Brussels, 21/02/2007 (Agence Europe) - “Nobody should have to pay more than 33 cents per minute roaming charges” for an outgoing international call, and wholesale prices should not exceed 25 cents. Such was the main conclusion reached in the study on roaming tariffs carried out at the behest of the European Consumers' Organisation (BEUC) and the French association, UFC-Que Choisir. The study also stresses that clear statistics are lacking on roaming and states that, contrary to claims made by the mobile phone sector, retail prices (prices paid by consumers) have not fallen. It stresses that a fall in prices would stimulate demand, have a positive effect on overall well-being and have very limited consequences on the sector's receipts and investment capacity. According to Jim Murray, BEUC Director, “with lower prices, consumers will make more international calls. Higher volumes will reduce unit costs - with benefits all round. It's time to get those prices down, down, down”.
The study notes that competition is far from real on the roaming market. On the basis of recent offers made by several operators, it points to the fact that, contrary to claims made by the latter, these offers are presented as if consumers can gain clear advantages from them - but in fact they only apply to very specific consumer profiles in very specific circumstances. Also, offers are often limited to a specific period or must be taken up for a whole year, although they are generally only used once or twice a year during holiday periods. Offers are therefore not adapted to the needs of most consumers.
BEUC also deplores the fact that information provided by operators to national regulatory authorities on international telecommunications services - including on roaming and on roaming costs -is often incomplete. It goes on to conclude that this lack of detailed information on the real cost of roaming makes it easier for operators to exaggerate the impact of price control.
Results of the study also challenge arguments put forward by the operators who say price reductions would lead to a corresponding reduction in receipts. Operators say that businessmen, who are forced to use roaming, would not change their habits if prices fell. BEUC and UFC-Que Choisir state these arguments are incorrect in that “ordinary” consumers also use roaming and are “sensitive to price and would use roaming services much more if prices were reduced”. Another argument of the industry demolished by the consumer representatives was that a price reduction would lead to a fall in investment. On this point, the study shows that the fixing of price ceilings for roaming, an option defended by BEUC, would not bring into question either the profitability of the industry or its investment capacity. And expected benefits for consumers would be very considerable.
UFC-Que Choisir estimated the potential impact that tariff reductions would have on the mobile phone bills of MEPs, based on the actual invoices of a number of them. Individual results are surprising as each MEP could make a substantial saving of between €277 to nearly €3,000 according to their use, with an average (taxes included) of €1000 each. According to Alain Bazot, President of the French association: “Mobile phone operators are twisting the truth. From the beginning they have organised collusion on a massive scale throughout Europe. The time has come to put an end to this, and build a Europe of telecommunications”. The study may be consulted on the BEUC website: http: //http://www.beuc.org/Content/Default.asp? (ol)