If we vote for Brexit what happens

mwpt

CLAPTON wrote: »

A normal company faced with a fall in revenue will seek to increase it.
Any such increase will be constrained by the competition: if all the other suppliers increase prices then the prices rises will hold, if not they will fall.

I've no idea whether mobile price are rising or falling or whether roaming charges were a significant profit centre.

And why if this is "a thing" then when a company doesn't offer a no-roaming contract at cheaper prices. I'd need to see something to back up angrypirate's assertion.

CLAPTON

mwpt wrote: »

And why if this is "a thing" then when a company doesn't offer a no-roaming contract at cheaper prices. I'd need to see something to back up angrypirate's assertion.

I don't know if any company offers a no roam contract.
The general principle however, is that 'government' inference has 'unintended consequences' which often simply transfer cost from one set of customers to another:
in this case I think that roaming charges were a rip off and the change is probably for the best (but unlikely to be cost free).

mwpt

CLAPTON wrote: »

I don't know if any company offers a no roam contract.
The general principle however, is that 'government' inference has 'unintended consequences' which often simply transfer cost from one set of customers to another:
in this case I think that roaming charges were a rip off and the change is probably for the best (but unlikely to be cost free).

Well yes, I agree, roaming charges were ridiculous and I for one have benefited from the reduction.

But the assertion was that providers raised costs to everyone else to compensate, I'm just curious if this is true or not, and if so, what prevents a company offering a no-roaming cheaper contract.

angrypirate

gfplux wrote: »

Oh dear Angry, really, even you should see how silly that is.
You just can't except that there some things to be written on the positive side of the argument.

Of course there are going to be positives - especially for those people continually travelling across Europe. However, the mobile phone operators are going to have a major source of revenue cut off with this bill. Do you honestly think they arent making some sort of adjustment in their pricing to recoup this? And who do you think will suffer the most? As the companies cant charge the people who travel across the EU any more, it'll be the lay person who doesnt.

Can you not accept that government interference always has unintended consequences?

CLAPTON

mwpt wrote: »

Well yes, I agree, roaming charges were ridiculous and I for one have benefited from the reduction.

But the assertion was that providers raised costs to everyone else to compensate, I'm just curious if this is true or not, and if so, what prevents a company offering a no-roaming cheaper contract.

the issue is that all other things being equal, a company will want to maintain its income level, indeed it will seek to make the maximum profit possible.
so if there is a cross the board hit, then all companies will seek to regain the lost profit and will probably (partially) succeed.

of course, other things aren't always equal

mwpt

So why isn't there a provider offering cheap no-roaming deals?

CLAPTON

mwpt wrote: »

So why isn't there a provider offering cheap no-roaming deals?

an opportunity for you to become a billionaire?
to get any further requires some-one to do some actual research and it would seem that neither of us are about to do that.

setmefree2

mayonnaise wrote: »

Not really sure if the likes of Corbyn, Diane Abbott or Emily Thornberry adopting a pro-EU position would be a good thing for the 'remain' campaign. :eek:

True. Shame really - 'cos I'm sure Alistair Darling, Tony Blair, David Milliband, Charles Clarke, Ed Balls etc would have done a brilliant job.

CLAPTON

setmefree2 wrote: »

True. Shame really - 'cos I'm sure Alistair Darling, Tony Blair, David Milliband, Charles Clarke, Ed Balls etc would have done a brilliant job.

its probably true that Alastair, Tony etc have supported EU as long as Jeremy, Diane etc have supported the IRA whilst Jeremy's et al's long term support for the EU is less well documented.

I understand that Jeremy's conversion is related to the Socialist opportunities in europe

antrobus

mayonnaise wrote: »

Not really sure if the likes of Corbyn, Diane Abbott or Emily Thornberry adopting a pro-EU position would be a good thing for the 'remain' campaign. :eek:

Perhaps not, but it would interesting to see what mental gymnastics they went through in order to justify the EU treaty obligation to adopt an economic policy "conducted in accordance with the principle of an open market economy with free competition".:)