is suicide imo..yes you grab lots of customers on 2years+contracts, but you'll have a lot of unhappy ones.

Personally I love having 4G on my iphone..with EE. Speeds are consistently excellent (around manchester), signal strength is great, and I use it daily to stream from iTunes match in my car on the way to-from work.

The difference is that I don't pay for it - it's a work phone with a 4gb/month limit, and that is just about the right amount for my usage.

If I was paying for this personaly I would cost me upwards of £50/month which is insane - and that is EE's biggest problem..the cost. The service itself is excellent and apart from some problems getting started, it has been flawless ever since (2 months and counting).

Importantly aside from being able to stream from iTunes match more reliably/faster, my usage profile hasn't really changed. It's still horrible trying to watch TV/Films on a mobile phone, it's still utterly pointless trying to download huge files on a mobile phone..so it really hasn't changed *what* I used my phone for. It does have a huge effect on browsing speeds though (so much faster/more reliable, its like being on wifi) and on browsing the app store, syncing/backing up to iCloud, and especially on-the-go mapping etc...they are faster and better as a result.

I wouldn't even begin to defend their awful pricing model, but you really don't need as much data as you think just because it's faster - ask youself what you will really use it for.

[watercooled]

@kingpotnoodle: As I keep saying, the current plans are 'unlimited' as far as a mobile user is concerned, hence why I keep sticking it in quotes. The same could be said about home broadband, a lot of companies including Sky, VM, BT offer 'unlimited' packages, but if you download at full speed 24/7 they won't be happy with you - those networks aren't close to being capable of handling sync speed transfers to every user simultaneously. Provided there's a FUP to prevent people from tethering and downloading tons of data, for example, 'unlimited' access shouldn't be a great deal harder than it is with HSPA. 3's 'all-you-can-eat' analogy is a good one IMO - you can go to such a restaurant and help yourself to food, but try taking everything to your table...

As for cell data, EE might be advertising speeds like 50Mbps, and it's quite possible if you're close to a lightly utilised cell, but the air interface is shared between users connected to the cell.

I agree with Biscuit, not selling LTE as a separate product is a better way to do it, although I can't say I'm surprised EE chose to go that route - it's a new shiny badge, so why not milk customers for a while, at least until they get some competition? 3 apparently put a lot of effort into their backhaul, and the cost of lighting more fibre (companies lay a *lot* more strands than they need, as the cable is cheap) isn't really that great considering the new RAN equipment they need anyway.

And as people keep basically saying, what the heck is the point in upgrading if you're so tied down with data limits you can't do anything you couldn't do perfectly well anyway?

[kingpotnoodle]

So all the services that have very little benefit from LTE?

So you've fallen for the marketing too then ;-)

Everything benefits from 4G/LTE because what the technology *should* eventually mean is that coverage is much better, reasonable data services are more available and there are fewer not-spots... LTE has better range and signal propagation, it supports a signal on fast moving devices better (i.e. a phone on a high speed train), latency is lower etc - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LTE_(te...tion)#Features the actual number of Mb sustained throughput is just one feature and not really the most useful one.

However what the public are being told 4G means is "what you used to use your phone for is so last century darling, watching streamed HD video when you should be watching where you're going is what all the cool cats are doing".

[pp05]

I suspect the early high price was a mixture of a) first to market and b) aimed at the business customer first who could benefit from such speed increase.

Here is the thing: how are they supposed to price it if all they are offering is a pipe. It doesn't make sense to offer say 2gb at £10 p/m. The only way then to increase their revenue then will be to sabotage your product that you will upgrade to next one up.