The apple iphone seems to be taking shape ready to be unleashed on the consumer.  Apple could have made a serious mistake restricting the phone just to O2 on contract, lets face it, if you want a lot of sales of a new mobile then why restrict this to one network only.  Dealers don’t want to sell on O2 generally as the commissions are very bad, and if O2 think they are going to make a killing,  then they have missed the boat. 

There is now a serious demand for the consumer for unlocked iPhones, as one consumer put it, “why should I want O2 I want to choose who I connect with”  Fair point which is why there is now steadily a stream of unlocked mobiles.

O2 and iphone could find themselves not having the monopoly on sales, and Apple could be forced away from their updates after the results of the latest case in the USA, in California when Sprint lost the case of locking phones as it was deemed a barrier to competition.  In fact with another case being filed against apple for the same thing, then if that is the case, will someone challenge the uk networks in this country who lock their phones to their network? 

Will someone come up with the same argument in court that it is a barrier to competition and a detriment to the consumer?  Who at the end of the contract or even during it, must either pay to get the phone unlocked or buy another mobile on a different network, bearing in mind that not all mobiles are given free, and they may have paid a certain amount towards it.  The only problem with that is that it will hit the many companies that make a living unlocking mobiles, and I am not sure that it would be a good thing.

Will the iphone take off?  Maybe it’s the “I want one of those” phones at the moment although the reviews have not made this the all singing and dancing phone it was made out to be.

Congratulations to 3 networks for their long awaited Mix and match tariffs.  The consumers like it and so do dealers, and at last consumers have a choice in addition to T-Mobiles Flext, it’s the freshest thing on the market and at last 3 has done something useful, and it will be interesting to see if other networks come up with something similar, now that would give the consumer a great choice.

We all know for a long time that Orange commissions on upgrades have been reduced, especially to reduce the large amount done by call centres.  But now that Orange has banned the use of call centres for upgrades,  we would ask Orange if they could increase commission at least on the lower bands, so that at least existing customers coming into shops can be offered something.  The commissions are so low, you would be lucky to offer a Jaffa cake let along a low end mobile to upgrade.  We can understand the move to dump call centres doing upgrades, but shop owners are now very disadvantaged as a result.  Perhaps the network will at least look at this for next month in the run up to Christmas and at least give shop owners some Christmas cheer this year, come on Orange at least tell us you will consider it.

Ok its now October 2007, some time ago Orange  and indeed Three recently said they would be working towards pricing information fixed for 3 months.  This would have such an impact on dealers who would have stability and only have to worry about mid month updates. 

The question is where are they?  We openly ask the Directors of both networks to give us a date when this fixed 3 month structure will come into effect.  The fact that they have openly stated this is what they would be doing is commendable and we support such a move, which the dealers have wanted for a long time.  But it drags on and on and still no fixed pricing, so when are you going to if you will pardon me “Get your finger out” and do it.

The pricing updates each month are a major move for dealers who have to prepare their POS material etc for the following month.  Can the networks work together to agree between them to provide a standardised 3 monthly time period.  We are asking all the networks to give us or FONE an answer?

What’s in a word?  Many networks put out plans to the consumer which looks really good, even broadband operators entice customers in with the word “UNLIMITED”  but lets look at what it should mean.  The Oxford English dictionary the Encyclopedia of our fair tongue says of the word “unlimited” adjective not limited or restricted; infinite.  Now please note those words not limited or restricted; infinit.  Now some broadband companies have been hauled up and have been made to change their wording, so why are the networks who are the first to have a go at the dealers for saying things which are wrong doing it themselves.

Yes I refer to offers of unlimited texts and other offers they promote to consumers.  They then qualify this by saying subject to “fair usage”, ok this has been passed as ok by Ofcom, but sorry guys but if you are restricting this to fair usage which is a condition, then it cannot be described as unlimited because its not.  What they are really saying is that if you text masses and reach a certain level, then you will either get a warning or they will hit you with a charge or cut you off that is hardly unlimited.

