We need your feedback: How do we make 90-day plans easier to understand?

[Brooke_C]

Hey Community,

When we announced that we would be closing down our Public Lab, we also committed to collecting your feedback and ideas in more actionable ways. Below is one example of how we plan to do just that.

Some feedback we’ve been regularly hearing is that new customers are having a difficult time understanding our 90-day plans. I recently witnessed this confusion firsthand, when a family member joined Public Mobile. She asked questions like: What is a 90-day plan? And, if I get a 90-day plan, how does the payment work? Do I pay every 30 days for a 90 day period or do I pay for the full 90 days upfront? Being the only carrier in Canada who provides 90-day plans, it is not surprising that this is the response, and we recognize that offering a plan for this length of time is unfamiliar for most. That is why, from now until April 20th, we want to work with you to see how we can make it easier for everyone to understand.

Today, we communicate the 90-day total within the plan calculators on our plans page, activation portal and Self-Serve. The total is displayed as follows:

We are looking to update this view in order to address the confusion some customers are experiencing when they purchase a 90-day plan.

Here’s how it will work

Below, you will you find several design and copy ideas that we’ve come up with. There are 4 versions, so please make sure to pay close attention to which variant you like.

1. Vote below on the option you like the most by clicking on the ‘Bravo’ icon
2. If you don’t like any of the proposed options, or have a different idea, create your own design and post it as a reply to this thread. Here are a couple of pointers when doing so:
   • Be sure to take the lens of someone who has never heard of Public Mobile before and is hearing about our 90-day plans for the first time
   • Get support for your option from the Community by sharing why you think your design and copy would be easier for others to understand

After April 20th, we will review the submissions, with particular focus on the most Bravo’d options. While we will be closely looking at the designs which have the most Bravo’s, we will also take into consideration other factors, such as how design elements impact timelines, when making the selection. We may also find that a combination of the options is best, and decide to pull them together for the ultimate customer-friendly design. From there, we will make the big reveal!

We are looking forward to seeing all the creative ideas, and hearing your thoughts!

-Public Mobile Community Team

[youbme]

I lean towards option 3 or 4. I agree with the above, using the phrase "90-day term" might help further clarify that pre-payment is for that specific amount of time.

I suspect this confusion will continue even with further clarity. Since it's beginning, PM has greatly improved the language used to explain its plans, yet there always seems to be confusion. I'm happy to see PM continuing to improve this aspect, but in the end of the day, I'm afraid customers will often see what they want to (or what they expect) when reading plans. The psychology of marketing is a funny thing...

[mimmo]

---

@raulg wrote:

Option 3 is the clear winner for me.

Also, I might be crazy, but I would start refering to them as 'plan subscriptions' instead of just 'plans'. '30 days plan subscription' vs '90 days plan subscription'. I think it would help people to understand them better.

---

or even use the word term. ie a 90 day term 

[Valthonis]

Why not put the est. monthly cost up front as the large text and then in the smaller text put the 90 day total? I think that would attract people a lot more.

Like:

You pay every 30 days about       $35     That's $105 that's billed every $90 days

[raulg]

Option 3 is the clear winner for me.

Also, I might be crazy, but I would start refering to them as 'plan subscriptions' instead of just 'plans'. '30 days plan subscription' vs '90 days plan subscription'. I think it would help people to understand them better.

[Ham1]

The most important thing is to make it more clear that there is only one payment for the full 90 days. Otherwise, I vote for option #3

[Mulder7983]

you pay the full 135 doallr for 90 day

[texwood]

I like #3 the best. 

[smp99]

2 things I have got out of this thread

People are passionate about PM, they really want to make it work.

PM is going to have a hard time deciding what option. You certainly will not please everyone.

[fsm7268]

#3 for me. I misunderstood when I signed up until I saw a post about this. Thanks for making it more clear.

[MoraMan]

didn't realize they were difficult to understand. don't fix it if it aint broke.

[mabmarkus]

Option 2 is the most-clear cut and non-ambigious!

[NancyJ]

@ Brook _C

I am unsure why it is such a confusion on the 90 day plan, it is pretty--clear you choose either a 30 or 90 day payment plan. 

