![]() |
Honesty from VM
Hi all,
Warning Rant ON I know from my own experience and looking at the plethora of threads on the "official VM Forum" that there seems to be a significant issue with capacity and peak time broadband speeds. Folks getting upgraded from one package to another suddenly see their service deteriorate, its not right. Different folks all over the country are seeing similar BQM and speed test profiles. The one thing no one is seeing is any transparency from VM. Is it really too much to expect VM to "man up" and actually explain the magnitude of their problems, what they are doing and how they are planning to fix the situation? I would actually feel better if somehow VM were more open and actually declared what they were doing technically with a published programme of works and regular project updates. I appreciate that the staffers who post on here can't say openly what they know but please can you push back up inside the organisation to get someone to provide some proper information, realistic timeframes and evidence of accountability for getting things right. I used to be a real cable advocate but the last six months I have seen the other side of the service, and its not good. Sorry rant off. |
Re: Honesty from VM
I'm one of those affected... and so far ignored by VM staff on the official forum.
100down/6up changed to >85down/10up after the free "upgrade". I don't know if I'm angry or sad, but I'm definitely frustrated. |
Re: Honesty from VM
Virgin is undertaking a big job as they are in the process of upgrading a lot of the old CMTS to the new Arris CMTS this lets them roll out 16 Downstream this takes time, And with the Hub 3.0 Rolling out to new customers it will start to improve but it will take time And they are doing the most overloaded areas first,
|
Re: Honesty from VM
Quote:
How do I know if I am in priority area or not, I appreciate its not your fault and you have provided some info but I really do think the firm should provide open honest communication to customers have been mis sold products, or at best had products mis represented. |
Re: Honesty from VM
It does look like its a country wide problem and the network just cant cope at peak times.
I was on 152mb and my connection was good even at peak times. Got the free upgrade to 200mb, new superhub 2 and now peak time speeds are all over the place Sometimes 90mb, upto 130mb but its not consistent and is all over the place. Why move people onto the new speeds when the network cant cope. I would have been happy staying on 152mb and having constant decent speeds. |
Re: Honesty from VM
Quote:
Also, VM will *never* say how many customers are impacted by over utilisation as it is a very commercially sensitive point. Imagine how much fun BT would have with this data |
Re: Honesty from VM
Quote:
It is a pain though - people can have no idea what the state of the network in an area will be like when they sign up for Virgin Media's service, and watching the forums it feels like fix dates are endlessly pushed back. |
Re: Honesty from VM
Quote:
Right now, based on their official feedback from the support forum, it feels like they don't give a f***** f*** for the customers just so long shiney new ones keep signing up. Personally I would like the regulators to publish information on the various ISP's & Telco's. I'm sure folks on here could think of five or six key metrics all ISP's & telcos could be scored on that would provide insight in to the overall service delivery of each supplier. Network Capacity & Contention by area Network uptime Lead time for new install in provisioned area %age of installs that require a second visit Comparison of published speed vs actual speed off peak/peak. Sam Knows type data. Billing accuracy etc. Based on my experience I am sure VM would score well on some metrics, for example I have had really good experience with network uptime, scheduling of engineers for the occasional defect fix etc. its not all bad and I'm sure other suppliers would score worse in some categories you could think of. Not publishing utilisation data makes it impossible for the customer to make an informed decision, in fact the way VM promote their service when they know they have these national issues is tantamount to mis representation. |
Re: Honesty from VM
Quote:
Blame the marketing lead side of the company. |
Re: Honesty from VM
Quote:
BT had the luxury, so it seems, to design and deploy a newer, technology wise, network into a far more devolved, fine grained solution. As a result, their ability to react to localised network loading problems seems far more reactive and sophisticated. VM has to convince its shareholders (1st) and customers (2nd) that it is "competing" with BT whether it can or not. VM is between the devil and the deep blue sea: it can't be honest with its customers when they face an area loading problem because this would admit the disadvantage they face in these areas. Consequently, they play a game of smoke and mirrors where customers who face a network issue are told: 1. there isn't an issue and send customer off on wild goose chase 2. when it is so obvious that there is an issue, they will then admit it 3. they will assign pseudo-random fix dates fundamentally decoupled, process-wise, from the real work on the ground (assuming it has been a) triaged, b) planned c) resourced d) budgeted and e) tasked) 4. they (mostly) mandate that the customer waste their time to ring and claim a rebate for a patently evident loss of service I think that OFCOM should work with SamKnows to collate a representive, statistically meaningfull set of VM customer line stats and publish them on map, alongside a similar set of BT data points. This map should flag in a some kind of colour coded way the level of peak-time degradation. This would be interesting :) |
Re: Honesty from VM
Quote:
This would allow the customer to make an informed choice, and would focus the minds a bit more of the VM Senior team.:dunce: Your commentary on the fix dates sounds very scarily believable.... |
Re: Honesty from VM
Quote:
One potentially awkward point though, is that especially when "longstanding" congestion areas are solved - I presume through new CMTS mainly - how future-proof such fixes are. In other words, if resolving congestion (either on broadband or Tivo-legacy) takes substantial work, then how much future planning is built into that work, to avoid congestion occurring within a reasonable timeframe. I'm potentially speaking from experience here, having presumed (hopefully not in error) that fixes would last a decent amount of time. |
Re: Honesty from VM
Quote:
That and VM's planning criteria. BT upgrade cabinet backhaul well in advance of congestion, VM simply don't. http://labs.thinkbroadband.com/local...area=E14000652 You can see the cycle of congestion, speed uplifts, and resolution of congestion really well there. |
Re: Honesty from VM
Quote:
|
Re: Honesty from VM
Quote:
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2016/01/6.png |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 23:12. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum