Meteor are lame

KevArno

seabre wrote: »

OK reality check - In the world of business and using my own position as an example - If I had agreed to provide my service to someone at an agreed price and subsequently offered another deal to a different customer - the reality is that if the 1st customer finds out and wants the same deal as the second I have to give in and offer the same deal - Why? Because if I dont 2 things will happen: The first customer will simply walk away leaving me with no payment whatsoever, and 2 they will have a terribly low opinion of me and will be sure to spread that to everyone they meet. Oh and genuine customers dont get "suddenly aggrieved" unless they are given cause to! I would point out that in 5 & 7 years they have never found themselves "suddenly aggrieved" before! Not typical of awkward or unreasonable people!

Now the difference here is the size of the company involved and the means by which they have available to them to recover the costs of the original contract.

Dont forget no one here is suggesting they walk out of a contract - They are merely seeking the opportunity to extend it for a further 2 years - and reap the benefit open to other customers for doing so.

I am far from on a high horse - perhaps your view from yours is clouding your judgement?

What are you talking about??? Customers get treated differently in all aspects of life. A prime example of this in the business we are talking about is that extremely high paying, generally business customers are sometimes offered early upgrades. They are dealt with by their own reps who have the authority to process these things. That is pretty normal in reality. You need to understand that some, and a small percentage of customers will cost you a lot of money to keep happy. They are not good customers. You say that Meteors size allows them to recover the cost of the early upgrade?? I really think you need to rethink that. If Meteor do not enforce their contracts then this will happen more often, to the point where (and I covered this earlier) their accounting may as well be chucked.

You cannot please all people all of the time, and you don't have to.

And yes, customers DO become suddenly aggreived, very regularly infact...in all types of business. You do your best to please customers while it makes financial sense to do so, and when they are still not happy you cut your losses.

And by the way, apologies for the high horse comment, its probably past my bed time!

Miss.Marple

Just adding my tuppence worth:D!!I do feel Meteor reward their new customers with new phones etc,however long standing customers are the last to avail of the new phones,offers etc,,it just doesnt seen fair.Could not move in the Meteor shop i was in today it was soo busy with people wanting the iphone..so many of them seemed to fail in their quest though for some rule or other,,which is fair enough..just know from experience that i was a loyal customer yet new customers were getting way better deals than me..i did get some joy with them when expained this just overall the system IMO doesnt seem very fair at timesReward the newbies,to hell with the loyalties:D:D:mad:

KevArno

Miss.Marple wrote: »

Just adding my tuppence worth:D!!I do feel Meteor reward their new customers with new phones etc,however long standing customers are the last to avail of the new phones,offers etc,,it just doesnt seen fair.Could not move in the Meteor shop i was in today it was soo busy with people wanting the iphone..so many of them seemed to fail in their quest though for some rule or other,,which is fair enough..just know from experience that i was a loyal customer yet new customers were getting way better deals than me..i did get some joy with them when expained this just overall the system IMO doesnt seem very fair at timesReward the newbies,to hell with the loyalties:D:D:mad:

If you are not in contract, then there are very simple ways around this!

seabre

KevArno wrote: »

And by the way, apologies for the high horse comment, its probably past my bed time!

Apology accepted and I probably shouldnt have thrown it right back at ya!

We are obviously NEVER going to agree on this one and I am much too tired to argue anymore - I am just genuinely confused by Meteor policy on this one -
Why not give long standing customers the choice to avail of this - the consequence being they loose out on a further 5 months of 20 euro - but they gain 2 years of 45 a month! Much better than the customer walking away after the remainder of their present contract which will be an inevitability and thats assuming they dont just walk away now without seeing through the contract!

bd250110

Miss.Marple wrote: »

IMO doesnt seem very fair at timesReward the newbies,to hell with the loyalties:D:D:mad:

in the industry it's called churn. Basically new customers will always be offered better deals as it it the number of customers added that bonuses are calculated on. Retentions may have authority to match customers to new deals, or give them appropriate discounts. They basically have a pot of money and what remins at the end of the day is their bonus, so thye will do the absolute minimum to keep customers, unless customers have a bad experience or have broken their phone, most will not have shopped around not know the deals, be woowed by a "free" phone and are cheap to keep.

muboop1

Hmmm...