What may be making it confusing is with the wording of...."thats $xxx / 30 days". 

When choosing a 90 day plan, I thinks this is all you need to know.....

[will13am]

---

@Korth wrote:

I compared 30 day vs 90 day and immediately understood that 90 day saves me a couple bucks a month.  I asked about how Rewards were applied on 90 day plans and received an answer (30+30+30=90) which was also easy enough to understand.  Not sure where all the confusion and "cost analysis" stuff factors in ... I don't really expect a whole lot of customers will be dumbfounded and mystified by the exotic details, lol.

Not everyone is savvy like you.  We are all constructed differently.  The English language is full of colloquial phrases.

---

[Autumn]

I find less words are better. No need to write lengthy explainations. I like Option #3 best. Clear and concise.

[MoreYummy]

Just put in the cost per 90 days, dont calculate per 30 days cost in 90 days plan.  Many just confuse about it.  

Or simply dont use how many days, use how many months

[Korth]

I compared 30 day vs 90 day and immediately understood that 90 day saves me a couple bucks a month.  I asked about how Rewards were applied on 90 day plans and received an answer (30+30+30=90) which was also easy enough to understand.  Not sure where all the confusion and "cost analysis" stuff factors in ... I don't really expect a whole lot of customers will be dumbfounded and mystified by the exotic details, lol.

[will13am]

---

@computergeek541 wrote:

---

@will13am wrote:

---

@computergeek541 wrote:

---

@will13am wrote:

I am going to offer a contrarian view here.  Let me put on the black hat first.  I think the KISS principle works very well here.  The confusion really comes from trying to dissect a 90 day plan into a discussion about 30 days.  Why not talk about individual days?  We all love the analogize how many cups of coffee a day something costs.  Let's look at the ubiquitous 2016 fall promo.  This plan costs $120 every renewal at 90 day intervals.  However, the spin doctors refer to the plan as $40/30 days.  This is what causes customers to ask, do I pay 1/3 of the 90 day cost every 30 days.  So, if we are talking about a plan with 90 day duration, do not try to dissect the duration into shorter elements and affix a cost to it.  For greater clarify, in the plan web page, additional wording may be added under the Plan Length to say that payment frequency is the same as the plan length.  BTW, if I had to pick my poison, I choose door #3.

---

As I was saying in the post right above you, I agree with the KISS method.  I would even go as far as Public Mobile is over thinking it.  An example would be $120 for 90 days of service as in the Fall Promo plan.  Saying anything else just adds to the confusion.  In my opinion, there really isn't anything you can do if I a customer doesn't grasp that concept.

When someone goes to a grocery store and prices are further broken down into price per gram or price per mL, it's obvious to the customer that you just can't rip open the package and take part of it to get a lower price.  That is obvious because you can physically see the product in front of you.  In the case of cell phone service, that may be harder for people to understand because you can't "see" a service (the product) in front of you.  So, why advertise it as such?

For that example, by going around and saying that's $40/30 days or approximiately $40 per month, that will just lead people to beleive that they can pay for 30 days at a time when that just isn't an option.  We'll also get a whole bunch of questions about how the data works.  I believe that mess was largely caused by Public Mobile themselves by trying to advertise 90 plans in 30 day almost-equivalents.  I believe Public Mobile should just stop doing that, and I would also say that it even borders on deceptive advertising (even if it's not deliberate), because at those prices, there is no 30 day plan available with those included features.  This an attempt to make the price look lower, but that's what I thnk is causing most of the confusion.

My vote is for "option #0" - keep it the same as before with no mention of approximate monthly prices, and to stop advertising with further 30-day breakdowns of 90 day plans.  Going around and changing things up adding more details, in my opinion, will only make things worse.

---

It was pretty late when I posted.  I did not read everyone's vote.  I only looked at the OP and the voting options.  There is always room for more than one contrarian.  BTW, there is no option #0. 

---

I didn't read every post in this thread either.  I was just saying what I thought so that the moderators might possibly read what I had to say.

You obviously know I was just being silly by saying option #0.  I think Public ought to just leave things alone.

