Oh, no ! Dodo !

We admit that we’re fascinated by Dodo.  Do they even know there’s a Trade Practices Act, despite being dealt with by ACCC for serious breaches ?

Take a look at the Naked DSL advert in the top left hand corner of Dodo’s home page as at 4 June 2009.  In a few square inches, there are three TPA breaches. 

We’ll explain what they are.

The home page

The main message

Always start a TPA advertising analysis with the question:  ‘What’s the main message of the advert ?’

Here, the eye-catching points are:

• Naked DSL from $29.99 a month
• No phone line needed

What a bargain !  Where do we sign ?

The full facts

Look just to the right of the highlighted $29.99 per month text … that’s not a dead pixel on your monitor.  It’s a footnote number.  A tiny little feint number ’1′.

It references some small, dull text at the bottom of the page that grudgingly reveals that to get the $29.99 price, you must bundle the DSL service with a Dodo mobile service.

What’s wrong with that ?

Nothing, if it was prominently explained in a way that formed part of the main message.

But in this case:

• It isn’t prominent, and doesn’t form part of the main message.  In fact, it significantly changes the main message.  The main message gives no clue that the buyer has to buy a second service to get the low price.

Breach of section 52 of the Trade Practices Act

• There’s a real problem in claiming that a customer won’t need a phone line, but requiring them to take a mobile service.  The value proposition of naked is that you can factor out the cost of a phone service if all you want is DSL.  To tie in an alternative phone service in the small print makes a lie, for practical purposes, of the ‘no phone line’ claim.  It’s literally true but it’s still misleading.

Breach of section 52 of the Trade Practices Act

• The total price of the plan isn’t stated prominently, and the total price of the bundle isn’t stated at all. 

Breach of section 53C of the Trade Practices Act