ASA upholds complaint about three but was it right to?
three was perhaps being a little cheeky when it referred to its DC-HSDPA service as 3.9G, but it was correct in saying that people could use that without having to wait for 4G to roll-out and from the speed test and comments from people using this evolution of 3G it does appear to get close to 4G type speeds.
Alas the ASA after some debate has ruled that a complaint by Everything Everywhere should be upheld, who complained the adverts implied 3.9G could get close to 4G in terms of speed and also '. the claim "Our Ultrafast network is built for more" in ads (a) and (b) was misleading and could be substantiated'.
We recall the adverts appearing on the London Underground and the sense gained about the 'more' aspect was as much an aspect of the speed as it was that three offer unlimited usage products and in our opinion is more honest than dragging a 'shed load of data' across a beach when the amount of data is just 1GB.
The complaint over speeds was actually upheld after three failed to provide any data on speed comparisons, but did try to explain the technology and that in some cases DC-HSDPA could be faster than 4G. The second complaint was upheld as it was felt that 'Our Ultrafast network is built for more' was misleading and again had not been substantiated.
Do people think that this adjudication was fair? How are you finding the speed for the faster 3G variants?
The world of mobile marketing is littered with marketing terms, to the extent that superfast and ultrafast carry different definitions to the fixed line world. It is not clear whether the ASA is helping or hindering at times.