GiffGaff

A friend of mine has a mobile phone on GiffGaff and reckons that sometimes she doesn't receive texts that have been sent to her or indeed calls.

Putting aside the fact that in the case of calls it could sometimes be due to lack of signal, I wondered if GiffGaff's calls are given less priority somehow as their service is so cheap?

I've read that mobile phone companies can reduce call quality to increase the number of calls that can be made simultaneously via a single mast so it seems logical that they could effectively kick off GiffGaff users and give priority to traffic from the the "real" customers (of O2 I think)who are paying more?

On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 19:58:10 +0100, Murmansk <stainburn@gmail.com> wrote:

> A friend of mine has a mobile phone on GiffGaff and reckons that
> sometimes she doesn't receive texts that have been sent to her or indeed
> calls.
>
> Putting aside the fact that in the case of calls it could sometimes be
> due to lack of signal, I wondered if GiffGaff's calls are given less
> priority somehow as their service is so cheap?
>
> I've read that mobile phone companies can reduce call quality to
> increase the number of calls that can be made simultaneously via a
> single mast so it seems logical that they could effectively kick off
> GiffGaff users and give priority to traffic from the the "real"
> customers (of O2 I think)who are paying more?

I am fairly new to GiffGaff but no problems so far. Yes they do use the O2
network

In message <c21e1fa1-62c3-4598-ae44-943a1b19e162@googlegroups.com>, at
11:58:10 on Sat, 30 Jun 2012, Murmansk <stainburn@gmail.com> remarked:
>A friend of mine has a mobile phone on GiffGaff and reckons that
>sometimes she doesn't receive texts that have been sent to her or
>indeed calls.

Not sure about inbound ones, but last week I had a fairly well
documented case of an outbound SMS taking over an hour to reach its
destination.
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote in message
news:v+aStnGo427PFAIm@perry.co.uk...
> In message
> <c21e1fa1-62c3-4598-ae44-943a1b19e162@googlegroups.com>, at
> 11:58:10 on Sat, 30 Jun 2012, Murmansk <stainburn@gmail.com>
> remarked:
>>A friend of mine has a mobile phone on GiffGaff and reckons
>>that
>>sometimes she doesn't receive texts that have been sent to her
>>or
>>indeed calls.
>
> Not sure about inbound ones, but last week I had a fairly well
> documented case of an outbound SMS taking over an hour to reach
> its destination.
> --



For a start SMS is handled through the Control timeslot so it
makes no difference in system terms. However the system operator
may delay handling of system sharer data.

In terms of SMS delivery delay, that is nowadays rarer than it
used to be but is by no means exceptional. I have had delays of
hours on Orange-Orange SMS delivery even in the last few months.


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

In message <c21e1fa1-62c3-4598-ae44-943a1b19e162@googlegroups.com>,
Murmansk <stainburn@gmail.com> wrote
>A friend of mine has a mobile phone on GiffGaff and reckons that
>sometimes she doesn't receive texts that have been sent to her or
>indeed calls.
>
>Putting aside the fact that in the case of calls it could sometimes be
>due to lack of signal, I wondered if GiffGaff's calls are given less
>priority somehow as their service is so cheap?
>
>I've read that mobile phone companies can reduce call quality to
>increase the number of calls that can be made simultaneously via a
>single mast so it seems logical that they could effectively kick off
>GiffGaff users and give priority to traffic from the the "real"
>customers (of O2 I think)who are paying more?

GG claim that that it is not technically possible to discriminate
between O2 and GG customers on the same mast, however during one of
their many cock-ups in the past 6 months they did manage to block the
majority of users from using the service for a number of hours - so it
is easily achieved.

Unfortunately with GG it's impossible to find out what is happening.
There are no call centres and after sales is provided by customers,
often with the blind leading the blind and much misinformation being
repeated until it becomes fact The GG representatives that do post
to the support forums seem to be employed for their people skills rather
than for any technical expertise.

I am aware that in the past couple of weeks my GG to GG text messages
disappearing into a black hole and being delayed.

