back to article Vodafone, EE and Three overcharging customers after contracts expire

Folk with mobiles on Vodafone, EE and Three are being stung by an average £22 per month for staying on their contracts after their handsets have been paid off, according to Citizens Advice. Customers who choose to stay on the same plan after the two-year fixed deal ends are not getting their bills reduced, meaning they are …

  1. This post has been deleted by its author

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Vodafone again? Ethics have definitely left the building!

    Vodafone hit me up with the robbery below... They'd routinely take money out of a prepaid balance at random times, just not enough to get noticed:

    Vodafone killed off direct email support, so you've to use outsourced Chat to get compensation. They in-turn claim they can't help, sending you back to the website to log a formal complaint for a call back, (unhelpful if you're away on business a lot or traveling etc). Regulator was indifferent also!

    End result? Went back to the outsourced Chat service where after logging a formal complaint and bluffing at a Regulator case number, the Chat service magically managed to produce a refund. So it was possible after all. How long did that all take? Ages! To sum it all up in one word: M'fuckers!

    1. SwizzleStick

      Re: Vodafone again? Ethics have definitely left the building!

      Ethics? that's where you get to from Thiverpool thst ttsttttattion

  3. AdrianMontagu

    If you need to complain to VodaFone - go straight to the top.

    CEO email address is

    They will do anything that they can get away with - there is no honourable business ethic

    1. Bunty

      All packages have broadband!

      Started on rolling contract for phone only, in 1996, used it for emergencies only. Lived alone, was due to retire, traveled alone. Was told by customer services you have a rolling contract, stay with it or cost will go up! Cost £5.00 per month. Was forced off the rolling contract and put on package with broadband, all packaged had broadband.! I can't get broadband in my area of Suffolk, only 2G signal, seldom leave home. Need a phone for emergencies, no neighbours, very rural, drive round country lanes. Used phone once or twice a month. Was charged for something I didn't receive and forced into a position where I had no option! Left Vodaphone, eventually, found all companies had broadband added to packages! Not pleased about being taken off my rolling contract then being charged for a service I couln't get! It's a scam!

  4. Not also known as SC

    Yeah - Whatever!

    "A Vodafone spokesperson said: "We strive to give our customers the price plan that best suits them. Wherever possible, we contact our customers nearing the end of their contract to offer them a range of options." "

    I've had numerous Vodafone contracts over the years and not once have they contacted me when a contract has ended to offer me a range of options. The only contact seems to be 'partner' companies who call up offering phone insurance. Maybe it wasn't possible for Vodafone to contact me because they only have my home address, home telephone number, email address 1, email address 2, and my Vodafone mobile number.

    1. Oh Matron!

      Re: Yeah - Whatever!

      "wherever possible..."

      They have their phone number, FTLOG!

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Moral of the story

    Go SIM free, and just buy a rolling one month airtime and data contract from whoever has the best reception and offer at the time.

    Of course, its worth taking a further look to see what this little trick does for telco margins. I'll assume that the handset charge per month is the reported £22, and then guess an average airtime value of £10 a month. Vodafone made about 6% pre tax margin last year, so the profit from a customer on contract is about £1.92 per month. When they come off contract but continue to pay, we can apply the 6% to the airtime still, but the £22 is now pure profit. So, ex-contract the monthly margin rises from 6% to just under 71% of that customer's charges, a profit increase of 1,100 %. Strictly speaking, these disengaged customers shouldn't be allocated much if any of Vodafone's sales, marketing and distribution costs, and that would push the monthly margin to 73% of the revenue.

    An interesting result of a quick bit of modelling: If a customer stays on for two months extra after the contract expires, the company make more profit in those two months than they did over the entire 24 month duration of the contract. If you're one of the 13-23% of customers staying on contract for an extra twelve months, then the total margin is over seven times greater.than for those who leave at the end of the contract. ICBA to work this out across the customer base, but I have an impression that around half of all domestic customer profits are made from out-of-contract customers who probably don't realise the extent to which they are being fleeced. How's that for a dirty little secret?