Instead for example if fair use comes in at say 3,000 or 4,000 texts then why not advertise this as 3,000 or 4,000 texts per month a much more eye opening selling point than just “unlimited”.

A report just out says that Mobile phone companies are among the least trusted organisations by consumers to protect their personal details from identity thieves, a YouGov survey has reported.  It went on to say only 9% of consumers questioned said that they trust mobile firms and retailers, putting the industry 7th out of 9 in a 'trust league.' Only travel companies and gambling companies came lower.  With all the latest media news and debacle against mobile companies, perhaps all mobile firms including networks should go out of their way to explain to customers that their personal details are safe with them, we need as much trust as we can get, and dealers should not now be complacement on this even if the customer smiles and appears happy, the survey itself  proves otherwise.

First a personal observation, I think my calendar is the same as the rest of the uk, well at least I think it is!  What made me query it?  Well on the 15^th October what arrived?  A parcel from 3 networks, ah I thought Freebies or at least an invite to one of their forthcoming Christmas functions.  I opened it with anticipation, to find what?  Point of sale material for OCTOBER!!!

What made matters worse was the delivery ticket which proudly told me under description amongst other things POS GUIDE – Sept 07   WHAT!!!!

Its question time for the networks this week, so here is the first.

Come on 3 I appreciate the material, but please, its halfway through the month already, not only me but shop owners need this type of material BEFORE the start of the new month, perhaps this is another question for Sales Director Marc Allera to answer.  All businesses need a structured plan, but there is no plan when we get POS mid month, does that mean new mobiles and promotions in on the 1^st November that shop owners won’t have POS until the 15^th.  Sorry 3 only scored 2/10 for that one.

Have you noticed the disparity of the enable system? For a system that is supposed to help dealers, some strange things happen, for example on doing checks for band 1 customers there is plenty of information that comes up, but if you are a band 5 customer (a valuable resource) then in many cases you cannot find them on the system, or they ask you to get the customer to contact customer services, yet you can get the information via the tel automated system, I wonder why? Or is it Orange want to keep band 5 customers to themselves perhaps Orange would like to contact FONE and explain why.

Claw back is not something that dealers like, especially when they have no control on what the customer does.  An example might be a customer misses a payment or gets cut off.  Now Orange of course will ask for proofs and will then not claw back, BUT Vodafone, O2 and T-Mobile will.  So we have to ask WHY?  We have to ask the networks, why claw back dealers, when YOU have credit checked customers, and what is the point of asking for proofs if the liability is going to fall on the dealer, surly you have to take some of the risk, especially if YOU have passed them in the first place.  It seems in the case of those networks that there is no point whatsoever in asking for proofs, as it’s not going to protect dealers, so wwe ask those 3 networks to explain the point in us asking for and keeping proofs.

Another thing networks have to answer is why they insist on contacting customers directly with no thought of the dealer.  Time and again as part of the customer service, dealers have spoken to their customers only to find the network has upgraded them before the end of their contract.  The networks need to realise that the customer is NOT THEIRS!.  The customer could take their custom to a different network if they choose to. Networks should NOT contact customers to upgrade but advise the dealer, he is the one that has a relationship with them, he is the one they turn to for advice, he is the one that actually looks after the customer, what do the networks offer, a faceless call centre operator that has no interest in the customers problems all they are interested in is poaching the customer away from the dealer.  Come on networks be fair, and give us a guaranteed statement that you will not bypass dealers and upgrade customers before end of contract.

What do the networks want?  Customers of course and happy dealers!  So why is it that the networks treat dealers the way they do?  The networks show very little regard for the indirect channel irrespective of the very high % of total connections this produces. The talk of the importance of “business partners”, “dealers”, “channel partners” or whatever the phrase of the year/network is banded about but means nothing when in reality we all feel the squeeze from the networks all the time. It is difficult to think of any other industry where the vast sums of revenue generated by dealers are treated with such contempt as the cellular one.

