Only 40 roam-free destinations; 50 is a misleading headline figure

[NFH]

All four UK networks are misleading consumers by advertising an inflated number of roaming destinations where domestic charges apply. Vodafone Global Roaming is no exception, advertising at https://www.vodafone.co.uk/explore/costs/travelling-abroad/global-roaming/ "There’s no extra charge to use your home plan in our 50 Roam-free destinations". The list of destinations reveals only 40 countries and territories, because Vodafone double-counts various islands and regions of three EU countries as well as two microstates that are for telecommunications purposes indistinguishable from Italy. Although Vodafone is not the worst culprit, this distorts competition because frequent travellers, when choosing a network for a 24-month contract, don't know their travel itinerary for the entire length of the contract and will therefore be attracted by a high headline total of roam-free destinations. Here's a comparison:

Note that:

• Three has not yet disclosed all of its new destinations, but has published a figure of "60 destinations".
• Vodafone mistakenly includes the Faroe Islands within Denmark, deflating its published total by 1.

I suggest that, by misleadingly inflating their headline totals, all four networks are breaching Regulation 5(5) of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008.

[NFH]

---

@jeffkinn wrote:

If you can't see why a territory 3,000 miles away from France should be listed separately to France itself I can't explain it to you.

---

You've missed the point. There are two parts of France (not territories of France) around 4000 miles from metropolitan France. These two parts of France are only 80 miles from each other, so why are they counted as separate "destinations" within the headline total?

[jeffkinn]

I didn't miss the point at all. The fact that Gadeloupe is 98.6 miles (not 80) from Saint Martin is not relevant because the chances that someone is going to visit both islands in the same holiday are remote. And even if they did (on a cruise for instance) the chances are that they won't know that they are both territories of France and treated as part of mainland France. Hence it is justified in my view that they are both names - clarity not misleading.

Saint Martin for instance is half French and half Dutch (St. Maarten) and it's only when you cross from the Dutch half to the French half that roaming kicks in.

[Getafix]

Before you even go to that Argument, why not just ask the Question Closer to home?

Why are Jersey, Guernsey and IOM not part of UK?

And in reverse other Provider might be listing as Seperate from UK.

And what your definition of Destination is could be different from mine or Vodafone!

[NFH]

---

@Getafix wrote:
Why are Jersey, Guernsey and IOM not part of UK?

---

Jersey, Guernsey, and the Isle of Man are Crown Dependencies. Like the Falkland Islands, British Virgin Islands and Cayman Islands for example, the Crown Dependencies are not part of the United Kingdom or the European Union, but separate jurisdictions. It is entirely correct that networks treat them differently from the UK. The Crown Dependencies' use of the +44 country code makes no difference, in the same way that Jamaica's use of the US and Canadian +1 country code makes no difference.

[Alex]

@NFH The change came to clarify that we offer the widest roaming offer. We've aligned our definition to our competitors and increased our count to 50. Italy and Vatican City for example are now separate destinations.

When you add in our 60 Roam-further countries, you can use your home plan abroad in 110 Countries - more than any other UK network. This also allows us to be compared to O2 and EE on a like for like basis.

[NFH]

---

@Alex wrote:

@NFH The change came to clarify that we offer the widest roaming offer. We've aligned our definition to our competitors and increased our count to 50. Italy and Vatican City for example are now separate destinations.

When you add in our 60 Roam-further countries, you can use your home plan abroad in 110 Countries - more than any other UK network. This also allows us to be compared to O2 and EE on a like for like basis.

---

@Alex - I agree that it would be unfair on Vodafone if O2 and EE inflated their headline number of destinations while Vodafone remained accurate. Three previously published an accurate total of 42 destinations (which was deflated by 1 as it mistakenly combined Jersey and Guernsey as a single jurisdiction), but now Three has also joined in with a misleading headline figure of "60 destinations". The network that particularly irks me in this respect is O2, which specifically quotes "47 countries", of which only 36 are genuine countries or territories. All networks seem to be jumping on the misleadingly-inflated destinations bandwagon. As I previously said, Vodafone is not the worst culprit and I thank you for your honest explanation.

I don't agree that with Vodafone you can use your home plan in 110 countries, because this is conditional on paying a whopping £5 per day, which is many times the price per day of one's home plan. I also don't see why a £5 per day charge is merited at all in countries where Vodafone operates a network.

[jeffkinn]

Each Vodafone network is separate and distinct. The only commonality is the brand. There are no cost arrangements between them that could benefit the customer.

[NFH]

---

@jeffkinn wrote:
Each Vodafone network is separate and distinct. The only commonality is the brand. There are no cost arrangements between them that could benefit the customer.

---

What's the point in operating a common brand under common ownership if customers don't benefit from it? Wholesale costs between networks in the Vodafone group can be minimal, which can reasonably be expected to facilitate non-surcharged roaming.

[jeffkinn]

It simply doesn't work like that. It would be nice if it did but it doesn't.

[NFH]

---

@jeffkinn wrote:
It simply doesn't work like that. It would be nice if it did but it doesn't.

---

There is no commercial reason why it shouldn't work like that. The only reason it doesn't is to charge exhorbitant roaming fees that are unrelated to wholesale cost. In many cases, the wholesale costs are lower than UK prices.