    If Citizens Advice think that companies like Vodafone and EE are going to voluntarily walk away from the chance to make a 73% margin out anybody, then they are mistaken. But I suspect anybody expecting Ofcom to step up to the mark and take issue with this is also mistaken.

    1. Kevin Johnston

      Re: Moral of the story

      I did this for my most recent phone change. I had been mobile inclusive before but sat down and did the numbers which showed that for the two year cost of inclusive I could buy the phone outright and get better GB/minutes/Texts as a SIM only option. Over the two years I expect to save at least £40 which may not seem a lot but I have now paid for the phone so my costs are £9/month

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Moral of the story

        Also worth factoring in that many of us aren't straight off the mark when the contract ends, and its pretty common (even when knowing the end date, and planning to change) to end up paying one or two months of the old contract.

        If that happens its another £24-48 in their pocket. With a decent mid range phone costing as little as £150, you wouldn't want to lose a third of that, which would pay for about one minute or so of Vittorio Colao's time, based on his £6m salary.

    2. ibmalone Silver badge

      Re: Moral of the story

      A few years ago, having paid off my then phone for a year or two, I got in touch with Orange (who I was then with) and asked to be changed over to one of their SIM only deals. A SIM only deal that I could have got without contacting them if I'd been willing to change my number (and I think involved a fixed term contract anyway). The call operator refused. It was only after I told them, right, let's just cancel the contract instead, that they went off to speak with a supervisor and eventually, "As a good will gesture," agreed to switch me.

      The next time, having looked around, and by now after a new phone (my venerable 6500s being a bit behind the times), I simply phoned up to get a PAC so I could switch to Tesco. This resulted in being offered a deal that was nearly as cheap as the Tesco one (and even after I'd said, "that sounds good", the retentions person said they'd try a few other things on their system to see if they could do better). Again, I probably overstayed that contract by a year (but it wasn't extortionate). Last change I took advantage of their attempting to move customers over to EE to get a SIM only deal online, which was painless.

      If I've learnt anything its always have an alternative you're ready to drop them for, and that it really makes a difference who you get on the other end of the phone. As far as letting people know when their contracts are up, that typically presents as a whole lot of offers to upgrade your handset, which isn't quite the same as suggesting you change to a SIM only tariff.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Moral of the story

        This resulted in being offered a deal that was nearly as cheap as the Tesco one

        That's the main thing about retention deals. Even a small difference like a quid a month can be a really big difference in the margin to be made, and they're still exploiting customer inertia.

        1. ibmalone Silver badge

          Re: Moral of the story

          True, though the difference was mainly down to the non-direct debit payment, which I still don't know if Tesco did, and I suspected the Orange coverage was better at the time. I don't object to a pound or two difference if they're actually providing better service. And the phone was network locked, which is a different annoyance, and for some reason that model is surprisingly expensive to unlock, more so than the one that replaced it.

    3. JimboSmith Silver badge

      Re: Moral of the story

      I've never had a mobile phone contract I've always been PAYG because I don't need a contract. That's not to say I haven't been offered contracts I've had them left right and centre almost everytime I top-up. I buy my phones sim free and I can switch phones/networks whenever something cheaper comes up. I don't normally make many calls I get called far more and therefore do not need millions of minutes, texts and data. I use Whatsapp and emails a lot instead of calling people and that works fine. I have two phones and a Blackberry: One phone for work related stuff, one for personal stuff and a Blackberry for emails (I like the physical keyboard). However whenever I used to go to top up I would get told that they had a contract/sim only deal that would blow me away/save me money/is exactly what you need. Recently I bought a £20 top up from a Three store and they told me that they could "Do something better than twenty quid"

      So I was then presented with the option to upgrade my phone (I don't want to do that) get silly amount of minutes, texts, etc. all for £15. I said how long do the minutes last and she said 30 days.

      Me: [playing the innocent] What happens after that, how much of my £15 is left for the next few months?

      Her: What do you mean? You get another load of mins, sms etc. next month

      Me: And this is a one off charge

      Her: No it's £15 a month

      Me: That's an awful lot more than I pay at the moment.

      Her: It's £5 less a month

      Me: That £20 will last me about 3 to 6 months.

      Her: What really?

      Me: Yes really I use WhatsApp/Email rather than make calls if at all possible.

