Network load is increasing for all networks and they look like they're struggling, giffgaff (my mvno of choice) has just had to reduce their value by changing tariffs as the data load was simply to much and everyone was suffering as a result.
Bearing this in mind all the networks now seen keen to increase loads even further with 4G when I'd think a decent HSDPA connection would suit the vast majority of users and be way more manageable for the networks.
Another example of business (the big operators) looking after their own businesses, whilst developing their business models to bring sales channels in-house.
However, it always amazes me that as a population we forget that people come before businesses. Although the latter supply and often employ the former, they are less important in the community scale of hierarchy and depend on there being sufficient people with disposable income to buy their wares. A constant drive to maximise profit, measured always over the short term, is simply unsustainable if it generates to lower employment for the sake of profit (i.e. the neo-liberal way).
Problem is that P4U is a otherwise successful organism with no food supply (contracts). It really irks me that the mobile companies can pull the rug from under these kind of third parties, but short of putting a gun to their heads (and boy is that tempting sometimes!) I cannot see how the consumer or government (especially this one!) could force them to "play nice".Originally Posted by Jowsey
I remember reading somewhere that P4U and CPW were a good force for the consumer since it forced the networks to compete head to head in a sort of "economic darwinism". So if O2, for example, had a better value deal than Vodafone (not difficult from my experience) then P4U/CPW would be selling more O2. You can get this from wandering up and down the high street and dipping into each of the relevant shops, but with the 3rd parties you could compare directly and easily.
Imho what's desperately needed is some true competition, even if that was Asda/Tesco with their own offering (rather than MVNO'ing EE and O2). Three - despite their god awful service - did at least get my respect for doing exactly that, keeping the evil coven of EE, O2 and Voda from getting too complacent.
Lord, this whole conversation is getting me down - more than the awful weather here or #indyref.
Career status: still enjoying my new career in DevOps, but it's keeping me busy...
Trust me when I say no retail mobile store sold more of one network due to value to the consumer, it's always been about pushing whichever network was offering the most money to the the retailer.They sold as much as possible depending on who was paying the most, the networks have simply figured that they can do it cheaper themselves.
giff gaff use o2, so it's either them not wanting to pay for more bandwidth (or too expensive) or it's down to o2 being useless. It's likely a combination as o2 are pretty useless.
while not upgrading the network to cope with the new 'unlimited' packages etc lolBearing this in mind all the networks now seen keen to increase loads even further with 4G when I'd think a decent HSDPA connection would suit the vast majority of users and be way more manageable for the networks.
Where I live I have to make a choice, do I go for the ability to make phone calls or the ability to browse the web on my phone...
vodafone - great call coverage, useless data, can't even get decent 2g speeds let alone 3g, even outside
o2 - yeah lets not go there, they don't manage either
t-mobile - I can get 3g and phone calls if I literally stand in the corner of the house or go outside... yeah that's practical
three - well there's several masts around here supposedly, closer than vodafone too yet I can't pick it up though
I know where all my local masts are and they're all well within the range of 3g signal AND decent phone calls, not to mention you can't really get much flatter land than norfolk lol
It's not my phone as I've tried several different phones. I could get a femtocell but why would I want to pay for mobile usage that's using my broadband, I may as well just use voip or the house phone....
As to phones4u... can't say I'm surprised to be honest, you just have to look at how the phone companies pretty much ignore ofcom (is it them for mobile) about coverage etc and the new merger of pcworld/cpw means they can take a lower 'cut'. Not to mention the phone companies looking over at the US mobile market and their 'methodology' on keeping customers, it started a fair while back with the shift from 12 month to 24 month minimum contracts with phones.
Erm, first, the company hasn't been cloed outright. Not yet, anyway.
Second, directors MUST keep a careful eye on the solvency of a company they are directors of. This is not optional. It is company law, and not doing so can result in personal liability, or in extreme cases, criminal prosecution. Even jail.
So the question is, in the absence of the Vodaphone and EE contracts, was Phones4u still "solvent". The fact that it "forced" into "administration" suggests not, especially with comments from those companies about Phones4u having said they had little room for commercial contract negotiations due to debt repayment levels. Whether a company is solvent or not isn't a straightforward matter, and all sorts of financial indicators can suggest it is not. But essentially, can the company honour it's commitments, and pay what it owes?
By the sound if it, Phones4u was rather debt-heavy. So it may have been profitable, operationally at least, on a P&L basis, but it could well have been balance-sheet insolvent. And, losing those contracts may well well have resulted in going from barely solvent, to insolvent, meaning the directors now owe a fundamental duty to creditors, over either their own or shareholder's interests.
At that point, there are several options, depending on the exact situation. One, a CVA or company voluntary agreement, is probably the best IF the situation permits. The use of administration suggests it was not.
So what is administration? It's a process whereby outside experts are appointed, through a court process, to run the company, so as to maximise benefit to creditors .... which includes HMRC, employees, holders of protected assets like debentures or secured loans, and, of course, unsevured trade creditors.
An administrator will, IF it maximises creditor benefits, run the company as a trading operation, perhaps restructure, and sell as a going concern. Jobs, etc, would be protected. But that may not be viable. It may close operations, sell assets piecemeal or as a whole, and liquidate the company.
But because it's a court-run process, administration also gives some protection to the company against predatory creditors, such as one bank or loan company grabbing assets becsuse it fears another might.
And the first thing an administrator has to do is a full assessment of the situation, which means a judgement call on how to proceed maximising benefits and minimising costs.
So, shops MIGHT close (minimising losses) while it takes a good look, then they might (or some might) re-open. Or might not.
But what is clear is that administration doesn't necessarily mean the company closes completely .... though I wouldn't bet against it in this case. Also, far from "silly", the financial situation may well, and indeed almost certainly did, mean the directors had no choice but to act.
