Mobile Operator CEO: Customers Under Our Data Caps Don't Use Much Data, So Nobody Needs Unlimited Data

from the lolwut? dept

While we just recently got some bandwidth-providers to come out from under their caps-due-to-congestion rocks, there is a long and storied history of ISPs filling in the void of logic in the debate over caps with creamy, pink nonsense cupcakes. Because, hey! Who doesn’t like cupcakes? A long-standing favorite of mine was Sprint’s deft change of the English language, when they altered the meaning of “unlimited” to mean “5 gigs,” because Sprint thinks the real world blows and we’re better off in their make-believe Sprint-land, where all of our parents turn into Kevin Durant.

But, in an apparent effort to put the UK in the mix for countries with CEOs who say really dumb things, mobile operator EE’s chief guy of stuff has come out with his own assessment of why their data caps are fine and unlimited plans are unnecessary.

EE is the first mobile operator in the UK to offer 4G services. When it launched last October, it was criticised for imposing tight data caps – including a 500MB plan that could be chewed through in five minutes at the network’s maximum speed.

Speaking at MWC 2013, [Olaf] Swantee said that on average users are actually getting through only 1.4GB a month. “It shows that the instinct for unlimited data plans is unnecessary,” he said.

Now, on the off chance that you’ve spent the past week doing massive amounts of peyote, let me take a moment to explain why this kind of logic is so abysmal that it might actually be responsible for global warming. Olaf says that unlimited data plans are not in demand because their customers, who are already under their strict caps, on average use about 1.5GB per month. The logic is flawless…and by flawless, I mean backwards and evil. Of course EE customers that are under strict caps are going to do everything possible to stay under those caps. You’re charging them extra if they go over! The very sample you’re using in your justification nullifies your entire point.

Let’s see…an appropriate analogy. Ah, got it! A dog owner buys one of those electric fence collars for Fido, puts the barrier around a twelve-foot squared kitchen, and then insists that the dog doesn’t want to leave the kitchen because it rarely chooses to get the piss shocked out of it by stepping over the barrier. If someone tried to use that kind of sophistry on you, how long before you’d shove a couple of pencils in your ears to make the bad man’s voice stop hurting you so?

So way to go, United Kingdom. You’re officially accepted into the Dumb CEO League of Extraordinary Un-Logic. Play nice now.

Filed Under: , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Mobile Operator CEO: Customers Under Our Data Caps Don't Use Much Data, So Nobody Needs Unlimited Data”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
59 Comments
Ninja (profile) says:

Re: No, no...

+insightful and +funny

What amuses me is that I have a 2Gb plan and I never go beyond 1,5Gb because I use 3Gwatchdog (pun not intended with article example) to track my consumption and when I get to 1,5Gb I start controlling very closely what I do with my phone in order to have spare bandwidth to use it in case of some greater need. I’d probably spend much more than 5Gb in some months if I had an unlimited plan or if my plan had higher caps.

So yes, the guy is a moron.

nasch (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: No, no...

In he UK, if you go past the cap they block downloads, but leave web browsing and email enabled.

It’s all downloads*… what do they do, block everything not on ports 80 and 443, or via SMTP? That wouldn’t prevent enormous downloads. Do they only allow certain file types and block email attachments? I’m curious about this implementation though I understand if you don’t know the details.

* and uploads of course

nasch (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 No, no...

Blocking a port isn’t considered deep packet inspection is it?

a form of computer network packet filtering that examines the data part (and possibly also the header) of a packet as it passes an inspection point

You don’t have to inspect the packet data to know what port it’s on. Not that I’m saying they would be unwilling to do so, just that there would be easier ways to accomplish their goal.

gorehound (profile) says:

Re: No, no...

LOL !
More like you get a bunch of people and put them in a room with precious diamonds.
Then you watch them all fight over them till you get a few Bigger Individuals who grab the Diamonds.
Then they all talk about how much they can sell the diamonds and come up with “Let us cut them into little pieces and charge even more money per piece” and they go on and on.
Sucking the life out of the Mass Consumer..

out_of_the_blue says:

Malthus will be right eventually. And congestion WILL be a problem.

They’re just getting ahead of the curve.

Also, this conflicts with Techdirt’s notion of “selling scarcity”. — Like the rest here, not a new idea, either. — Look, they’re GIVING you FREE USE of their equipment and selling the scarcity of bandwidth, yet you STILL complain.

And don’t forget the universal fix: if you don’t want the service, don’t buy it!

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Malthus will be right eventually. And congestion WILL be a problem.

What you write makes no sense. The customer is paying mostly for the backhaul ISP costs and very little for everything else. The real cost is therefore on keeping the customers with sufficient maximum capacity (the equipment!)and not peanuts like usage-cost!
The only reasonable argument for usage costs are trying to control users behaviour so the ISPs usage become more equally distributed throughout the day, the week and the year. A flat unconditional $x per GB is not gonna do beep in that context!

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Malthus will be right eventually. And congestion WILL be a problem.

Wha…? Please stop talking about technology you don’t understand. Seriously.

First of all, bandwidth is an artificial scarcity because we have a large amount of spectrum being locked away for legacy technology or military use (most of which is unused). If we stopped broadcasting terribly ineffecient analog TV channels and radio stations and replaced them with digital versions we could dramatically increase the amount of currently available bandwidth.

