Long overdue IMO but more importantly won’t this ruling by Ofcom ironically benefit the networks? I’ve always bought my phones outright from the manufacturer and the main detraction from using PAYM for me has been the locked phones and the hassle of unlocking them. You can now buy a phone on a contract and know you’ll be able to sell it on easily without issues. Always thought this practice was a bit like shooting yourself in the foot.
Networks now banned from locking phones
- Thread starter Barks
- Start date
Nah I don't see it.
Why would a network which was happily involved in having phones locked to them be even happier that the practice is banned.
And the manufacturers will see this as old phones getting more life second hand so there's less to squeeze customers towards a new phone.
Time to whack up the prices on all phones and packages so the customer doesn't get any free value out of this ruling.
Why would a network which was happily involved in having phones locked to them be even happier that the practice is banned.
And the manufacturers will see this as old phones getting more life second hand so there's less to squeeze customers towards a new phone.
Time to whack up the prices on all phones and packages so the customer doesn't get any free value out of this ruling.
This is a good point, a lot of people don't realise that you can unlock the phone, but sometimes it's not always free and then that puts people off even bothering.
I've always bought directly from the manufacturer, not because of the worry of being locked to a network, but because adding in the cost of a pay monthly sim, it usually works out cheaper over 2+ years for the phone and network usage.
To give the companies plenty of time to find an alternative source of revenue...
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 35,711
They should never have been allowed to lock a phone into a network in the first place.
This...
If it benefited the networks, they wouldn't be locking their phones in the first place.
Surely we'll still get phones with carrier bloat on them, so while they're unlocked, they will still be running that carrier's modified firmware, meaning updates will still rely on that network greenlighting it even if you're using a SIM from a different network.
The networks needs to concentrate on building networks rather than selling phones on 18 month contracts have 3 shops in one shopping mall.
In this market the ideal would be one SOE with prices to suit rather than duplicating the infrastructure. Or State owned infrastructure with some sort of open access arrangement although I dont know if this is possible.
It's why we dont have four motorway networks and 3 national grids.
In this market the ideal would be one SOE with prices to suit rather than duplicating the infrastructure. Or State owned infrastructure with some sort of open access arrangement although I dont know if this is possible.
It's why we dont have four motorway networks and 3 national grids.
Lol... And why is that.
Edit.
They let multi billion pound companies get away with in contract price rises. Now EE seems to be doing CPI plus 3.99%
Pathetic overseeing by ofcom.
If the price rises are clearly explained in the contract you don't have to agree with it, i have a 30 day contract and just change to sometjing else if I see something better.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Jul 2019
- Posts
- 2,689
Agreed. It's almost like they cherry pick or have limited control.
Personally i don't care for locked or unlocked phones, think it only really benefits those who buy sell regularly. And like said, it'll cost us somewhere else anyway.
Props to Three. They never did this anyway.
EE are the worst for it. Had to wait 6 months into your contract before they will unlock the handset
Vodafone is 3 months if on contract or 1 month if payg.
Only bad thing is I can see some independent unlocking companies closing down now.
EE are the worst for it. Had to wait 6 months into your contract before they will unlock the handset
Vodafone is 3 months if on contract or 1 month if payg.
Only bad thing is I can see some independent unlocking companies closing down now.
This is not the point though. Ofcom are there to regulate the industry, not allow telcos to enrich themselves by charging CPI increases (without the burden of showing their business is affected by them in that year). I can just about accept that the service side of a contract might increase in cost to the company (though they still shouldn't be granted the right to increase costs mid contract), but the phone purchase side of it as well? A total scam.