Mobile and broadband firms accused of fuelling UK ‘greedflation’ with
major price hikes
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jun/27/mobile-and-broadband-firms-accused-of-fuelling-uk-greedflation-with-major-price-hikes

"Analysis published by the Guardian today reveals that six companies
controlling most of the telecoms market all charged a 3.9 percentage
point supplement on top of their annual inflation-linked increases this
year."

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 28/06/2023 11:11, Java Jive wrote:
> Mobile and broadband firms accused of fuelling UK ‘greedflation’ with
> major price hikes
> https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jun/27/mobile-and-broadband-firms-accused-of-fuelling-uk-greedflation-with-major-price-hikes
>
>
> "Analysis published by the Guardian today reveals that six companies
> controlling most of the telecoms market all charged a 3.9 percentage
> point supplement on top of their annual inflation-linked increases
> this year."
>
The article fails to acknowledge that electricity prices for businesses
has more than trebled since March 2023.

I do agree though, the companies need to be far more transparent with
their costs, and how they arrive at these increases

Java Jive wrote:

> "Analysis published by the Guardian today reveals that six companies
> controlling most of the telecoms market all charged a 3.9 percentage
> point supplement on top of their annual inflation-linked increases this
> year."

Top "analysis" by the Guardian!

O2: "Each year, your Airtime Plan will be increased by the RPI rate of
inflation announced in February plus 3.9%"

EE: "Each year, we adjust the prices of our products and services in
line with the Consumer Price Index (CPI) rate of inflation, plus 3.9%"

Vodafone: "Every year in April, we increase your monthly bill by the CPI
(UK Consumer Price Index), plus 3.9% to cover the increasing costs of
running our network"

Three: "Your Monthly Charge will increase annually each April by an
amount up to the December CPI Rate, published in January of that year,
plus 3.9%"

I wonder what the office junior did for the remaining 7h56m of the day?

On 28/06/2023 11:42, Andy Burns wrote:
> Java Jive wrote:
>
>> "Analysis published by the Guardian today reveals that six companies
>> controlling most of the telecoms market all charged a 3.9 percentage
>> point supplement on top of their annual inflation-linked increases
>> this year."
>
> Top "analysis" by the Guardian!
>
> O2: "Each year, your Airtime Plan will be increased by the RPI rate of
> inflation announced in February plus 3.9%"
>
> EE: "Each year, we adjust the prices of our products and services in
> line with the Consumer Price Index (CPI) rate of inflation, plus 3.9%"
>
> Vodafone: "Every year in April, we increase your monthly bill by the
> CPI (UK Consumer Price Index), plus 3.9% to cover the increasing costs
> of running our network"
>
> Three: "Your Monthly Charge will increase annually each April by an
> amount up to the December CPI Rate, published in January of that year,
> plus 3.9%"
>
> I wonder what the office junior did for the remaining 7h56m of the day?
>
The national newspapers, and now following the local ones with 'cut and
pasted' drivel, without analysis.

On 28/06/2023 in message <kg2h44F3802U1@mid.individual.net> Andy Burns
wrote:

>Java Jive wrote:
>
>>"Analysis published by the Guardian today reveals that six companies
>>controlling most of the telecoms market all charged a 3.9 percentage
>>point supplement on top of their annual inflation-linked increases this
>>year."
>
>Top "analysis" by the Guardian!
>
>O2: "Each year, your Airtime Plan will be increased by the RPI rate of
>inflation announced in February plus 3.9%"

Plus Net did the same.

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
You can't tell which way the train went by looking at the tracks

Jeff Gaines wrote:

> Andy Burns wrote:
>
>> O2: "Each year, your Airtime Plan will be increased by the RPI rate of
>> inflation announced in February plus 3.9%"
>
> Plus Net did the same.

I'd love to know how they all happen to have come up with the +3.9% bit
independently? At first I assumed it was some maximum allowable by
OFCOM, but that isn't the case, they're investigating ...

On 28/06/2023 11:55, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>
> On 28/06/2023 in message <kg2h44F3802U1@mid.individual.net> Andy Burns
> wrote:
>>
>> Java Jive wrote:
>>>
>>> "Analysis published by the Guardian today reveals that six companies
>>> controlling most of the telecoms market all charged a 3.9 percentage
>>> point supplement on top of their annual inflation-linked increases
>>> this year."
>>
>> Top "analysis" by the Guardian!
>>
>> O2: "Each year, your Airtime Plan will be increased by the RPI rate of
>> inflation announced in February plus 3.9%"
>
> Plus Net did the same.

