Jonathan Jensen on Thursday – Thinking about mobile tariffs

Recently I’ve been canvassing opinion about tariffs. I asked the question ‘How many mobile tariffs meet the basic tenets of simplicity & predictability?’ Every answer I received was ‘none’, which got me thinking. What should tariffs look like and is anyone offering ‘customer friendly’ tariffs yet? Mobile tariffs expect customers to guess what their usage will be. If you over-shoot it costs a fortune, if you under-shoot you’re wasting money.

New service providers in the market are starting to provide a glimpse of what true convergence can deliver and this is starting to simplify tariffs. The distinction between fixed and mobile communications is becoming increasingly blurred in the market, with VoIP allowing service providers to offer simple inclusive tariffs as a key part of the customer value proposition. The simplicity of these propositions allows them to be offered to customers worldwide and not just within narrow territorial boundaries.

From a customer perspective, choice of tariffs is a balance between giving the customer the choice to identify the most appropriate tariff for their needs and confusing the customer through too much choice. Whilst per call charging may suit the occasional user, heavier users want certainty and predictability in their bills. A flat rate monthly charge that covers all calls to landline and mobile numbers worldwide is the most desirable tariff for heavy users (unlimited calls would of course be subject to a fair use policy).

The options for flat rate models can include worldwide, in-country or in-region, e.g. Europe. Including mobile calls in the flat rate tariff is desirable because for many customers, mobile numbers make up a significant proportion of their calls and without mobile numbers the element of certainty is lost.

An innovative approach to tariffs allows the customer to build their own package based on selecting the options they require. The selected options generate a monthly charge specific to that user. For example, a customer could select flat rate calls within the UK, plus flat rate calls to the US, plus data, plus three geographic inbound numbers for the UK, USA East Coast and USA West Coast. This puts the customer in control of their own service package and therefore charges. The customer sees the value from a service tailored to their own requirements and for the service provider it provides the opportunity to increase ARPU by offering the customer additional services which can be added to their base tariff.

Whilst the economics of the VoIP market are different to the cellular mobile market, we are starting to see tariffs from the new service providers that are not ‘designed to confuse’. What we need now is for a mobile operator to take the plunge …

The ultimate test for any tariff is to test it against the customer experience. Is it simple? Will the customer understand what charges they will incur? Does it give the customer certainty and predictability in their expenditure? For an example of how not to do it look at charging for data by the MB. What does a MB mean to a customer? Nothing!

Jonathan’s also at Sevendotzero.

, , , , ,

7 Responses to Jonathan Jensen on Thursday – Thinking about mobile tariffs

  1. TerenceEden November 13, 2008 at 6:25 am #

    Simple, Predictable, Useful. Pick any two. It's a basic project triangle.

    Some countries charge per MB. Some charge per minute (very dial up). Some charge per session. Some charge flat rate – but have a limit. Which is the easiest to understand? Which is most useful? Depends on the person, their technical knowledge and their societal expectations.

    I fully expect that, in the future, there will be 2 main models.
    1) PAYT – 10p per minute / text / MB.
    2) Super Contract – £80pm for unlimited (international/roaming) calls, texts, data.

    T

  2. sevendotzero November 13, 2008 at 9:48 am #

    That simplicity would be refreshing!

    Under existing tariffs event based charging only suits low users because charges rack up very quickly once you start using a service.

  3. nacho November 16, 2008 at 10:14 am #

    More flexibility is what is needed. 500 min and 500 text a month for UK only is a waste of money for someone who calls and text abroad or travels regularly (not a lot). Ideally the contracts will be flexible, with add ons you can change every month or so. At present, add-ons are only on top of the 35 quid a month plan or something like that.

  4. nacho November 16, 2008 at 11:14 am #

    More flexibility is what is needed. 500 min and 500 text a month for UK only is a waste of money for someone who calls and texts abroad and/or travels regularly (not a lot) and needs international roaming. Ideally the contracts will be flexible, with add ons you can change every month or so. At present, add-ons are only on top of the 35 quid a month plan or something like that.

  5. nacho November 16, 2008 at 4:14 pm #

    More flexibility is what is needed. 500 min and 500 text a month for UK only is a waste of money for someone who calls and texts abroad and/or travels regularly (not a lot) and needs international roaming. Ideally the contracts will be flexible, with add ons you can change every month or so. At present, add-ons are only on top of the 35 quid a month plan or something like that.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Asim Qureshi - November 13, 2008

    Thinking about mobile tariffs – http://tinyurl.com/67nlag

  2. Asim Qureshi - November 13, 2008

    Thinking about mobile tariffs – http://tinyurl.com/67nlag

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress. Designed by Woo Themes

Real Time Analytics