      Her: [almost shouting] I so couldn't do that.

      She then went on to offer me a sim only deal at £5 a month but that wasn't any good either. She then apologised for the length of time it had taken said I wasn't a typical PAYG customer and gave me my top-up.

      O2 came out top of my justgivememytopupandstoptryingtosellmesomethingelse league table.

      When I topped up with them a few years ago I was told I'd be better off on a contract. I explained my typical usage and the bloke said "If you can't be honest about how much you use your phone I can't help you". I told him that I was being honest showed him the call log and data usage and he said "Is this a wind up?" This is just one of the reasons I'm not with O2 anymore.

    4. technoise

      Re: Moral of the story

      Absolutely - with GiffGaff here - I have never had a contract on a mobile phone, though I have on broadband.

      Contracts achieve two things for businesses.

      The first is anti-competitive - for the time that you are locked in, you cannot switch, so market forces cannot operate for that time. If most people are on contracts most of the time, then the market is mostly suspended. This is particularly bad in the energy market where the government claims we are expected to switch to bring prices down, but many of us end up entering into agreements that prevent us from doing so. In the energy markets, customers who enter into fixed term contracts also unwittingly become speculators in energy price futures, which unsurprisingly, the smoke-and-mirrors energy retailers are much better at.

      The second is securitisation. The moment you are in a contract, you have entered into a debt obligation which can be sold on instantly, for an instant upfront profit for the telco / energy provider etc.

      Contracts are the gift that keeps giving as far as businesses are concerned, and it is a pity that most of us do not realise this and refuse to enter into them. If we did, we could have a proper competitive market.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Moral of the story

        In the energy markets,

        Just like in mobile comms, nobody has to take up a fixed term contract. You can happily take out a standard variable rate tariff with any supplier, even a local authority owned provider if you think that the commercial suppliers are evil.

        The second is securitisation.

        I'm not aware of any credible securitisation of revenues from telco or energy customers. You could securitise the handset repayment element of a mobile contract, because it is in practice a debt obligation. That would clean up the telco's balance sheet and reduce the working capital needed, but on the other hand they'd need to give away a proportion of their margin, and on many contracts there's insufficient margin to make that a sensible move (although it could explain why some companies are very uncompetitive in pricing). Out of contract you have the sort of margins to make securitisation work a treat, but no continuing obligation, so you'd struggle to structure a sensible contract..

        It would be far harder to do that for an energy company, because the costs are incurred as the contract is delivered. Even most fixed price futures contracts aren't paid up front, it would just be a hedging contract, and that hedging element could easily be a CfD against the wholesale price at the time of delivery. Securitisation usually requires a fairly pure income stream that the provider has already incurred the vast bulk of costs for, so I don't see how you could make that work (having worked for an energy supplier).

    5. Roland6 Silver badge

      Re: Moral of the story

      An interesting result of a quick bit of modelling: If a customer stays on for two months extra after the contract expires, the company make more profit in those two months than they did over the entire 24 month duration of the contract.

      It wasn't that long ago that Orange gave a 5% discount to those who remained on contract but didn't upgrade their handset, users could accumulate upto 25% discount by doing this...

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    This is interesting, now what I would like to know is do the mobile companies actively target under 65's at the end of contract for a new phone and not contact over 65's on purpose to make more money?

    I know that in the past I have either been contacted or when logging in I get a "you have a new offer" message.

    My money is on them being the usual scumbags they are.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      do the mobile companies actively target under 65's at the end of contract for a new phone and not contact over 65's on purpose to make more money?

      Can't speak for telcos, but I can speak from experience of a related customer service business, where the initial good deals are all time limited. If the initial deal is a good offer for customers, then its loss making or profit neutral for the provider - these offers are called "acquisition tariffs" and they're frequently not offered to existing customers. The maths is that you incur customer acquisition costs, you offer a loss making or profit neutral deal, but make your margin from that smaller proportion of customers who stay with you on worse terms when the contract expires. In mobile, that's by keeping the tariff the same when the contract ends, in energy or broadband it is by retiring the acquisition tariff and only offering higher price deals, in both cases accepting the churn.