So this is price-fixing. Are you saying that the Guardian are wrong to
report it?

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

Java Jive wrote:

> So this is price-fixing.

Not exactly, there are all sorts of starting prices, just that they
happen to go up at RPI+X% or CPI+X%, if you shop around (or even renew
contract without moving) it's still possible to pay less or get more.

On 28/06/2023 13:07, Andy Burns wrote:
> Java Jive wrote:
>
>> So this is price-fixing.
>
> Not exactly, there are all sorts of starting prices, just that they
> happen to go up at RPI+X% or CPI+X%, if you shop around (or even renew
> contract without moving) it's still possible to pay less or get more.

The point of the report seems to be that seemingly all or nearly all of
the market are upping their prices by inflation (however measured) +
3.9%. However achieved, the commonality of the 3.9% part seems like
price-fixing to me.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 28/06/2023 in message <u7h670$1opbs$1@dont-email.me> Java Jive wrote:

>On 28/06/2023 11:55, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>
>>On 28/06/2023 in message <kg2h44F3802U1@mid.individual.net> Andy Burns
>>wrote:
>>>
>>>Java Jive wrote:
>>>>
>>>>"Analysis published by the Guardian today reveals that six companies
>>>>controlling most of the telecoms market all charged a 3.9 percentage
>>>>point supplement on top of their annual inflation-linked increases this
>>>>year."
>>>
>>>Top "analysis" by the Guardian!
>>>
>>>O2: "Each year, your Airtime Plan will be increased by the RPI rate of
>>>inflation announced in February plus 3.9%"
>>
>>Plus Net did the same.
>
>So this is price-fixing. Are you saying that the Guardian are wrong to
>report it?

I said "Plus Net did the same." I said nothing about the Graudian
reporting it.

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
Tell me what you need, and I'll tell you how to get along without it.

On 28/06/2023 14:16, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> On 28/06/2023 in message <u7h670$1opbs$1@dont-email.me> Java Jive wrote:
>
>> On 28/06/2023 11:55, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>>
>>> On 28/06/2023 in message <kg2h44F3802U1@mid.individual.net> Andy
>>> Burns wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Java Jive wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Analysis published by the Guardian today reveals that six
>>>>> companies controlling most of the telecoms market all charged a 3.9
>>>>> percentage point supplement on top of their annual inflation-linked
>>>>> increases  this year."
>>>>
>>>> Top "analysis" by the Guardian!
>>>>
>>>> O2: "Each year, your Airtime Plan will be increased by the RPI rate
>>>> of inflation announced in February plus 3.9%"
>>>
>>> Plus Net did the same.
>>
>> So this is price-fixing.  Are you saying that the Guardian are wrong
>> to report it?
>
> I said "Plus Net did the same." I said nothing about the Graudian
> reporting it.

I was guilty of some ambiguity there: I was intending to use your
additional example to illustrate the price-fixing, thus showing to those
back in the thread history who had criticised The Guardian that the
newspaper was right to cover the story, but did not make this
distinction clear in my reply, for which apologies.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 28/06/2023 in message <u7hc3q$1pbpl$1@dont-email.me> Java Jive wrote:

>On 28/06/2023 14:16, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>On 28/06/2023 in message <u7h670$1opbs$1@dont-email.me> Java Jive wrote:
>>
>>>On 28/06/2023 11:55, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>>>
>>>>On 28/06/2023 in message <kg2h44F3802U1@mid.individual.net> Andy Burns
>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Java Jive wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Analysis published by the Guardian today reveals that six companies
>>>>>>controlling most of the telecoms market all charged a 3.9 percentage
>>>>>>point supplement on top of their annual inflation-linked increases  this
>>>>>>year."
>>>>>
>>>>>Top "analysis" by the Guardian!
>>>>>
>>>>>O2: "Each year, your Airtime Plan will be increased by the RPI rate of
>>>>>inflation announced in February plus 3.9%"
>>>>
>>>>Plus Net did the same.
>>>
>>>So this is price-fixing.  Are you saying that the Guardian are wrong to
>>>report it?
>>
>>I said "Plus Net did the same." I said nothing about the Graudian
>>reporting it.
>
>I was guilty of some ambiguity there: I was intending to use your
>additional example to illustrate the price-fixing, thus showing to those
>back in the thread history who had criticised The Guardian that the
>newspaper was right to cover the story, but did not make this distinction
>clear in my reply, for which apologies.

