Quote:
Originally Posted by Horace
I can't imagine any outcome of this case that would benefit customers, VM are already burdened with huge debts, they don't really have spare money to dish out in compensation and anything that this costs them, either in legal bills or as a result of any ruling, just ends up with less money going into the services we pay for and a worse service and maybe changes in their traffic management to hard capping. I'm happy with my services, I'm happy and have been since the introduction, with STM ,since the alternatives are much worse.
I'd rather things stay exactly as they are with VM trying to get the most out of their network and pushing speeds and services upwards, they do pretty well as it is considering their dreadful finanical situation.
|
So because a company owes massive debts you should be leniant towards them?
because they owe so much money, one could say that that is the reason why they don't and can't supply the high speeds they sell. feel the need to have to hide the fact that STM is in place.
If it was suggested that they just supply a speed they can supply such as 5MB they would argue that they would go out of business if they did that. but at the same time they are saying that we offer the higher speeds but with the hidden STM as that is how we can make money without actually having to provide the speed paid for.
I'm all for a company making money. but not when it means doing it in a way that can be seen as being deceitful and dishonest.
The question is why don't you want us to know about STM?
the answer is the deciding factor that unravels the use the use of the words Unlimited and Fastest when selling the product to the public.