Here's my 2c from a purely mathematical POV.

Meteor sell a Galaxy S to a customer 12 months ago. They pay 100 for the phone, and agree to a bill of 30 per month. (price of phone at christmass i believe).

18*30=540 + initial 100 euro, totaling 640. The total revenue gained in the transaction.

Galaxy S retails around 430 or so. Now... we know companies sell these at a subsidized price... however I am unsure as to how much that is.

Ignoring for a moment the subsidization, the company would make

640-430=210

If this customer broke contract 6 months early, the loss on this would be
6*30=180

Meaning they now only have 30 euro.

This 30 euro is completely ignoring ALL infrastructure, staffing costs, insurance, rent and most directly the subsidization!! (plus many other factors i have not included.

By meteor allowing the customer to break contract 6 months early they cannot possibly make a profit. They would in fact make a loss!

And fine the customer has been with them ages, but even I can see they would be mad to work at a loss.

So you argue that it would be worth it because they can make money off him next time? I argue that this would be bad business practice. What if he does this next time to?

Firstly you have to consider that the value of money today is worth more then that same money in a year due to inflation, and ultimately that cash could be put to work to in turn earn more money etc.

Secondly, we do not know the margins available on the meteor price plans. I'd guess in many cases they are quite low. Meteor are the cheapest network, this must cut into their profit earned per customer. Vodafone charge 45 quid for 150 mins, 150 texts and 500mb data. Meteor do the same for 30 a month with 50 more mins and texts as well as double the data (both 18 months btw).

They clearly must have much lower profits then vodafone, unless vodafone are really wasteful. Vodafone would likely be in a much better position to allow a customer to upgrade sooner as they have likely started making profit earlier in the contract.

bd250110

I agree 100% with the poster above. The only thing I would say is that the accountants would assign a certain amount against each monthly payement for the equipment subsidy, but looking at it over the life of the contract, you are bang on.

Just as an indication, in the UK in order to get a 3 month early upgrade on 02 UK you need to have spent over £1000 in the preceding 12 months, assuming you are on an 18 month contract.

Kensington

Miss.Marple wrote: »

Just adding my tuppence worth:D!!I do feel Meteor reward their new customers with new phones etc,however long standing customers are the last to avail of the new phones,offers etc,,it just doesnt seen fair.Could not move in the Meteor shop i was in today it was soo busy with people wanting the iphone..so many of them seemed to fail in their quest though for some rule or other,,which is fair enough..just know from experience that i was a loyal customer yet new customers were getting way better deals than me..i did get some joy with them when expained this just overall the system IMO doesnt seem very fair at timesReward the newbies,to hell with the loyalties:D:D:mad:

Look at it this way. Meteor are already making €x a month off you. Why do they need to do anything for you as long as you pay up each month? Now, if you left Meteor, they're no longer making any money off you and will throw all sorts of wonderful things at you. Not to mention the other networks who'd happily throw equally decent offers at you.

seabre

muboop1 wrote: »

Hmmm...

Here's my 2c from a purely mathematical POV.

Meteor sell a Galaxy S to a customer 12 months ago. They pay 100 for the phone, and agree to a bill of 30 per month. (price of phone at christmass i believe).

18*30=540 + initial 100 euro, totaling 640. The total revenue gained in the transaction.

Galaxy S retails around 430 or so. Now... we know companies sell these at a subsidized price... however I am unsure as to how much that is.

Ignoring for a moment the subsidization, the company would make

640-430=210

If this customer broke contract 6 months early, the loss on this would be
6*30=180

Meaning they now only have 30 euro.

