Slashdot Mirror
EU Mobile Roaming Charges Scrapped (bbc.com)
From now on, European Union holidaymakers should return home without that sense of high anxiety about their mobile phone bill: extra fees for using it abroad should have gone. From a report: The new rules mean that citizens travelling within the EU will be able to call, text and browse the internet on mobile devices at the same price they pay at home. The European Commission said the end of roaming charges was one of the greatest successes of the EU. But a UK consumer group warned phone users could face "unexpected charges." Until now roaming, or connection, charges have been added to the cost of calls, texts and internet browsing when consumers from one EU country travelled to another and connected to a mobile network there.
We had an EU friendly phone plan. We drove to Andorra...great skiing, good food, nice hospitality. There was a thief in the Mountains, who waylaid our travelers....Andorra Telecom. They sent a message saying that we'd used 50 euro in data (for some google maps...an hour's drive maybe). We turned off data. Then, they shut off our phone for a 250 euro data charge, which had magically run up in that 45 minutes before the 50 euro shutoff message. Andorra Telecom put a black eye on an otherwise interesting place-they are a robber in the hills...so . F@!K Andorra Telecom.
That is not the worth of the EU, just a headline to catch attention. Besides this is not a small change - 10 years ago using a cellphone from Spain was 2 GBP per minute for calls in the UK. In USD that means at the time $4/minute.
.. and don't brexit, frexit, itexit, portexit etc.
You can always tell who is the American idiot kid posting; above is a perfect example. This is about the single market, which expands to the internet as well. There is no added cost for service as the legal regulations are exactly the same already. This simply ends the divisive practice of charging for cross-border usage in an otherwise economically unified territory. It cuts profits, and companies can't increase prices in competition without losing revenue.
The European Commission said the end of roaming charges was one of the greatest successes of the EU
If that is one of their "greatest successes" then the EU is a good approximation of worthless. Sure roaming charges are an issue but are a very minor problem in the grand scheme of things.
Pretty much like your opinion - very minor in the grand scheme of things. But since you've taken the time to help others understand that you're bored or incapable of posting something worth reading, why can't you talk about the good from this article where imaginary borders between 28 countries have just been dropped in a way that helps unite the people of Europe and reduce the overall individual's stress levels when dealing with technology and traveling? If anything, the rest of the world can follow suit and make this place more progressive with regards to technology...
That is not the worth of the EU, just a headline to catch attention. Besides this is not a small change - 10 years ago using a cellphone from Spain was 2 GBP per minute for calls in the UK. In USD that means at the time $4/minute.
Good news! Today that would only be USD$2.50/minute (ain't progress wonderful ;^b)
"EU Mobile Roaming Charges Scrapped" Sorry but the title is a filthy lie. EU included possibility for operators to be excluded from dropping prices so they're all going for it. Finlands been in the EU since 1995 and our customs agency are just now in 2017 starting to realize they've been illegally destroying millions worth of alcohol and charging tens of millions illegal extra taxes on import cars over decades. EU has no spine, muscles, teet or brain. They should be doing something about the tens of millions of unemployed european youth instead of making laws which won't take effect for decades.
Both T-mobile and Google Fi offer worldwide free roaming, the EU is years behind
-]Phreak Out[-
by that same token, so would skype or vonage.. since they also use the fucking internet via wifi to "roam".
It's not possible to legislate a cost into oblivion. Roaming costs will get moved into a different user fee.
Yes, there is a cost to roaming, and the cost will now be blended into the base fee instead of a separate cost.
BUT, roaming fees are an overpriced cash cow - the cost to provide the service is far, far less than the amount charged.
Your choices are pay the ludicrous roaming fee or be without your phone (or buy a temporary prepaid SIM in the new country).
So overall, most people will be better off with this new rule.
Both T-mobile and Google Fi offer worldwide free roaming, the EU is years behind
The EU is pushing this through regulation, because the companies weren't willing to do this themselves. T-Mobile and Google Fi aren't European based operators, as far as I am aware? In France there is one operator who offers a great plan, one that being resident in Canada seems excellent, if I only make outgoing calls: http://mobile.free.fr/ Ignoring the features for people using the phone in France, here are the out of country features (translated), all for 19€/month:
I have to pay my ISP $57/month in Canada, and I don't get any of those international features. Heck when I do travel it is $10/day for 100MB of data, which work out to be around $300/month for 3GB of data!? It is cheaper for me to get a SIM card when I go to a new country, even if it is just for a week. T-Mobile is great in the USA for the pay-as-you-go plans.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
T-Mobile has Deutsche Telekom as a majority owner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Sure roaming charges are an issue but are a very minor problem in the grand scheme of things.
