[Charlie_Bubble]

In my opinion, yes it is a blunder. Back in 1999 I took NTL on, because I thought I was unable to get Sky, living in a flat as I do. I already had a BT phoneline. In 2000 I got ADSL, because they offered it to me before NTL offered me cable broadband. Once cable broadband was available I decided to leave BT and ADSL, due to the fact I was effectively paying for 2 phonelines, which I didn't need. Now I find myself in the position that I am leaving NTL altogether, mainly due to the price/quality of their broadband service. If they didn't bundle the phone with the TV, I might have actually kept the tv, despite the lack of interactive etc. but I will not pay a company for something I do not use. Moving back to BT to get ADSL, forces me to go the other way due to having 2 phonelines again, but this time I know I am allowed to have a dish on my flat, so I am taking Sky as well. So NTL effectively lose out on about £40 a month due to them not packaging TV on it's own.

I have no idea why they have stuck to this plan. Their basic phone package is no longer competitive especially when compared with BT's basic package. Why should I pay 1 or 2p per minute with NTL when I can speak for up to an hour for 6p (5.5p next month) with BT? If they want to survive and attract/keep customers they have to be more flexible about this sort of thing and more price competitive. At the moment their broadband and telephone services are no longer as attractive as they were. Their TV service is the only thing still remotely competitive (will be whenever they finally get interactive/new epg going), as movies are cheaper to order and the premiership plus is much cheaper, but this is only one aspect of the whole package and I'd rather have Sky/BT/ADSL than them now, because the combined benfits of the three companies outweighs NTLs.