Expired minimum terms, a tendency not to switch and inadequate communication from operators mean telecoms consumers are missing out on significant savings
Research paints a largely positive picture of the Dutch telecoms market
On 16 January 2025, the ACM published the results of its telecoms market review looking into the quality, choice and price of fixed and mobile services in the Netherlands in 2024. The report was released alongside the findings of a consumer survey conducted by the regulator. According to the ACM, its research indicates that the quality of telecoms services in the country is high and among the best internationally, and states that the vast majority of consumers are satisfied with their own provider. 82% believe that there are sufficient mobile providers, with consumers having a choice between KPN, Odido and Vodafone, as well as a number of MVNOs. Regarding fixed-line services (broadband, TV and landline), 67% feel there are sufficient providers, with consumers able to purchase fibre from vertically integrated players (e.g. DELTA, KPN, VodafoneZiggo) and retail operators, including Freedom, Odido and Online, that rely on wholesale access to infrastructure. In addition, consumers are generally satisfied with mobile prices, although half of consumers consider the price of fixed services high. While about a quarter of consumers do not think they can save money by taking out a different broadband subscription, one in two would not be prepared to spin down to a lower speed to do so.
Many consumers are outside of their minimum contract term, paying more than if they were to change operator or tariff
The ACM’s consumer survey also states that half of consumers have had a subscription with the same provider for more than five years, while about one in 10 had switched to another operator in the past year. A fair price or good quality of service are the most common reasons for not switching. At the same time, the potential saving on monthly costs is the most important motivation to switch. In the Netherlands, price competition between providers is mainly based on discounts that consumers receive when they switch or sign a new contract with their current provider. However, the ACM’s research shows that there are many “dormant contracts” for which the initial contract period has expired and subscriptions may be automatically extended. This can result in some consumers paying more than those that are relatively more engaged with the market – an issue compounded by the fact that almost half of consumers find it difficult to compare prices between providers.
A slower broadband service can cost more than a faster one
Another striking conclusion from the regulator’s analysis is that households with broadband subscriptions in the lowest speed category (<100Mbps) pay an average of €44 (£37) per month – more than what customers pay for speeds in the 100-250Mbps and 250-750Mbps ranges. The ACM adds that this problem is made worse as most consumers in the budget segment have a dormant contract and are missing out on potential savings of up to €250 (£211) per year by not choosing a new contract or an alternative provider. An international comparison shows that the prices for fixed broadband services in the Netherlands are higher than in most other European countries, particularly for 100Mbps tariffs. Mobile prices are in the middle bracket, broadly aligning with the findings of the BIPT’s own recent benchmarking exercise for Belgium. The ACM provides a caveat that drawing conclusions from the international comparison remains complex due to differences between countries, including macroeconomic conditions, regulation, the number of competing networks and the nature and intensity of competition.
Further research is planned into pricing, with the ACM committing to monitoring compliance with information requirements
Based on the results, the ACM considers that it is justified in conducting further research into the market dynamics and prices in the budget segment for fixed broadband. According to Manon Leijten (board member, ACM), the combination of high prices and many dormant contracts in this corner of the market necessitates further scrutiny given the essential nature of affordable internet access. The regulator will also be monitoring operators' compliance with transparency obligations more closely. Providers are legally required to actively tell customers about the expiration of their contract – i.e. give an end-of-contract notification – and must inform customers annually about their best tariffs. However, the ACM considers that in practice this sometimes does not happen sufficiently, if at all.
