Comments on: Touchscreen handsets driving decline in UK spending

By: Fred

Fred — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 11:41:06 +0000

Or, it could just be that customers are getting “smarter”, and the gravy train for cell phone companies is coming to an end.

By: Wale

Wale — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 15:55:54 +0000

Paul, as much as the article points out to the operators what they might be doing wrong in terms of attracting volume and not possibly attracting value. It is impossible to say that the non-smart touchscreen phones are responsible for what the article termed decline in UK spending. In the current economic climate, people have generally become wiser with how they “lose money” and more in tune with cost-control. Across the board, operators are trying to attract customers by reducing cost of contracts. A lot of factors other than the handset type might be responsible for this price model. Also remember that VAT has been reduced which might be responsible for the sort of spending decline quoted “on average £38.11 per month to £32.14 per month.”

By: Gayathri

Gayathri — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 10:33:18 +0000

It is not clear from the artcle if there a direct corelation between the decline and the “touch screen” handsets. The decline in user spending could have happened even with a non-touch screen handset user following the same switching pattern. Or is the author saying that this decline is only among users who switched touch screen handsets?

By: Paul Moore

Paul Moore — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 12:46:38 +0000

Hi all. To clarify: our data shows that the customers who are now acquiring non-smart touch handsets were previously higher value customers (in terms of monthly bill spend). For example, those who switched from smart touchscreen to non-smart touchscreen went from spending on average £38.11 per month to £32.14 per month. Those who transferred from non-touchscreen to non-smart touchscreens spent more than 12% less per month after the transfer. Whichever way we look at the data, the consumers that own non-smart touchscreen phones are spending less than other market segments (when they were previously higher value customers). As you mention above, these consumers are generally “value seekers” (tariff wise and handset wise), but this does not take away from the fact that operators and manufacturers should focus on how the tariff and handset mix could be better used to improve this group’s ARPU.

By: Russell Whitworth

Russell Whitworth — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 14:29:28 +0000

This is a very strange article, mixing up cause and effect as well as confusing time with money. It fails to provide any evidence to support the headline.

Has the usage (time) declined by 12% and 23%, or is it the revenue? It is unlikely to be both, because tariffs and bundles change frequently.

Could it not be that lower-value customers are attracted to lower-cost handsets? And these very same customers are spending less because of better-value bundles? If this were true (and I think it a more likely explanation), then clearly touchscreen handsets are not *driving* declining revenues.

By: tim deluca-smith

tim deluca-smith — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 14:23:11 +0000

I’m trying to understand why consumer confusion between a smart and non-smart touchscreen device would reduce ARPU. Is the research house saying that it’s a result of people purchasing lower-value price plans or that their usage has decreased? The former I can believe, the later doesn’t stack-up as the features available to them even on a low end touchscreen would likely map what they were previoulsy using.