Second, we’re already developing technologies that will further increase our bandwidth. Read about “twisting” radio waves to allow for multiple signals to be transmitted on the same spectrum. We can also further improve the amount of data transmitted through the air by utilizing higher resolution detection systems or systems that cancel “noise” by analyzing reflected waves in metropolitan areas. And this is ignoring technological improvements we haven’t already started working on or that are not yet known too the public.

The “bandwidth crisis” is just as much of a myth as the “fuel crisis.” We’re not going to run out of bandwidth just as we aren’t going to run out of gas…by the time prices start increasing high enough to be prohibitive to the average consumer, the market will develop an alternative that is affordable. And the prices are already far above the standard market value due to the natural monopolies (cell carriers) which are government sanctioned.

Never mind. Go back to talking about piracy and stealing, at least with your morality plays there aren’t any facts that can contradict you. Discussing technology is obviously outside your comfort zone.

slick8086 says:

This is like the cheating girl friend.

Cheating girlfriend:”It was only sex, it didn’t mean anything”

Boyfriend: “If it didn’t mean anything then why did you fuck do it?”

Capped Carrier: “No one ever uses more than X data so unlimited is not necessary”

Angry customer: “If no one ever uses more than X data, then why are you putting limits on it?”

TrustAvidity (profile) says:

Not only is it a valid point people are making that there’s no reason to limit the data if the average person doesn’t use that much as the company is claiming, but according to that logic, they’re turning down free money. When they use this excuse to not have unlimited data, all I hear is “We could offer this service people are willing to pay us for without the costs of them actually using said service but we prefer to turn away free money.” An abundance of people utilizing unlimited data would be a much better argument for them to be rid of it.

TrustAvidity (profile) says:

Not only is it a valid point people are making that there’s no reason to limit the data if the average person doesn’t use that much as the company is claiming, but according to that logic, they’re turning down free money. When they use this excuse to not have unlimited data, all I hear is “We could offer this service people are willing to pay us for without the costs of them actually using said service but we prefer to turn away free money.” An abundance of people utilizing unlimited data would be a much better argument for them to be rid of it.

alastair says:

Busness Logic

We were moving to new premises and each office was designated to have a whiteboard installed. On moving it was then noticed that the pens had been forgotten and a request was sent to the stationary manager to put in a stock order.

Several months went by and in a head if departments meeting the question was raised why the pens hadn?t turned up yet. The stationary manager said’ I cancelled that order as an unnecessary expense ‘cos on looking round the building I noticed that no-one was using the whiteboards’

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

The easiest way is to have an “audit” program monitor all activity on the device.

https://doc.opensuse.org/products/draft/SLES/SLE-audit-quick_sd_draft/

Also there are ways to see everything the system does for security purposes which can be abused to send information on what the device is doing(i.e. TOMOYO, SELinux, AppArmor, etc).

The easiest one to understand is TOMOYO probably, it watches everything the system does and can tell what accessed what and when, it is great for debugging but also for snooping.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TOMOYO_Linux
http://tomoyo.sourceforge.jp/2.5/android-arm.html.en

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Sprint has unlimited data for PHONES. The only cap they have is for mobile hotspots.

Actually, they have data caps for everything except phones, and only for data used on the phone itself. This includes tethering, tablets, and other devices.

Also, if you’d actually bothered to read the linked article, it talks about mobile hotspots and how, while being advertised as unlimited, they changed the policy on their customers without warning or recourse.

“After that, I stopped reading because I can’t be bothered with basic reading comprehension.”

FTFY.

Anonymous Coward says:

Pencils? Pencils?

If some bad man tried to use that kind of “sophistry” on me, I don’t think that it would be my ears that I shoved pencils into. In fact it wouldn’t be ears that received the pointy ends of the pencils at all. And, come to think of it, I would probably be inclined to use a more appropriate tool than pencils. Also, it seems likely that the “bad man” in this little vignette is the one who has been making (inappropriate) use of peyote, or perhaps crack, and on company time too.

Anonymous Coward says:

this twat has obviously been taking thinking lessons from a friggin’ moron! about par for the course of top UK business execs! look at who’s in charge of the country atm and then look at who has aspirations of stepping into the shoes once worn by Thatcher (useless bitch!). will be going from a disaster to a greater disaster!

Devils_Advocate (profile) says:

Unlimited Logic

Scientist logging a lab experiment…

Summary: Frog placed at starting line, and prompted to jump by sounding an airhorn. A condition is changed and test repeated. Resulting distances are recorded.

Jump 1: Frog with 4 legs jumps 20 feet.
(1 Leg is removed.)
Jump 2: Frog with 3 legs jumps 2 feet.
(1 Leg is removed.)
Jump 3: Frog with 2 legs jumps 3 inches.
(1 Leg is removed.)
Jump 4: Frog with 1 leg jumps 1/8 of an inch.
(1 Leg is removed.)
(Airhorn sounds repeatedly, with no response.)
Jump 5: Frog with no legs is DEAF!

warren crossing (user link) says:

I have always been one for conspiracy theories, so here’s one for why they don’t want unlimited caps.

First. OTT and VOIP, Choose a new voice provider and turn your carrier into a bitpipe.

Second. Packet loss. Entire leg, TCP retransmits, at a percentage of your actual traffic. (Echos which turn into Feedback and cause massive network contention)

But there is a solution, wearing a tinfoil hat, prevents both these problems.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...