Vodafone Live! with 3G or Vodafone Live! powered by 3G? We've heard both monikers. But how about Vodafone Live! with unnecessary jargon?
It seems a small point but this week's mega-3G launch (you know the one we are talking about), while good for several reasons, took a step backwards in terms of its branding and how it will reach the mass market.
When Vodafone launched Live! a couple of years back this publication and much of the telecoms industry praised the über-operator for its approach. Gone were nasty acronyms and abbreviations that most ordinary people didn't care for. No more WAP this, GPRS that and all manner of m-commerce malarkey.
Instead end users - mainly ordinary consumers - took to an all-in-one portal that just worked. Vodafone's stock rose, albeit mainly metaphorically.
Fast-forward to this week. News of the turbo-charged upgrade to Live! should be more widely talked about in such terms. The industry and, to a large extent, business press understands what 3G should enable. Even mainstream news outlets are excited and nowadays quite comfortable with the term. (Don't ask them about 2G and 1G, or 3G nuances, mind.)
But to most people, adding 3G to the name won't help. We wait to be proved wrong by upcoming campaigns from other operators and it would be understandable if we learnt that executives who have read negative reports for years about money 'wasted' on 3G spectrum and build-outs are eager to let it be known this is the point of returns on investments.
But wouldn't Vodafone Live! Plus or even Vodafone Live! Turbo (from the company that sponsors Ferrari) be more appropriate? Discuss.
Comments
There are 3 comments. Join the discussion
1. Brian Catt
I have no wish to watch video on my telephone, and am happy to work offline en route. If its urgent someone will call.
I go online when it suits me somewhere I can sit and think, and access a LAN or broadband connection simply with my regular access provider and log in.
If I want e-mail on the move a GRPS Blackberry like point device is appropriate to this need. SMS exchanges are not.
I keep asking and don't find many who disagree with this general approach.
So what's the real disposable income capturing/efficiency improving/life enhancing need for 3G again? Still don't get it, and I'm technical.
2. David Love
You think you're confused? Staff in two Voda London stores couldn't tell me whether 3G was an add-on to my present "Anytime" price plan, or whether I needed to start over.
And neither could describe how 3G data would be charged. Live! portal? Non-Live!? it's a minefield.
One didn't know whether I needed a new SIM!
I hear Big Red's 3G launch is costing £100m. Well I suggest they a bit more on staff training.
3. anonymous
Apparently "3G" is too complicated for the Dutch to understand (or possibly pronounce - "dree ghay" is a bit klunkey). So here, it is Vodafone Live! UMTS. Catchy, no?