      In these markets, there is definitely no attempt to preferentially target existing customers with the really good offers, because otherwise you'd never make any money. If you have a segment you believe will be more likely to churn out to a competitor, the norm is to actively offer them a deal to stay eg via email or outbound sales calls, but not as good a deal as the acquisition tariff. For any segment where there's less likelihood of churn, you still offer deals, but only passively (eg through the web site). Those passive deals won't be very good at all, probably worse than the proactively promoted offers, but there's better offers to be had if those customers phone up to cancel. Even then, these customers will still struggle to get the best deal by staying with their current retail services provider, be that phones, broadband, energy, insurance, or home services.

      In practice, this does mean the offers work as though segmented by age and socio economic group, and the companies know that, and don't mind. However, IME management are very wary of doing anything directly off those forms of segmentation, they could be clobbered both legally and reputationally if it leaked out, because it could be seen as various categories of discrimination. The sort of cost of being caught doing the wrong thing there would be of the order of several hundred million pounds for a large retailer. Incidentally, that's why the government are progressively intervening in the energy market, because it is the older, poorer customers who generate most of the profits, as the CMA enquiry found, although it was widely known before. There is of course a consequence of calling this a "broken market" and fixing it, that the good deals for people who shop around will vanish, because the companies can't rely on the inertia of disengaged customers. You may see that as a good thing, but if that's the case, don't complain when your energy or airtime bill goes up by 25%. Despite what the tabloids claim, most of these companies aren't making excess margins, so they'd need to earn the same profits more broadly spread across the customer base.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Add Sky to that list for fixed like broadband and phone. I have experienced them increasing my monthly bills following contract expiry. A quick look on the homepage revealed much cheaper alternatives for "new customers", but unfortunately not for existing customers.

    1. ibmalone Silver badge

      If you're past the contract, find a suitable alternative provider, then call sky up to cancel. Either they give you a sensible offer, or you move. What they really seem to be doing is two things: 1. hoping people will sign up for a new fixed contract, 2. gradually squeezing more out of people in the hope they wont notice. Not much downside for them unfortunately, unless lots of people start playing the game back. Bit frustrating if you rent though, as new contracts can be longer than a rental contract (my last landlord gave us notice 12 months into an 18 month plusnet contract).

    2. lybad

      Sky broadband

      Again, thinks that depends - when my Sky half price fibre deal was about to end, they automatically extended it for 2 months, and offered me a 12 month extension on same deal. All by e-mail, before I was going to contact them about it.

      In the end, I increased my costs by going for the 72MB fibre, a new router, and when I didn't get the advertised speed, a free OpenReach engineer visit. So I was actually reasonably happy.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    This isn't new....

    It's been happening in the cellular industry for years. People who use contracts (not PayG) usually have no idea of the real value of their handsets as they are seen to be 'Free' or less than £150 because the real cost has been bundled up into their contract. When they walk into the apple store and see £700+ it's a bit of a shock.

    EE, Voda and Three take the gamble that people won't automatically upgrade at the end of their contract. So they'll buy the handsets from the manufacturers at cost price (so probably £400-odd for an iPhone 7 with an RRP of £699) and then amortize the RRP cost of the handset across the contract, so they're making a profit on the handset, as normal, and then add Airtime.

    However the end user just sees the monthly cost. But after the contract ends and goes onto rolling contract, of course you're still paying for the handset you've paid off, and thus it's pure profit from that point on for the cellco's.

    The big difference with O2 is that they unbundle this under their 'Refresh' policy. So you have a clear cost for the handset and the airtime. When the handset is paid off, you stop paying for it. If you want to upgrade early, pay off the handset. Much better option.

    Of course, the other option is to just go and buy the handset outright and do SIM Only. The downside to that is that the networks don't make the initial handset profit and as such, you don't get such a good deal on the airtime with the amount of data etc vs someone buying the handset from the Cellco. Or unless you're willing to tie yourself into a 24 month contract. That's where GiffGaff come in as if you're smart enough to be able to unloop everything and happy to support yourself, then they are cheap as chips. Three are similar on SIMO and have decent tariffs.

    1. tiggity Silver badge

      Re: This isn't new....