From what I've seen, my guess is that Phones4u may well have been struggling, what with those debt payments, to keep noses above water, and that the loss of these contracts simply meant they had no choice at all but to do this.
Saracen, my view/understanding of P4U's use of 'forced into administration' was more to do with the fact they didn't have a business model anymore, P4U at a basic level was a shop selling phone contracts under 'license', this 'license' is no longer in place so they have nothing to sell. If they could still sell the contracts like in the past they could have likely continued to fulfil the loan/debt repayments (note I'm not their accountant lol), lots of companies take out loans etc and then pay them off over a period of time.
At a fundamental level you can't remain profitable if you have nothing to sell etc so this might be more of a process to protect what assets it does have and come up with a new business model while minimising losses, a bit like what happened with Jessops and HMV.
EE and 3 are horrific they really are , ended up in court against 3 (and won - got a CCJ against them) , even sent baliffs round.... and amazingly the store called the police and shut the doors to the ballifs! seems 1 rule for us and 1 for them
anyway , they are all about the same , although currently 02 are the best for us here
I watched Micro Anvika go through that, and going into administration was the absolutely last resort.
The article made it look like they decided over the weekend to give up. I would have expected there to be months and months of negotiations, loads of store closures and may be even directors lending cash to the company.
Being in the commission business I would also expect P4U to have money coming in from EE for the next 3+ months. I remember back in the day T-Mobile used to take absolutely ages to pay Micro Anvika for Blackberry contracts sold in store.
True enough.
The distinction I would draw though is that a company isn't obliged to be profitable. It is required, legally required, to be 'solvent'.
For instance, most new companies aren't profitable for several years. Part of the risk of starting one is financing it through that, keeping it solvent.
It is, IMHO of course, the collapse of that business model that would have turned the company insolvent. They have commitments, expenses and, of course, those debts, hanging round their neck. With contracts in place, presumably, revenues were sufficient to service that, though perhaps, just barely. But lose those contracts and it's very likely that they lost the ability to pay creditors, loan repayments, etc. I would suspect that it's an unprecedentedly large, unsustainable and unrecoverable hit to take. And that would trigger the 'insolvent' judgement.
Being insolvent can build slowly, or can arrive in a snap. A friend ran a company that derived about 75% of it's income from one customer. It was very profitable. But when that customer's needs changed, and he lost them, the company would have become insolvent in a hurry had he not acted. Fortunately, he knew (or strongly suspected) it was coming, restructured the firm's operations and a director bought out the restructured company which operated in a different field, and my friend retired. There were no debts, and permanent (non-contract) staff were minimal, so insolvency wasn't an issue in the time frame, but had there been lots of debt to service, it'd probably have been 'insolvent' the moment he read the letter not renewing the contract.
Insolvency can build over months, or appear out of nowhere.
Cellnet is technically O2 now. But like you my first phone was £10 a month from the Link on cellnet.
Never brought from Phones 4 U or Carphone warehouse in over 10 years. All my buys are online from companies that offer unlocked phones, cheaper prices and from the comfort of my home without pesty sales people who generally don't know much.
Funny how the best value network (Three) has generally the smallest stores on the high street. Perfect example of lower costs passed onto the customer for better value. (Aka Richer sounds Syndrome)
Carphone Warehouse should be safe considering Dixon Stores Group just brought them under their umbrella.
Tell that to The Link
Dareos (20-09-2014)
Ah well, there's your problem, you need to be under the level of the mast - so the signal can travel downhill and doesn't get tired as a result!
Not sure what net you're on, but when I've been fortunate enough to be able to travel to Norwich on business I've got pretty good signal. Especially that bit around Carrow Road - really fast transfers, was able to do a fairly major Linux Mint OS upgrade just using my handy T-Mobile WiFi hotspot with no real issues.
Yep, the switch to enforced 24 month contracts is why I continue to go SIM-free - yes it means a shed load of dosh up front, but it does put me in the driving seat when negotiating contracts.
Presumably the police told the Three folks (politely of course) stop being a donkey's back end and settle up. After all, I thought baliffs were court-sanctioned so perfectly within their legal rights, etc.
Career status: still enjoying my new career in DevOps, but it's keeping me busy...
I'm actually with vodafone because I need phone calls more than data and round here they are the strongest, luckily there's plenty of places with free wifi now. Having said that I can go into King's Lynn which is about 10mins up the road and get good signal from all of them, and I think it might have 4g on a couple. I can walk 5mins up the road and I get no signal outside, there is a complete dead spot in my village lolAh well, there's your problem, you need to be under the level of the mast - so the signal can travel downhill and doesn't get tired as a result!
Not sure what net you're on, but when I've been fortunate enough to be able to travel to Norwich on business I've got pretty good signal. Especially that bit around Carrow Road - really fast transfers, was able to do a fairly major Linux Mint OS upgrade just using my handy T-Mobile WiFi hotspot with no real issues.
Norwich might as well be another country around here, it's the biggest city in Norfolk so it's going to get 'everything' while the rest of us pick up the scraps lol
Since the Merger with Dixons, I think Carphone Warehouse will be reasonably safe, at least for the foreseeable future. Dixons have/had around 160 P4U concessions in branches up and down the country, it wouldn't surprise me if they do something to help the staff that worked in these shop-in-shop branches, which I think were due to be closing after May 2015 when the P4U lease arrangements would have come to an end anyway.
its a shame less choice for consumers, the better way to get deals now is through sites like uswitch, omio and mobile comparison websites to get a better deal. I also hope consumer pressure group which will help clamp down on their contract prices when there trying to take the middle man like CPW and phones4u
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