GG suits my needs but it is a second rate service. It seems to expanded
beyond its the capability of its infrastructure, especially in the area
of customer service.

--
Alan
news2009 {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

In message <njp6UeT9IC8PFwBA@amac.f2s.com>, at 11:11:09 on Sun, 1 Jul
2012, Alan <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>GG suits my needs but it is a second rate service. It seems to
>expanded beyond its the capability of its infrastructure, especially in
>the area of customer service.

As the TV ads say "The network run by you", ie no-one when you are at
home watching TV.
--
Roland Perry

In message <jjdBa+gqSC8PFAw8@perry.co.uk>, Roland Perry
<roland@perry.co.uk> wrote
>In message <njp6UeT9IC8PFwBA@amac.f2s.com>, at 11:11:09 on Sun, 1 Jul
>2012, Alan <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>>GG suits my needs but it is a second rate service. It seems to
>>expanded beyond its the capability of its infrastructure, especially
>>in the area of customer service.
>
>As the TV ads say "The network run by you", ie no-one when you are at
>home watching TV.


It's much worse than that. If there is a problem and you post to their
support forums stating the problems and say that the 'agents' are not
responding you will get a hundred replies saying "contact an agent".

The culture is that customers get paid for providing the first line
support service hence very few bother to read the question in their rush
to be the first to reply.

The second line support are agents who can only be contacted by message
on their web site. The problem with this approach is that many people
don't get a response within the 24 hour advertised turn-around time and
if they do it is a standardised reply that often bears no relationship
to the question asked.
--
Alan
news2009 {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 01/07/2012 10:52, Woody wrote:
> "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:v+aStnGo427PFAIm@perry.co.uk...
>> In message
>> <c21e1fa1-62c3-4598-ae44-943a1b19e162@googlegroups.com>, at
>> 11:58:10 on Sat, 30 Jun 2012, Murmansk <stainburn@gmail.com>
>> remarked:
>>> A friend of mine has a mobile phone on GiffGaff and reckons
>>> that
>>> sometimes she doesn't receive texts that have been sent to her
>>> or
>>> indeed calls.
>>
>> Not sure about inbound ones, but last week I had a fairly well
>> documented case of an outbound SMS taking over an hour to reach
>> its destination.
>> --
>
>
>
> For a start SMS is handled through the Control timeslot so it
> makes no difference in system terms. However the system operator
> may delay handling of system sharer data.
>
> In terms of SMS delivery delay, that is nowadays rarer than it
> used to be but is by no means exceptional. I have had delays of
> hours on Orange-Orange SMS delivery even in the last few months.
>
>
Yes - SMS is not a guaranteed system of point to point messaging - it
goes via a post office that then will make repeated attempts to deliver
it.

This is a good thing as it caters for your mobile not being on at the
time and pretty much guarantees a message will get through eventually,
but a bad thing if you don't have delivery reports switched on and are
expecting a quick response.

Despite it not being possible to prioritise (it is for calls however),
no network would deliberately think of ways to deprecate an SMS service
to the extent where it wouldn't work (mainly because almost nothing is
going over the networks at e.g. 4am).

Now, I have heard of networks which are badly planned and run far closer
to capacity controlling call access, but in that case to preserve as
much revenue as possible they would drop ongoing calls to allow new ones
to be placed... (note: they were not in this country and that story may
be an urban legand)