---

All this play on 30 days is the marketing department trying to throw in cost comparisons here and there to give the impression of value.  Because this is the only service in Canada with 90 renewal options, they might have concerns that the cost appears high relative to the competition.  In dissecting costs, an unintended consequence was produced.  Remove the root cause and problem goes away.  Options 1-4 amounts to the pound of cure. 

[computergeek541]

---

@will13am wrote:

---

@computergeek541 wrote:

---

@will13am wrote:

I am going to offer a contrarian view here.  Let me put on the black hat first.  I think the KISS principle works very well here.  The confusion really comes from trying to dissect a 90 day plan into a discussion about 30 days.  Why not talk about individual days?  We all love the analogize how many cups of coffee a day something costs.  Let's look at the ubiquitous 2016 fall promo.  This plan costs $120 every renewal at 90 day intervals.  However, the spin doctors refer to the plan as $40/30 days.  This is what causes customers to ask, do I pay 1/3 of the 90 day cost every 30 days.  So, if we are talking about a plan with 90 day duration, do not try to dissect the duration into shorter elements and affix a cost to it.  For greater clarify, in the plan web page, additional wording may be added under the Plan Length to say that payment frequency is the same as the plan length.  BTW, if I had to pick my poison, I choose door #3.

---

As I was saying in the post right above you, I agree with the KISS method.  I would even go as far as Public Mobile is over thinking it.  An example would be $120 for 90 days of service as in the Fall Promo plan.  Saying anything else just adds to the confusion.  In my opinion, there really isn't anything you can do if I a customer doesn't grasp that concept.

When someone goes to a grocery store and prices are further broken down into price per gram or price per mL, it's obvious to the customer that you just can't rip open the package and take part of it to get a lower price.  That is obvious because you can physically see the product in front of you.  In the case of cell phone service, that may be harder for people to understand because you can't "see" a service (the product) in front of you.  So, why advertise it as such?

For that example, by going around and saying that's $40/30 days or approximiately $40 per month, that will just lead people to beleive that they can pay for 30 days at a time when that just isn't an option.  We'll also get a whole bunch of questions about how the data works.  I believe that mess was largely caused by Public Mobile themselves by trying to advertise 90 plans in 30 day almost-equivalents.  I believe Public Mobile should just stop doing that, and I would also say that it even borders on deceptive advertising (even if it's not deliberate), because at those prices, there is no 30 day plan available with those included features.  This an attempt to make the price look lower, but that's what I thnk is causing most of the confusion.

My vote is for "option #0" - keep it the same as before with no mention of approximate monthly prices, and to stop advertising with further 30-day breakdowns of 90 day plans.  Going around and changing things up adding more details, in my opinion, will only make things worse.

---

It was pretty late when I posted.  I did not read everyone's vote.  I only looked at the OP and the voting options.  There is always room for more than one contrarian.  BTW, there is no option #0. 

---

I didn't read every post in this thread either.  I was just saying what I thought so that the moderators might possibly read what I had to say.

You obviously know I was just being silly by saying option #0.  I think Public ought to just leave things alone.

[Nightkiller]

Public Mobile gives savvy users the best mobile network access at really reasonable rates. You want to communicate what your customers need to do to make it possible.

The essentials are as follows:

Hey, people! Pay $35 upfront and Canada's best full featured mobile network is yours for 30 days. Stay as long as you want by topping up every month. We'll even reward you for staying.

Better Deal! Pay $120 upfront and Canada's best full featured mobile network is yours for 90 days! You'll save $5 a month for even BETTER service and you won't have to top up for another 90 days! We'll even reward you for staying!

Or something like that.

The copy tries to address some of the issues about what 90 days means as mentioned elsewhere in the forum. PublicMobile's problem is in framing the service in terms of days rather than months as is common with other carriers. You want people to commit to the service and offer something tangible if they make a stronger commitment. I'm not scared using "upfront" here because we can't afford to sugarcoat what's expected from the customer to get an advantage. Public Mobile is no frills and needs that kind of undertone to convey sharpness at every level. The tricky part is getting people to see beyond the 30 day horizon. My guess is that the people who would benefit most from Public Mobile have even less than a 30 day horizon.