This 30 euro is completely ignoring ALL infrastructure, staffing costs, insurance, rent and most directly the subsidization!! (plus many other factors i have not included.

By meteor allowing the customer to break contract 6 months early they cannot possibly make a profit. They would in fact make a loss!

And fine the customer has been with them ages, but even I can see they would be mad to work at a loss.

So you argue that it would be worth it because they can make money off him next time? I argue that this would be bad business practice. What if he does this next time to?

Firstly you have to consider that the value of money today is worth more then that same money in a year due to inflation, and ultimately that cash could be put to work to in turn earn more money etc.

Secondly, we do not know the margins available on the meteor price plans. I'd guess in many cases they are quite low. Meteor are the cheapest network, this must cut into their profit earned per customer. Vodafone charge 45 quid for 150 mins, 150 texts and 500mb data. Meteor do the same for 30 a month with 50 more mins and texts as well as double the data (both 18 months btw).

They clearly must have much lower profits then vodafone, unless vodafone are really wasteful. Vodafone would likely be in a much better position to allow a customer to upgrade sooner as they have likely started making profit earlier in the contract.

Yes the maths cannot be disputed here - however you have not factored in the loss that meteor will make if and when these and other customers walk away.

Speaking personally I spend on average 65 per month, if I see out my contract before I walk away they will rec a further 325 fr me. No more then - I walk away. Had they offered me the iphone and 2 year contract they would be guaranteed a further 1080 - 1560, for me its a no brainer for them - bearing in mind the old adage "a bird in the hand......"

IMO they have got this wrong - Im not saying anything can be done about it bar a good argument and a great deal of bargaining down the phone! But I genuinely dont see the business logic behind this.

KevArno

seabre wrote: »

Yes the maths cannot be disputed here - however you have not factored in the loss that meteor will make if and when these and other customers walk away.

Speaking personally I spend on average 65 per month, if I see out my contract before I walk away they will rec a further 325 fr me. No more then - I walk away. Had they offered me the iphone and 2 year contract they would be guaranteed a further 1080 - 1560, for me its a no brainer for them - bearing in mind the old adage "a bird in the hand......"

IMO they have got this wrong - Im not saying anything can be done about it bar a good argument and a great deal of bargaining down the phone! But I genuinely dont see the business logic behind this.

But a bird in the hand is f*ck all good if the thing is dead and weighing you down... There is no point in having a customer that is only going to cost you money. As a company they will have acceptable levels of return as minimums for every customer. If the spend doesn't add up to required levels, and the cost of subsidising a new handset puts them in a position where they may lose money, or simply not make the required returns on the customer then they need to be cut loose.

I applaud the fact that you seem to be of the mentality where you would do anything for your customers, and its great to see, but you need to understand that it simply isn't good business sometimes.

muboop1

seabre wrote: »

Yes the maths cannot be disputed here - however you have not factored in the loss that meteor will make if and when these and other customers walk away.

Speaking personally I spend on average 65 per month, if I see out my contract before I walk away they will rec a further 325 fr me. No more then - I walk away. Had they offered me the iphone and 2 year contract they would be guaranteed a further 1080 - 1560, for me its a no brainer for them - bearing in mind the old adage "a bird in the hand......"

IMO they have got this wrong - Im not saying anything can be done about it bar a good argument and a great deal of bargaining down the phone! But I genuinely dont see the business logic behind this.

We are going to have to agree to disagree!

I value more not making a loss on a current direct income stream that is just starting to see a profit, then on effectively going into debt with the same customer again.