      Indeed, have both a 3 & GiffGaff SIM only deals as cheap (& 2 providers increases coverage chance in some badly served areas of UK with dual SIM phone)

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Wrong, wrong, wrong!

    The phone is FREE people, the £30/m is for all those texts, calls and datas you make. Sheesh, don't you guys know anything.

    This was effectively what a senior manager in my last company told me when I tried to point out that no, there's no such thing as a free iPhone. I guess when you're used to getting everything for free, it's difficult to think about things.

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    How are vodafone even still in business

    Used them once back in the 90's through an airtime provider. Switched to Mercury and never looked back.

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward


    "We send our customers regular updates about their options before and after they reach the end of their contract."

    If I ate beef once a year, one would not say that I regularly ate beef.

    1. ibmalone Silver badge

      Re: This:

      I think it's code for "bombard people with offers to upgrade their handset", under that interpretation I got Orange 'associated companies' phoning up 6 months before my contract was due to end.

    2. Anonymous Coward

      Re: This:

      If I ate beef once a year, one would not say that I regularly ate beef.

      Surely that depends upon WHEN you eat the beef. If it is say around Christmas, you have a periodically repeating pattern of consumption. That's regular. It may not be frequent, but it is regular. Since they're claiming that they do this before and after the contract end, then so long as there is a some repeating pattern (like once every thirteen months) they are correct, if disingenuous.

      You didn't come here to avoid pedantry, I hope?

      1. Commswonk Silver badge

        Re: This:

        You didn't come here to avoid pedantry, I hope?

        As the original poster has a silver badge then any hope of avoiding pedantry should have been dispelled long ago.

    3. Woodnag

      Actually one would

      If you eat beef once a year, every year, then you eat beef regularly.

      Just not frequently.

      So please change your engine oil frequently (I suggest 60% to 75% of the OCI). I don't care how regular that interval is, depends on your car use pattern dunnit.

  12. stu 4

    They're all the same

    They seem to all manage to have the same amount of confusion on their websites, making it as difficult as possible to find basic information.

    The actual bundle prices with a phone are almost always more than buying a phone outright + a phone plan by a considerable margin too which is insane - you'd expect a discounted rate.

    I've never really understood why anyone does it - but I imagine it's to do with the effective ease of the credit, plus the fact that many people really really don't understand what things cost - my friend for example changes his car every 3 years 'for free'...

    "I pay £500 a month for my car loan. when it's finished after 3 years, I change to a new car and it still just costs me £500 a month) so it's free - why wouldn't you change"

    that's their logic.. the fact my car was paid for 5 years ago and costs me nothing a month (in loans) is irrelevant apparently..

    "no no you are missing the point - this new car is costing me no more than the old one"



    and yeh - we're talking about a 'smart' guy - degree, good job...

    now think of the young folk buying these 600 quid phones... it's them more than the oldies that the telcos are ripping off - but they seem too stupid to care.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Why do people go for such deals - is it because they must have the latest shiny shiny or what?

    I have always bought the phone outright and then shopped around for the best sim only deal. With my dual sim phone I have two providers, one in France and a Tesco pay as you go for the UK. My French account costs me about 190 per YEAR and Tesco about half that which makes me a happy camper.

    Ohm by the way my phone cost less than 100.

  14. andy 103

    Only applies to thick people

    I don't feel sorry for anyone who is "caught out" by this.

    Clearly if you get a brand new smartphone and have left the shop without paying anything for it, possibly beyond the first months rental, then clearly you have not been given a phone "for free". You are paying for it, over the lifetime of the contract, which includes airtime/data.

    And why would you just let a deal continue with *any* product or service, without looking into alternatives? A prime example being car insurance. Unless you're a total simpleton you can pretty much always get a better deal by using a price comparison website every single year.

    Sorry, but this would only happen to the most stupid of stupid people.

    1. Pascal Monett Silver badge

      Re: "Sorry, but this would only happen to the most stupid of stupid people."

      Welcome to the real world !

    2. Woodnag

      Consumer protection laws...

      ...are there to protect the gullible, the less informed, the less analytical population.

  15. EddieD

    O2, too.