"Someone Somewhere" <nntpac@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:jsqalf$d9r$1@speranza.aioe.org...
> On 01/07/2012 10:52, Woody wrote:
>> "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:v+aStnGo427PFAIm@perry.co.uk...
>>> In message
>>> <c21e1fa1-62c3-4598-ae44-943a1b19e162@googlegroups.com>, at
>>> 11:58:10 on Sat, 30 Jun 2012, Murmansk <stainburn@gmail.com>
>>> remarked:
>>>> A friend of mine has a mobile phone on GiffGaff and reckons
>>>> that
>>>> sometimes she doesn't receive texts that have been sent to
>>>> her
>>>> or
>>>> indeed calls.
>>>
>>> Not sure about inbound ones, but last week I had a fairly
>>> well
>>> documented case of an outbound SMS taking over an hour to
>>> reach
>>> its destination.
>>> --
>>
>>
>>
>> For a start SMS is handled through the Control timeslot so it
>> makes no difference in system terms. However the system
>> operator
>> may delay handling of system sharer data.
>>
>> In terms of SMS delivery delay, that is nowadays rarer than it
>> used to be but is by no means exceptional. I have had delays
>> of
>> hours on Orange-Orange SMS delivery even in the last few
>> months.
>>
>>
> Yes - SMS is not a guaranteed system of point to point
> messaging - it goes via a post office that then will make
> repeated attempts to deliver it.
>
> This is a good thing as it caters for your mobile not being on
> at the time and pretty much guarantees a message will get
> through eventually, but a bad thing if you don't have delivery
> reports switched on and are expecting a quick response.
>

[snip]

No good having delivery reports switched on if you are an O2
customer - they don't work. You have to preceed the text with *0#
to get one sent.


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

Murmansk wrote:
> A friend of mine has a mobile phone on GiffGaff and reckons that
> sometimes she doesn't receive texts that have been sent to her or
> indeed calls.
>
> Putting aside the fact that in the case of calls it could sometimes
> be due to lack of signal, I wondered if GiffGaff's calls are given
> less priority somehow as their service is so cheap?
>
Networks have several levels of network priority, i've not noticed
GiffGaff accounts lower than O2's.

If you suspect your Sim has a low level of priority, buy another
and start again, there's nothing your network Customer Service
Dept can do to change it, or even tell you it's level of network priority.

If you need to keep the number, port it out and then later port it back in.
Porting won't change a sims network priority
>
> I've read that mobile phone companies can reduce call quality to
> increase the number of calls that can be made simultaneously via a
> single mast so it seems logical that they could effectively kick off
> GiffGaff users and give priority to traffic from the "real"
> customers (of O2 I think)who are paying more?
>
A Sims network priority has nothing to do with it coming from
a virtual or parent company, you could just as easily have the
situation of where a virtual had higher priority than one from the parent.

O2 and Voda 2G can switch to half rate codec at peak times

Steve Terry
--
Get a free GiffGaff PAYG Sim and £5 bonus after activation at:
http://giffgaff.com/orders/affiliate/gfourwwk

On Sun, 1 Jul 2012 17:30:23 +0100, Alan <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <jjdBa+gqSC8PFAw8@perry.co.uk>, Roland Perry
><roland@perry.co.uk> wrote
>>In message <njp6UeT9IC8PFwBA@amac.f2s.com>, at 11:11:09 on Sun, 1 Jul
>>2012, Alan <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>>>GG suits my needs but it is a second rate service. It seems to
>>>expanded beyond its the capability of its infrastructure, especially
>>>in the area of customer service.
>>
>>As the TV ads say "The network run by you", ie no-one when you are at
>>home watching TV.
>
>
>It's much worse than that. If there is a problem and you post to their
>support forums stating the problems and say that the 'agents' are not
>responding you will get a hundred replies saying "contact an agent".
>
>The culture is that customers get paid for providing the first line
>support service hence very few bother to read the question in their rush
>to be the first to reply.
>
>The second line support are agents who can only be contacted by message
>on their web site. The problem with this approach is that many people
>don't get a response within the 24 hour advertised turn-around time and
>if they do it is a standardised reply that often bears no relationship
>to the question asked.

That's exactly my experience.

The forums are useless except for the simpliest of problems and I
don't recall ever receiving a satisfactory response from an agent.
IIRC some tickets were automatically closed without having a reply at
all.

I use GG for the Kids as it's cheap but I don't use them myself.

I've never managed to pay by card over the Internet, despite trying
different cards, different browsers, different ISPs, and different
times.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) If a man stands in a forest and no woman is around
(")_(") is he still wrong?