“Dear customer: your tariff is rising again” – why we’re paying for data we don’t even use

Many mobile users in Uzbekistan say they have grown accustomed to this pattern. Operators notify subscribers that the monthly fee will increase, promise “additional benefits,” and move on. Complaints follow – but rarely lead anywhere.

The SMS that says it all

Let’s take one example. Recently, Beeline subscribers using the ‘Oila Max’ tariff received the following message:

“Dear customer! Starting from March 11, 2026, the monthly fee for the ‘Oila Max’ tariff will amount to UZS 155,000. At the same time, the internet volume will increase by 45 GB and the total traffic will reach 225 GB. Other conditions remain unchanged.”

In simple terms – the price goes up from UZS 125,000 to UZS 155,000. In exchange, the operator adds 45 GB of mobile data to the tariff plan.

At first glance, it sounds like a fair deal: more data, slightly higher price. What is there to complain about? But many users are asking a simple question: who actually needs those extra gigabytes?

More gigabytes nobody asked for 

The ‘Oila Max’ tariff allows one subscriber to pay for the package while two additional users are connected without separate payments. In practice, three people share the package.

Yet even with three users, the existing 180 GB monthly limit is already more than enough for most families. Many subscribers say they rarely consume even a third of that amount.

So why raise the limit to 225 GB? Critics say the answer is obvious: increasing data is the easiest way to justify raising the price.

In other words, the operator is not responding to real demand – it is creating a technical argument to raise the tariff. More data sounds like an improvement. In reality, it often goes unused.

The pattern users know too well

Subscribers say the situation is hardly new. Not long ago, the same tariff increased from UZS 105,000 to UZS 125,000. Now it has climbed again to UZS 155,000.

Meanwhile, cheaper tariffs quietly disappear. Older packages become unavailable. New plans tend to be more expensive.

The formula is familiar:

• remove affordable options
• raise the price of existing tariffs
• add extra gigabytes few people need
• notify customers by SMS

And that is usually the end of the story. Many users complain. Social networks fill with criticism. But the tariffs continue to rise.

A question for regulators 

This raises a broader issue: where exactly are consumer rights in this process?

Mobile operators do inform subscribers about changes. But the notification often arrives as a simple message stating that the price will increase from a certain date. Customers are rarely offered real alternatives.

In theory, this is precisely the type of situation that regulators should examine. Uzbekistan has an institution responsible for such matters – the Competition Promotion and Consumer Protection Committee.

If operators can repeatedly raise tariffs while eliminating cheaper options, some users wonder whether the market is functioning competitively at all. From the subscriber’s perspective, the choice often feels limited.

The gigabyte illusion 

In the end, the extra 45 GB may be the most ironic part of the story. Many customers would gladly keep the 180 GB limit if it meant keeping the old price.

But that option rarely appears in the SMS. Instead, subscribers receive a message announcing that they are getting “more internet” – and a higher bill.