You say that in the comfort of not knowing what it's like being able to walk across the border for lunch, or live in a house where depending on which direction the wind blows you get a message saying welcome to the Netherlands or welcome to Germany, or working in a different country from where you live, or those friends around the corner from you living in a different country.
Roaming charges in a place where countries are so densely packed that you can walk from one side to the other without any great effort are a huge frigging problem.
One thing that is very minor is your understanding of the rest of the world.
He's not all wrong. At least in Norway, all the plans that didn't already have roaming included have had their prices increased or the data allowance reduced.
My UK Vodafone contract already had EU roaming included in it when I went to Germany recently, so I knew that I could keep roaming turned on as I intended to use google maps and the like while I was away. However to get to Europe we took the ferry from Harwich to the Hook of Holland. on that ferry trip, my phone picked up the Telenor maritime cell signal from the ferry, which counts as "rest of world" at £6 per meg! I wasn't even using the phone. it had just been checking email etc while I was asleep. Woke to an £18 extra bill for that...
so be careful on the seas people...
Norway isn't in the EU. Try again.
Actually that is a great success. It means the government only interferes with business when business is hurting consumers.
Unlike say pai who is actively trying to turn internet in the USA into cable interactive television.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
Except that at least for fi, it isn't reliant on the internet to roam. When I was down in Mexico I wasn't on wifi most of the time, yet I was still roaming for free.
It is not free, but becaus it is now included in the regular cost, competition will mean it will overall be cheaper. Where I live, the cost of the cheapest usable subscription (1 GB data, phone and text included) went up by approx $4. For those who do not want a price increase, it is also possible to get a subscription without roaming at the old fixed cost, but then you cannot use the subscription at all abroad.
Norway is following the EU regulations on this (as on a lot other stuff).
T-Mobile is in the EU.
So, what did happen? This regulation has been in the works for ages. Companies knew it was coming and could prepare. Where I am, the average subscription cost (including cellphone) has raised with 22% in the last four years, in a period with ~0% inflation. I gave up on that, and went a SIM-only subscription for 15€/month. For that I got 6000 units (SMS/call) nationally, and 5GB data nationally. For roaming I paid on usage. If you don't roam often: You just make sure you don't exaggerate and use Wifi when possible. My last vacation, I had a full blown 4€ roaming bill, for one week of Portugal for two lines (my wifes line and mine). That's cheap.
Now, with the regulation, my cellphone provider gave me the following options:
In summary: Option 1. gives me less for the same money. I don't know how you feel about it, but being able to call or get called when you are abroad is an essential feature of having a cellphone. I could see this plan be useful for kids and teenagers, but not for normal mobile adults. Even adults like me who do a few vacations a year and perhaps a business trip or two.
Option 2, is basically: pay more, for getting less. Sure, you might argue that I get "more" in the sense I can call EU wide, but in the day to day case, I simply pay more.
Option 3 is really just pay much much more to get exactly what I had. I mean, that's 144€ per line, per year more, simply to keep the ability to roam and have "decent" amount of data.
Now, granted, if you are the cosmopolite Eurotrotter you will be better off. Keep in mind that those people are already people who earn a better living. So, basically, this really is the "poorer" (or more frugal) people subsidizing the richer people. Incidentally, the EU Commissioners are notorious Eurotrotters. For them this is awesome. For normal people much less. I do suspect a lot of self-interest.
It really depends a lot where you live. From what I heard, France kept to the intent of the EU regulation. Not raising prices, giving everyone everything for the same price. In Germany, for example, I have heard that many subscriptions also will lose the roaming feature, basically locking people to their home country.
I am not happy at all with this regulation. Especially, that the EU Commission conceded to the telcos on many things and basically made roaming worse or more expensive for low-usage people. You can't even escape, as they made sure "permanent roaming" isn't allowed. I can't get a Polish SIM and use it permanently here in Luxembourg.
Do note that I can't even escape to other operators nationally: they all have equally bad conditions. Some even much worse than my current one. For now I negotiated with my current operator to get the 27€ plan with a 55% discount for one year. So, I hope the markets normalize and I'll have better choice in 12 months. That is just a slim hope and I suspect I'll have to start paying the insane rates in a year.
Perhaps, I'll just go to a pay as you go plan, with roaming pay as you go. That is allowed in the regulation, just not if you have packages. I'll lose data then. Data is extremely expensive with pay as you go.
The worst part is that any first year economy student could have explained these consequences to them... I can't believe that they didn't have economic advisers on their overpaid panels.