The lateness of the price books just illustrates the lack of planning and thought from the networks and again further antagonizes relationships and the talk of stability, reducing churn, adding value and building ARPU.   It is bad business practice and an insult to dealers when the networks do not even have the courtesy to prepare a credible schedule for the start of a month’s business.

Some dealers have still got September posters in store because it takes time to get new ones designed and printed, that could be 1 week into the new month.  Also dealers need to get pricing info, with realistic handset forecasts which networks should commit to (don't put a MDA Vario 3 on your November price book, when there's no stock till February), all by the 24th of the previous month, so that dealers can hit the ground running on the 1st.

You would think networks would work with dealers to ensure a smooth transition from one month to the next but no!  Consistently pricing books have been late, and as we have reported before Avenir has been late time and again through no fault of their own why?  Because they have been waiting for changes from the networks to hit their desk.  This has resulted in the final version of the pricing book being 3-4 days into the new month.

Increasingly 3 network has been at fault, late all the time, the question is why?

Let’s be sensible about this 3 even if you bring out a new tariff to rival others why leave it until the last day to issue it?  Even if you let distributors and dealers know 5 days in advance a rival network is not going to be able to get up a tariff to challenge that in that time, and on the 1^st of the month it’s in the public domain anyway.  In any case you as a network must leak bits to the media as it’s always being reported by someone what’s coming in the following month, so please give the dealers a chance.

One suggestion to come out of the dealer community sometime ago which Orange said they would work towards but which has not yet become a reality, is for networks to all agree to produce pricing which is locked for a 3 month period, this would then give stability and consistency and Then it would not matter when the price books got to you as you would be able to produce consistency and not cram connections in before the end of the month. 

Meanwhile we openly invite Sales Director Marc Allera to tell us at the IMPDA or “FONE” magazine why they are consistently late issuing information to distributors which causes the delay and what he intends to do about this in future so that dealers can have the information at least 3-4 days ahead so as to be ready in time.

Roger Godsiff MP for Birmingham, Sparkbrook & Small Heath, launches the debate on Cashback at Westminster, where a call was made to the Minister for the networks contributions towards Ofcom running costs to be put into the public domain.   Richard Benyon MP for Newbury, gave suprise that the Network operators had not had a meeting with the IMPDA, and suggested that they should do so as soon as possible.  He also said "undoubtably some of the networks providers may have encouraged certain activites which in the wrong hands by independent dealers may be open to question".  The IMPDA now awaits the Network operators to contact them to address this situation.

PRESS RELEASE

A historic moment took place today as 20 dealers representing the whole of the UK Mobile Phone dealers and at the invitation of the IMPDA met for the first time with regulator Ofcom in London.  The UK dealer network has never before had the opportunity to give their views or suggestions on the industry, historically Ofcom has engaged in talks with Networks but the heart of telecoms, the dealer has always been left out.

A wide ranging discussion took place, with Ofcom being apprised of the working relationship between dealers and Networks, and in depth discussions on the cashback crisis involving the consumer.

Chris Caudle chairman of the IMPDA said “This is indeed a first for the UK dealer network, for years dealers in the country have asked to be listened to and generally been ignored by networks. 

The fact that Ofcom is now prepared to hear what dealers have to say and take on board the suggestions they give to the betterment of the consumer, and to push for change in the industry is applauded.  The industry needs now more than ever to change, and the time has come for the networks to work with UK dealers and not against them, both in communication and in competition.  With the discussions held today with Ofcom we are of the opinion that the change for the industry starts here today, and we are pleased that Ofcom has listened to our views and suggestions and agreed to further discussions with us in the future.

The consumer needs to be protected and UK dealers need to be able to compete and not be dictated to or stifled in their business by the networks.  We now look to 2008 as the year fair trade is returned to UK dealers and better protection for the consumer