In my recent post, I pointed out why and how I wanted to get my right with KPN’s commercials at Dutch television stating that their DVB-T implementation in the form of Digitenne is an improvement of your signal quality. I also stated that KPN is, with thanks to me, not allowed to broadcast this claim anymore.

However, KPN doesn’t seem to agree with me and the decision of the Reclame Code Commissie and requested further appeal at the Board of Appeal of the RCC. As KPN points out, their claim of “Improved sound and picture” isn’t absolute. Claiming they have the ‘best’ quality, is an absolute claim. However, ‘improving’ isn’t absolute and only true in some specific context.

Digitenne improves quality in comparison with analog signal. As KPN claims, most consumers are still using this kind of signal, and this is therefore also Digitenne’s audience.

Furthermore, KPN considers that consumers who already decided to move to a digital signal, investigated which provider has the best signal and that they should know that signal quality for all digital providers is more or less equal. Therefore, consumers already having a digital signal, won’t be brought into buying Digitenne. They would consider this campaign as a general campaign for digital television.

KPN concludes in their two page fax that their claim of “improved sound and picture” is correct for consumers with an analog signal (which is, as KPN likes to point to again, most of the consumers). A consumer already having a digital signal will judge this claim on its merits and wouldn’t be brought to buying Digitenne (which is the point where the decision of the RCC is based on).

In my opinion, KPN doesn’t introduce any real new facts. In their commercials KPN doesn’t make clear this claim is only true for consumers current having analog signal. Currently, more then 50% of Dutch households have digital television. This is the majority of all households, so that claim of KPN isn’t true. They are currently targeting at the minority of all consumers,

However, this isn’t the point of their objection. Their objection can be considered true if all consumers currently having digital television, won’t even consider taking Digitenne, as they already know that all digital providers provide the same quality of signal (more or less). There isn’t any known market research on this and KPN doesn’t provide any supporting facts for this supposition.

Furthermore, I can’t imagine that all 50% of all Dutch households would have researched signal quality of all digital providers and that they know that there isn’t any significant difference inbetween. In most cases, consumers would choose ‘at random’ for a digital provider, not knowing that there can be difference in signal quality.

If a company, like KPN, claims that have ‘improved’ quality, the consumer would think there is a significant difference in signal quality at digital providers and consider moving to KPN. Only consumers who take the time to read papers of researches on signal quality, can possibly know there isn’t a significant difference between providers and their signal quality. In such cases and if the consumer primarily wants the best signal, he wouldn’t even choose for KPN.

Maybe you can give me any more reasons why KPN should not continue broadcasting their commercials. I have 14 days to respond.