No probs :-)

It looks like price fixing to me too, wonder if it's worth contacting the
competition authorities?

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
George Washington was a British subject until well after his 40th birthday.
(Margaret Thatcher, speech at the White House 17 December 1979)

"Jeff Gaines" <jgnewsid@outlook.com> writes:

> On 28/06/2023 in message <u7hc3q$1pbpl$1@dont-email.me> Java Jive wrote:
>
>>On 28/06/2023 14:16, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>>On 28/06/2023 in message <u7h670$1opbs$1@dont-email.me> Java Jive wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 28/06/2023 11:55, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 28/06/2023 in message <kg2h44F3802U1@mid.individual.net> Andy
>>>>> Burns wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Java Jive wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Analysis published by the Guardian today reveals that six
>>>>>>> companies controlling most of the telecoms market all charged a
>>>>>>> 3.9 percentage point supplement on top of their annual
>>>>>>> inflation-linked increases  this year."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Top "analysis" by the Guardian!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> O2: "Each year, your Airtime Plan will be increased by the RPI
>>>>>> rate of inflation announced in February plus 3.9%"
>>>>>
>>>>>Plus Net did the same.
>>>>
>>>> So this is price-fixing.  Are you saying that the Guardian are
>>>> wrong to report it?
>>>
>>> I said "Plus Net did the same." I said nothing about the Graudian
>>> reporting it.
>>
>> I was guilty of some ambiguity there: I was intending to use your
>> additional example to illustrate the price-fixing, thus showing to
>> those back in the thread history who had criticised The Guardian
>> that the newspaper was right to cover the story, but did not make
>> this distinction clear in my reply, for which apologies.
>
> No probs :-)
>
> It looks like price fixing to me too, wonder if it's worth contacting
> the competition authorities?

Some of the price rises are not 3.9%

TalkTalk CPI + 3.7% Mar 2021
Shell Energy Broadband CPI + 3% Oct 2021
Community Fibre CPI + 2.9%* Dec 2021

All price rises could be blamed on the energy prices, which in turn
could be blamed on lockdown, and Russia.

On 28/06/2023 16:56, Richmond wrote:
>
> Some of the price rises are not 3.9%
>
> TalkTalk CPI + 3.7% Mar 2021
> Shell Energy Broadband CPI + 3% Oct 2021
> Community Fibre CPI + 2.9%* Dec 2021
>
> All price rises could be blamed on the energy prices, which in turn
> could be blamed on lockdown, and Russia.

In the absence of a smiley, I have to assume that you're being serious
in blaming energy prices on lockdown. :-(

There was a temporary increase in energy prices as the world came out of
lockdown, but that was a year or more ago, the main driver in the long
term has been the Ukraine War. It's so typical of today's dishonesty in
politics that anything and everything else is used to blame our economic
condition rather than the failed economic policies of those who have had
over a decade in charge of it.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> Mobile and broadband firms accused of fuelling UK ‘greedflation’ with
> major price hikes
> https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jun/27/mobile-and-broadband-firms-accused-of-fuelling-uk-greedflation-with-major-price-hikes
>
> "Analysis published by the Guardian today reveals that six companies
> controlling most of the telecoms market all charged a 3.9 percentage
> point supplement on top of their annual inflation-linked increases this
> year."

Hardly a surprise as it's been written in every contract and made very
clear. This is simply them doing as they said they would.

The real problem is OFCOM never put a cap on it, plus allowed the
supplement to be so high.

And finally, last year the major providers all removed 12-18 month
contracts so anyone with a recent contract is locked into two big price
hikes.

Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>> Mobile and broadband firms accused of fuelling UK ‘greedflation’ with
>> major price hikes
>> https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jun/27/mobile-and-broadband-firms-accused-of-fuelling-uk-greedflation-with-major-price-hikes
>>
>> "Analysis published by the Guardian today reveals that six companies
>> controlling most of the telecoms market all charged a 3.9 percentage
>> point supplement on top of their annual inflation-linked increases this
>> year."
>
> Hardly a surprise as it's been written in every contract and made very
> clear. This is simply them doing as they said they would.
>
> The real problem is OFCOM never put a cap on it, plus allowed the
> supplement to be so high.
>
> And finally, last year the major providers all removed 12-18 month
> contracts so anyone with a recent contract is locked into two big price
> hikes.
>
>

That’s just not true about the removal of 12 to 18 month contracts. Yes,
the operators push the 24 month contracts, but shorter contracts have
always been available, but at a higher price. In fact a quick look today
shows 24/12/1 month radio buttons on their sim only front pages.

Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> writes:

> On 28/06/2023 16:56, Richmond wrote:
>> Some of the price rises are not 3.9%
>> TalkTalk CPI + 3.7% Mar 2021
>> Shell Energy Broadband CPI + 3% Oct 2021
>> Community Fibre CPI + 2.9%* Dec 2021
>> All price rises could be blamed on the energy prices, which in turn
>> could be blamed on lockdown, and Russia.
>
> In the absence of a smiley, I have to assume that you're being serious
> in blaming energy prices on lockdown. :-(
>
> There was a temporary increase in energy prices as the world came out
> of lockdown, but that was a year or more ago,

The dates up there are in 2021.

But the effects of lockdown are much longer term anyway. Some people are
still working from home. Can you show that the effects of lockdown were
temporary? or is that just your opinion?

On 28/06/2023 18:24, Richmond wrote:
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> writes:
>
>> On 28/06/2023 16:56, Richmond wrote:
>>> Some of the price rises are not 3.9%
>>> TalkTalk CPI + 3.7% Mar 2021
>>> Shell Energy Broadband CPI + 3% Oct 2021
>>> Community Fibre CPI + 2.9%* Dec 2021
>>> All price rises could be blamed on the energy prices, which in turn
>>> could be blamed on lockdown, and Russia.
>>
>> In the absence of a smiley, I have to assume that you're being serious
>> in blaming energy prices on lockdown. :-(
>>
>> There was a temporary increase in energy prices as the world came out
>> of lockdown, but that was a year or more ago,
>
> The dates up there are in 2021.
>
> But the effects of lockdown are much longer term anyway. Some people are
> still working from home. Can you show that the effects of lockdown were
> temporary? or is that just your opinion?

It depends what effects we are talking about ...

By definition, the effects of lockdowns on energy prices were undeniably
temporary, because we have long since returned to normal. If now more
people are working from home, that is just part of a new normal because
the pandemic showed them that they could do it.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 28/06/2023 11:11, Java Jive wrote:
> Mobile and broadband firms accused of fuelling UK ‘greedflation’ with
> major price hikes
> https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jun/27/mobile-and-broadband-firms-accused-of-fuelling-uk-greedflation-with-major-price-hikes
>
> "Analysis published by the Guardian today reveals that six companies
> controlling most of the telecoms market all charged a 3.9 percentage
> point supplement on top of their annual inflation-linked increases this
> year."
>

I have just come to the end of a 2 year contract with TalkTalk and
signed up for another 2 years - and its now £2 a month cheaper than the
last renewal.

--
random signature text inserted here

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>> Mobile and broadband firms accused of fuelling UK ‘greedflation’ with
>>> major price hikes
>>> https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jun/27/mobile-and-broadband-firms-accused-of-fuelling-uk-greedflation-with-major-price-hikes
>>>
>>> "Analysis published by the Guardian today reveals that six companies
>>> controlling most of the telecoms market all charged a 3.9 percentage
>>> point supplement on top of their annual inflation-linked increases this
>>> year."
>>
>> Hardly a surprise as it's been written in every contract and made very
>> clear. This is simply them doing as they said they would.
>>
>> The real problem is OFCOM never put a cap on it, plus allowed the
>> supplement to be so high.
>>
>> And finally, last year the major providers all removed 12-18 month
>> contracts so anyone with a recent contract is locked into two big price
>> hikes.
>>
>>
>
> That’s just not true about the removal of 12 to 18 month contracts. Yes,
> the operators push the 24 month contracts, but shorter contracts have
> always been available, but at a higher price. In fact a quick look today
> shows 24/12/1 month radio buttons on their sim only front pages.

Sorry to be unclear, but I didn't mean they permanently removed them. For a
while before christmas to a bit after apart from a couple of exceptions the
12/18 months contracts went missing.

On Wed, 28 Jun 2023 12:16:11 +0100, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk>
wrote:

>Jeff Gaines wrote:
>
>> Andy Burns wrote:
>>
>>> O2: "Each year, your Airtime Plan will be increased by the RPI rate of
>>> inflation announced in February plus 3.9%"
>>
>> Plus Net did the same.
>
>I'd love to know how they all happen to have come up with the +3.9% bit
>independently? At first I assumed it was some maximum allowable by
>OFCOM, but that isn't the case, they're investigating ...