I would be effectively effectively writing off their current debts in the hope to make some more profit off them down the line. Considering they are getting a 600+ phone for free... it would be approx a year before I could see a return... on the second investment after writing off the first... Not for me!

krudler

superfish wrote: »

They are not losing out in the long run if the op decides 12 month into his 18 month contract he wants a new phone, he would have to pay for the upgrade and sign into a new contract a minimum of 12 or more month even if he gets the upgrade for free meteor are still making a profit thats how you hold on to your customers and keep them happy

I love how people who have zero idea how the phone industry works just assume the networks get phones for free, they don't. How are they making a profit on giving the customer 2 phones when they havent even fulfulled the contract for 1 yet?

who is this

krudler wrote: »

I love how people who have zero idea how the phone industry works just assume the networks get phones for free, they don't. How are they making a profit on giving the customer 2 phones when they havent even fulfulled the contract for 1 yet?

Yes, I agree that obviously the network needs to be careful how it operates the contracts, but it also needs to look at the bigger picture.

Depending on the figures, in some cases allowing the customer to break the contract would obviously be in their interest, if say it were all of the following: A previously reliable customer (probably one who frequently has excess call/data/text charges) nearing the end of the current contract, upgrading from a plan whose profit margin is sufficiently smaller than the new plan that the loss on the old broken contract can be absorbed as an expense of signing the new contract.

Obviously in such a scenario they can just write it off, on the basis that, if they try and hold out till you finish the current one, you may switch, and the fact that they'd make SOME profit allowing you to break the last, balances out in favour of breaking the contract.

UPC do this when they change the broadband packages, but usually this has no new equipment needed so even a slight reduction in the charge right away may be worth locking you into a new contract.

But I imagine these cases are the minority: you would probably need to be spending a lot above your current committment.

I know Vodafone are always at my dad to upgrade before the end of his contract (often several months before) though I'm never quite sure why...

Kristopherus

krudler wrote: »

I love how people who have zero idea how the phone industry works just assume the networks get phones for free, they don't. How are they making a profit on giving the customer 2 phones when they havent even fulfulled the contract for 1 yet?

They don't get them for free, but they do get them at huge discounts to the actual wholesale price because of the quantities they buy. They make a profit on the sale of phones at very low levels.Whatever peeps views are about this threads issue, rest assured that the mobile providers have a very low level they must reach to make a profit.

who is this

Kristopherus wrote: »

They don't get them for free, but they do get them at huge discounts to the actual wholesale price because of the quantities they buy. They make a profit on the sale of phones at very low levels.Whatever peeps views are about this threads issue, rest assured that the mobile providers have a very low level they must reach to make a profit.

Your source? I find it very hard to believe that say a Galaxy S2 costs a network below 350€ incl. VAT (the minimum I would say to call it a "low level").

And even then I imagine it's much more than this.

muboop1

Kristopherus wrote: »

They don't get them for free, but they do get them at huge discounts to the actual wholesale price because of the quantities they buy. They make a profit on the sale of phones at very low levels.Whatever peeps views are about this threads issue, rest assured that the mobile providers have a very low level they must reach to make a profit.

Thats actually not the way it works, at least not in Ireland. The companies here purchase the phone, lock it (generally) and sell it at a loss. They rely on having locked the phone to ensure that they gain money back over time through spend.

There may be certain exceptions, but in general that's how it is!

who is this

muboop1 wrote: »

Thats actually not the way it works, at least not in Ireland. The companies here purchase the phone, lock it (generally) and sell it at a loss. They rely on having locked the phone to ensure that they gain money back over time through spend.

There may be certain exceptions, but in general that's how it is!

Well I find it hard to believe they sell prepay phones at a loss. I bought my Galaxy S unlocked for a good deal less than Meteor were selling it locked for, and the retailer I bought it from obviously made a profit.

KevArno

Even prepay phones are subsidised by the networks...

And the discounts they get from distributors are not as great as you would think. We are specifically talking about contracts here, and the operators genuinely do not see a return until well into the contract period for the majority of customers.

As was mentioned earlier in the thread, companies and their investors see the contacted customers as assets, with a certain return expected in due course based on the contract period, it simply does not make sense to keep bringing forward upgrades and postponing seeing a return on some customers. It would depreciate the customers value in the companies books.

eyesofvenus

Mimikyu

This post has been deleted.