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
This, some time ago they were celebrating some occasion and they made a video with the "achievements" of EU, scrapping roaming fees was rather central because of the lack of content.
Norway also happens to be a signatory to EFTA and the Schengen agreement.
Roaming charges in a place where countries are so densely packed that you can walk from one side to the other without any great effort are a huge frigging problem.
They are. But so is government interference in a free market.
The government (in this case, the EU) has no business dictating what pricing should be for a particular service, unless there are special circumstances like monopolies. It is very hard to argue that there is a monopoly or duopoly in most EU member States' cellphone market.
As a consumer, you have the choice to either accept whatever rate is being set, or to just go and get a local sim card in whatever country you are. Or, to choose a carrier who eliminates roaming charges without being forced by the government to do so.
For example, after living 35 years in the EU I moved to the US. Initially I chose AT&T as my cellphone service provider, but I switched to T-Mobile because T-Mo offers free international data roaming and text, and low rates for voice calls. I used to travel a lot, so that was important to me.
With the EU basically interfering with a privately owned company's business model, T-Mo's competitive advantage would be lost if this were to be interested in my current jurisdiction.
That's bad, and the EU needs to make a choice: either they keep their dirty politician fingers out of the market place, or they continue on the path towards the EUSSR.
And yes, I know this is an unpopular opinion which is likely to be downmodded, but I don't give a rat's ass about that.
I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
The government (in this case, the EU) has no business dictating what pricing should be for a particular service
Just like the US government has no business regulating interstate commerce.
Seriously though, the EU is not dictating what the pricing should be, they're only banning the use of a customers location within the EU from being a part of the pricing model. I'm pretty sure service providers can still charge based on call distance if they choose to, they just can't tack on a fee for calls being cross-border. It's a legitimate step to take in bringing Europe closer together.
Limited liability companies - all telco companies are that - exist only because the government allows them to. Free market fundamentalists like you often forget that. Don't want the government to meddle - accept unlimited personal liability.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
You're an angry closeted gay Republican who enjoys big black cock and is ashamed of it.
they're only banning the use of a customers location within the EU from being a part of the pricing model.
I don't think you understand what they are doing here. They are banning the charging of using a network that is not included in your service. They are banning the charging of using your service on a network that is not paid for by your subscription fees.
On top of that, many EU phone companies have already slashed their fees, in order to gain a competitive advantage. The EUSSR is now taking that away.
I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
all telco companies are that - exist only because the government allows them to. Free market fundamentalists like you often forget that
This law would apply to any network, including a mom&pop shop (if that would exist). So your argument is moot.
In a free market, the government steps in only when needed. And right now it's not needed because no single party has the power to abuse consumers.
I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
They are banning the charging of using a network that is not included in your service. They are banning the charging of using your service on a network that is not paid for by your subscription fees.
Yes, because the network boundaries very often correspond with national boundaries which it's the EU's role to break down. My bytes travel just fine all over the internet without me having to pay all the network providers involved and without me having to pay any special fees either. Peering arrangements are a thing. Why should mobile networks be any different. Next you'll be telling us you're against net neutrality.
The government (in this case, the EU) has no business dictating what pricing should be for a particular service
And the government is not. What it is is preventing arbitrary charges that cell carriers tack on for no reason based exclusively on which tower my phone happens to be connected to at a given time. The carriers still have the right to set whatever price they want, they just need to not arbitrarily screw a portion of the people.
As a consumer, you have the choice to either accept whatever rate is being set, or to just go and get a local sim card in whatever country you are.
Yes I have that right. The problem is the inefficiencies that causes. If each local SIM is tied to the same phone number then that's great. Unfortunately due to circumstances that I'll explain in a second no carrier here will currently offer dual-SIM or triple-SIM model phones in the EU. My neighbour just got a brand new dual-SIM Galaxy S7 from India.
That's bad, and the EU needs to make a choice: either they keep their dirty politician fingers out of the market place, or they continue on the path towards the EUSSR.
And now to the crux of it. You're against government intervention in a free market but ignore the way the market was setup in the first place. The entire telecoms industry was built on the back of government funds, in many cases by the government itself using government controlled resources (spectrum) and funded entirely by people. When you build something like this an privatise it (thanks to so many of you "anti-government" people) you end up with large government granted monopolies.
Government intervention in this case simply creates a resemblance of what the free market could have done if it weren't for the government messing the entire industry up in the first place.
Living in the EUSSR is great. We have healthcare, lots of holidays, cheap internet oh and now cheap phones now thanks to the government.
They are banning the charging of using your service on a network that is not paid for by your subscription fees.