    I had a contract with O2 and they didn't tell me about the end of my contract, and being an inherently lazy bastard, I didn't do anthing.

    Then, I lost my contract phone and bought a replacement on Amazon and thought "bugger this for a game of soldiers" and stalked down to O2 prepared to wax greatly wroth upon them, but they meekly, okay, willingly, gave me a new sim-only contract - half the price and far better terms.

    Now, here's the thing. Up until then, when I'd been meekly paying for a phone I'd paid off well over 18 months earlier, I'd never heard a dicky bird from O2. Immediately after I switched to a much better deal for me, I started getting rung about 3 times a week with "incredible offers on new hardware" which I ended up having to block with Truecaller.

    Odd that.

  16. Wo

    O2, but not too

    I have twice bought a phone on contract, and both times analysed the costs up front, and found the deal offered (by O2 incidentally) was a better option than buying the phone outright with a sim only deal - by about £50 or so. Both times was I contacted ahead of the end of contract (I'd made a calendar entry to follow up) that a better option could be available to me if I got a new phone. Short discussion later determined whether to swap to sim only or not.

    So maybe this is widespread, but my experience (approx 10yrs ago) did not indicate so.

    These days it's always cheaper to buy the phone outright.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: O2, but not too

      I think 10 years ago if you bought a phone outright you paid an inflated price, just like the price Hertz pays for a car used to be about 70% of the end user price.

      Nowadays it's a bit more competitive.

      My current solution is a Smarty SIM (no international calls though) and a Three PAYG SIM for the odd times I need it. It's working out around £7-£9 a month, for roughly what I was paying £15 for on contract.

  17. pleb

    % APR?

    I don't understand how they get away with selling phones on what amounts to Hire Purchase without having to comply with the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act, such as quoting the APR and total cost of borrowing.

    1. peter_dtm
      Black Helicopters

      Re: % APR?

      I don’t understand why this is not fraud.

      They entered into a time limited agreement with you. And failed to stop it; knowingly.

      Shirley that is fraud ?

      1. Tony W

        Re: % APR?

        Charging for something not provided - I think you could probably take them to the small claims court. They're relying on individuals (like me) thinking it's too much hassle and being uncertain of their rights.

        That was the case with me and Vodafone. But I did phone and explain why I was leaving them immediately and would never ever use them again.

        Yes I am over 65. but I would prefer to think that's just coincidence.

      2. ARGO

        Re: % APR?

        Because they're not time limited. I've had "fixed term" contracts with almost all the networks - they all had T&C clearly stating that after the initial period, it automatically converts to a rolling 30 day contract.

        If it was a proper time limited contract, you'd be cut off at the end of the period. Can't see that being popular.

  18. Tromos

    Vermin Media

    While chatting with an elderly neighbour, she told me that she had come to the end of her contract with Virgin Media and worried about being cut off she went to a shopping centre where she knew they usually set up a stand. She didn't want a new phone, it had taken her most of the contract period to learn how to use the one she had. She came away re-assured and grateful that all she had to do was to carry on paying and she would be allowed to continue using the old phone and would keep the same number.

    Next time she goes to that shopping centre I've offered to go with her and I reckon I can get twenty quid a month off for her. Either that or a PAC to switch to a fiver a month GiffGaff which would be more than adequate for her requirements.

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    O2 doing this

    A few months ago I stopped two separate contracts where this had been going on for some years after the original handsets had been paid off but the full price was still being charged. If you consider that this was for one iPhone 4 and one iPhone 4S originally on two year deals that will give you an idea of how long this goes on for when they realise no one is looking too hard. No handset upgrades ever took place.

    Eventually we got six months difference back, but not everything taken. Its our foolishness in part but now they're off the approved supplier list. Not so much for this but the pretending that they're a network not doing this.

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    O2 isn't that clean either..

    .. but they hide their villainy in the PAYG arena.

    I've got quite an old chip as I only occasionally wander into the UK now, and it's now gotten so bad that I'll be switching to any provider BUT O2.

  21. Bewildered49

    Extra charge after contract ended

    Vodafone have charged me an extra £1.50 as an out of commitment fee since the end of my contract, which they did not flag up at the time.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019