Your customers need to have a stake in your services. That's already implied in the contractual arrangement by offering the service. Why not make it personal?

[will13am]

---

@computergeek541 wrote:

---

@will13am wrote:

I am going to offer a contrarian view here.  Let me put on the black hat first.  I think the KISS principle works very well here.  The confusion really comes from trying to dissect a 90 day plan into a discussion about 30 days.  Why not talk about individual days?  We all love the analogize how many cups of coffee a day something costs.  Let's look at the ubiquitous 2016 fall promo.  This plan costs $120 every renewal at 90 day intervals.  However, the spin doctors refer to the plan as $40/30 days.  This is what causes customers to ask, do I pay 1/3 of the 90 day cost every 30 days.  So, if we are talking about a plan with 90 day duration, do not try to dissect the duration into shorter elements and affix a cost to it.  For greater clarify, in the plan web page, additional wording may be added under the Plan Length to say that payment frequency is the same as the plan length.  BTW, if I had to pick my poison, I choose door #3.

---

As I was saying in the post right above you, I agree with the KISS method.  I would even go as far as Public Mobile is over thinking it.  An example would be $120 for 90 days of service as in the Fall Promo plan.  Saying anything else just adds to the confusion.  In my opinion, there really isn't anything you can do if I a customer doesn't grasp that concept.

When someone goes to a grocery store and prices are further broken down into price per gram or price per mL, it's obvious to the customer that you just can't rip open the package and take part of it to get a lower price.  That is obvious because you can physically see the product in front of you.  In the case of cell phone service, that may be harder for people to understand because you can't "see" a service (the product) in front of you.  So, why advertise it as such?

For that example, by going around and saying that's $40/30 days or approximiately $40 per month, that will just lead people to beleive that they can pay for 30 days at a time when that just isn't an option.  We'll also get a whole bunch of questions about how the data works.  I believe that mess was largely caused by Public Mobile themselves by trying to advertise 90 plans in 30 day almost-equivalents.  I believe Public Mobile should just stop doing that, and I would also say that it even borders on deceptive advertising (even if it's not deliberate), because at those prices, there is no 30 day plan available with those included features.  This an attempt to make the price look lower, but that's what I thnk is causing most of the confusion.

My vote is for "option #0" - keep it the same as before with no mention of approximate monthly prices, and to stop advertising with further 30-day breakdowns of 90 day plans.  Going around and changing things up adding more details, in my opinion, will only make things worse.

---

It was pretty late when I posted.  I did not read everyone's vote.  I only looked at the OP and the voting options.  There is always room for more than one contrarian.  BTW, there is no option #0. 

[DeniseS]

OPTION # 4

[computergeek541]

---

@will13am wrote:

I am going to offer a contrarian view here.  Let me put on the black hat first.  I think the KISS principle works very well here.  The confusion really comes from trying to dissect a 90 day plan into a discussion about 30 days.  Why not talk about individual days?  We all love the analogize how many cups of coffee a day something costs.  Let's look at the ubiquitous 2016 fall promo.  This plan costs $120 every renewal at 90 day intervals.  However, the spin doctors refer to the plan as $40/30 days.  This is what causes customers to ask, do I pay 1/3 of the 90 day cost every 30 days.  So, if we are talking about a plan with 90 day duration, do not try to dissect the duration into shorter elements and affix a cost to it.  For greater clarify, in the plan web page, additional wording may be added under the Plan Length to say that payment frequency is the same as the plan length.  BTW, if I had to pick my poison, I choose door #3.

---

As I was saying in the post right above you, I agree with the KISS method.  I would even go as far as Public Mobile is over thinking it.  An example would be $120 for 90 days of service as in the Fall Promo plan.  Saying anything else just adds to the confusion.  In my opinion, there really isn't anything you can do if I a customer doesn't grasp that concept.

When someone goes to a grocery store and prices are further broken down into price per gram or price per mL, it's obvious to the customer that you just can't rip open the package and take part of it to get a lower price.  That is obvious because you can physically see the product in front of you.  In the case of cell phone service, that may be harder for people to understand because you can't "see" a service (the product) in front of you.  So, why advertise it as such?