Except that is an artificial delineation. Tell me what when two mobile phone towers are connected by a common fibre backbone by a common provider built by a common country, why should people be charged an exorbitant fee for one vs the other? Or why should a government granted monopoly reserve the right to charge a person several hundred times higher fee than the wholesale access price to a partner provider?
Yes, because the network boundaries very often correspond with national boundaries which it's the EU's role to break down.
Why would that be the EU's role? Again, network boundaries are a business decision, not a political decision. The EU should keep it's nose out of private businesses.
Peering arrangements are a thing. Why should mobile networks be any different.
Mobile networks are not any different and peering arrangements are a thing. What you are paying for with roaming fees is the privilege to access the network of a third party as if you were a subscriber there.
Let me give you an extreme and fictional example. We have LuxemCell and Deutsche Telekom. LuxemCell only provides services in Luxembourg, which is a tiny country. This means that LuxemCell does not need a lot of infrastructure and can charge a very low price for its services. DT on the other hand needs to maintain a large network in Germany, which has way higher costs. Why would DT be compelled to provide services to LuxemCell's customers without being able to charge for it? Because that's exactly what's happening here.
Next you'll be telling us you're against net neutrality.
I am indeed against the current implementation of "net neutrality", for exactly the same reason. No government should interfere with the configuration of a private network. If a government wants to dictate how I should transmit data frames on a network, they should build their own network. Stay off my lawn and off my network.
The whole term "net neutrality" is stupid and does not cover any of the technical aspects. Any network that needs "net neutrality" interference is an extremely poorly designed network in the first place. Reason for this is that in the simplest terms, "net neutrality" bans the prioritization of certain traffic over the other. That prioritization, called Quality of Service in networking terms, only comes into play when a particular link is 100% utilized. Any network which allows a subscriber traffic carrying link to be 100% utilized is poorly designed.
What "net neutrality" advocates should be fighting for is regulation that bans intentional interference with subscriber traffic. But that's something that, strictly speaking, should be a part of contract law. Reason for this is that I have a contractual relationship with my ISP, and I'm paying to have Netflix traffic delivered to my cable modem. I can reasonably expect my ISP to deliver those frames without intentional interference, or they would be in breach of contract. I should be able to sue for damages, not Netflix, or some stupid ass government agency.
Remember, you're asking for protection from the same government, that in other threads you'll blast for invasion of privacy when your ISP is compelled to hand over your browsing data.
Take a step back, look at it from 10,000ft (or 3km, in non-retard units) and think about it.
I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
Yes and if my aunt had a pair, she would be my uncle.
Like I said, limited liability, no personal responsibility, hence the government has to rein in this kind of companies. Mom and pop shops are not the reason any regulations are created because if they misbehave the owners will have to stand for it anyway. More importantly, they don't grow large enough to actually make a lot of damage.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
This is not a question of simple economics you make it out to be as it involves little or no actual increase in costs to the telcos, as most of them operate across the EU anyway, just as separate companies from one group. With this they merely take a loss in premium revenue, of course they could always put prices up to try and recover that but potential competition makes that scary. So what to do? Well there is one way to save money, consolidation and that was the EU's plan to begin with.
The EU don't really care about roaming as such, it's the principle of a single common market for selling services that they want. Right now if I buy from Amazon in the EU the majority of goods are being legally sold by Amazon EU S.a.r.L a consolidated entity for most of Amazon's EU sales. By contrast if I get a cellular contract in the EU I have to go to a different company in each country. By killing roaming the EU is actually trying to entice companies to merge their operations across countries and sell across the entire single market.
Roaming costs will get moved into a different user fee.
There are no real reasons for roaming fee nowadays except to fill the pockets of the providers.
At worst situation for the service provider, he needs to interconnect with another provider.
As most modern telephone back-end use voip (usually SIP), there aren't that many extra costs compared to a home call, and a cell tower is still a cell tower, no matter which country you're in.
At best for the service provider, it's the same parent company in both countries. The client isn't really roaming, he's just using 2 different local presence of the same parent company (e.g.: O2 is present in several EU-members countries. But it's still considered roaming if you're on O2 Germany, and calling from O2 Czech republic, etc).
So in other words, there's almost no justification for you to pay more than a few percents above what communications rates are at the local operator to which you're roaming while traveling in this country. (if it costs xxx eurocents for operator yyy to take a call for residents of a EU-country, it doesn't cost much more for the same operator to take the same call for somebody coming from abroad).
But until recently, operator had the habit to jack up prices by an insane factor when roaming (when travelling abroad, in a not so distant past, you'd be prepared to pay between 4x and 10x what the locals pay for their calls).
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]