The Guardian article explains that. BT led the way. Others followed.
It was explained that Vodafone felt they were unable to make their
uplift more than 3.9% as it might attract criticism, but anything less
was money left on the table.

In uk.telecom.broadband Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> On 28/06/2023 13:07, Andy Burns wrote:
> > Java Jive wrote:
> >
> >> So this is price-fixing.
> >
> > Not exactly, there are all sorts of starting prices, just that they
> > happen to go up at RPI+X% or CPI+X%, if you shop around (or even renew
> > contract without moving) it's still possible to pay less or get more.
>
> The point of the report seems to be that seemingly all or nearly all of
> the market are upping their prices by inflation (however measured) +
> 3.9%. However achieved, the commonality of the 3.9% part seems like
> price-fixing to me.

When I phoned up Plusnet to cancel my impending switch to them, on the
grounds that their 'fixed' price contract wasn't, using significant weasel
words (it said it was fixed in big letters, but the CPI+3.9% was in the
small print), the guy I spoke to was grumpy that I was cancelling and whined
that 'everyone does it, there's no point going elsewhere'.

Which sounds like an admission of price fixing.

(although not necessarily collusion)

Theo

Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> writes:

> On 28/06/2023 18:24, Richmond wrote:
>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> On 28/06/2023 16:56, Richmond wrote:
>>>> Some of the price rises are not 3.9%
>>>> TalkTalk CPI + 3.7% Mar 2021
>>>> Shell Energy Broadband CPI + 3% Oct 2021
>>>> Community Fibre CPI + 2.9%* Dec 2021
>>>> All price rises could be blamed on the energy prices, which in turn
>>>> could be blamed on lockdown, and Russia.
>>>
>>> In the absence of a smiley, I have to assume that you're being serious
>>> in blaming energy prices on lockdown. :-(
>>>
>>> There was a temporary increase in energy prices as the world came out
>>> of lockdown, but that was a year or more ago,
>> The dates up there are in 2021.
>> But the effects of lockdown are much longer term anyway. Some people
>> are
>> still working from home. Can you show that the effects of lockdown were
>> temporary? or is that just your opinion?
>
> It depends what effects we are talking about ...
>
> By definition, the effects of lockdowns on energy prices were
> undeniably temporary, because we have long since returned to normal.
> If now more people are working from home, that is just part of a new
> normal because the pandemic showed them that they could do it.

This doesn't sound normal to me:

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2023/jun/28/one-in-10-gcse-year-pupils-absent-from-english-schools-each-day

And note that energy prices affect everything, because everything
requires energy to produce.

https://theconversation.com/energy-prices-how-covid-helped-them-to-surge-and-why-they-wont-go-down-any-time-soon-175679

On 29/06/2023 19:36, Richmond wrote:
>
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> writes:
>>
>> It depends what effects we are talking about ...
>>
>> By definition, the effects of lockdowns on energy prices were
>> undeniably temporary, because we have long since returned to normal.
>> If now more people are working from home, that is just part of a new
>> normal because the pandemic showed them that they could do it.
>
> This doesn't sound normal to me:
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/education/2023/jun/28/one-in-10-gcse-year-pupils-absent-from-english-schools-each-day

Nothing to do with energy prices.

> And note that energy prices affect everything, because everything
> requires energy to produce.

Indeed, but ...

> https://theconversation.com/energy-prices-how-covid-helped-them-to-surge-and-why-they-wont-go-down-any-time-soon-175679

.... that article is over a year old, before the beginning of the Ukraine
War, so unsurprisingly doesn't mention it. As already pointed out and
still quoted above, the rise in prices after lockdown was a temporary
effect. The predominant factor keeping prices high now is the war, and
the need for the world to find alternative sources of energy to those
from Russia.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 28/06/2023 11:37, Mark Carver wrote:
> On 28/06/2023 11:11, Java Jive wrote:
>> Mobile and broadband firms accused of fuelling UK ‘greedflation’ with
>> major price hikes
>> https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jun/27/mobile-and-broadband-firms-accused-of-fuelling-uk-greedflation-with-major-price-hikes
>>
>> "Analysis published by the Guardian today reveals that six companies
>> controlling most of the telecoms market all charged a 3.9 percentage
>> point supplement on top of their annual inflation-linked increases
>> this year."
>>
> The article fails to acknowledge that electricity prices for businesses
> has more than trebled since March 2023.
>
> I do agree though, the companies need to be far more transparent with
> their costs, and how they arrive at these increases

would that be my electricity or theirs ????