For that example, by going around and saying that's $40/30 days or approximiately $40 per month, that will just lead people to beleive that they can pay for 30 days at a time when that just isn't an option.  We'll also get a whole bunch of questions about how the data works.  I believe that mess was largely caused by Public Mobile themselves by trying to advertise 90 plans in 30 day almost-equivalents.  I believe Public Mobile should just stop doing that, and I would also say that it even borders on deceptive advertising (even if it's not deliberate), because at those prices, there is no 30 day plan available with those included features.  This an attempt to make the price look lower, but that's what I thnk is causing most of the confusion.

My vote is for "option #0" - keep it the same as before with no mention of approximate monthly prices, and to stop advertising with further 30-day breakdowns of 90 day plans.  Going around and changing things up adding more details, in my opinion, will only make things worse.

[stonechucker]

Option 2 is the one I bravoed.  However, the 30 day comparison NEEDS to be removed.

if the plan selector display could be reprogrammed to allow a customer trying to compare 30 vs 90 day plans, without resetting slelections, it would be easier to compare actual costs.

[CalvinW]

All looks the same to me. What we really need is a larger discount for the 90 day plans.

[lyndsay_sbaum]

i think option 2 make sense. telling you its about 35 a month but your total tday will be 105 for the 90 plan

[ute1978]

(I haven't read all pages of this long topic) but

The 90 day plan is pretty obvious and nothing needs to be changed imho.

No matter what you will do to try to explain it, some people just don't get it.

[mimmo]

I think you need to go one step further.  you need to explain the 90 day plans better.  I don't recall seeing  any mention of 90 day plans untill you get to the plan picker.   so a link or a popup window saying extly how 90 days worked and the benefits woudl be useful. If people understood how they worked then you could even leave things as they are, else go with #3

[will13am]

I am going to offer a contrarian view here.  Let me put on the black hat first.  I think the KISS principle works very well here.  The confusion really comes from trying to dissect a 90 day plan into a discussion about 30 days.  Why not talk about individual days?  We all love the analogize how many cups of coffee a day something costs.  Let's look at the ubiquitous 2016 fall promo.  This plan costs $120 every renewal at 90 day intervals.  However, the spin doctors refer to the plan as $40/30 days.  This is what causes customers to ask, do I pay 1/3 of the 90 day cost every 30 days.  So, if we are talking about a plan with 90 day duration, do not try to dissect the duration into shorter elements and affix a cost to it.  For greater clarify, in the plan web page, additional wording may be added under the Plan Length to say that payment frequency is the same as the plan length.  BTW, if I had to pick my poison, I choose door #3.

[computergeek541]

Here's my opinion:

i believe it just needs to say "$150 for 90 days" or "$120 for 90 days" or whatever the price of that plan is.  I do not believe there should be anything at all comparing it to 30 day pricing or any of that.  I consider that to just be overcomplicating things and the more details you add, the more questions there will be causing even more confusion.

Just stating the price and the term length alone really is the simplest from my point of view.  Customers just need to understand how much they are paying and how many days of service that they are paying for.  I would say that if a customer doesn't understand those 2 concepts, adding more details isn't going to help.

If Public Mobile really wants to avoid the confusion about 90 day plans, I would say that the only real way would be to eliminate them, while grandfathering customers who are already on them.

More importantly, I believe it's more important to change from 30 and 90 day plans to 1 month and 3 month plans.  That would make it so much easier for customer to understand when they need to have payments in the account by.

[Someone_here]

---

@Luddite wrote:

Some more basic suggestions:

a) stop advertising $xxx for 30 thirty days*  (* when purchasing 90 day plan)

b) move to 1 month and 3 month plans

a) is the most critical source of the confusion. IMHO Let people figure out for themselves the 30 day cost.

---

b) is not a bad idea at all, but I'm pretty sure it falls under "we will also take into consideration other factors, such as how design elements impact timelines [and budget]," 😉

I can't imagine the changes required to the whole billing system for this to become true, and given that a bug needs on average 27,34 years to be fixed here, well, ... ! 😉