Why don't Virginmedia....

[New to cable]

I just noticed Smallworld cable have reduced the cost of 50mb bb to £19 and will be rolling the new price out to all customers.

If this happened on Virgin then only new customers would get the new price and old customers would have to pay the "conversion" fee. WHY DON'T VIRGINMEDIA understand the benefit and good word of mouth generated by reducing everyones bill?

Ringing up a lot of loyal customers and saying "Hi Mr X we have just reduced your monthly bill by £10"??

We are all used of what seems to be the eternal price rises or added fee's...Why not give out some good news and put out a large advertising campaign saying.........

AT VIRGINMEDIA WE DIDNT FREEZE CUSTOMERS PRICES FOR 1 YEAR.....WE REDUCED THEM BY £XX

Good idea?

Because they already have the advantage of being the only TV and BB provider that can provide half decent internet throughout the UK. Why would they need to drop prices and lose millions in doing so?

[Jelly]

they probably cant afford offering cheaper broadband or having a more congested network

[New to cable]

Originally Posted by Jameseh

Because they already have the advantage of being the only TV and BB provider that can provide half decent internet throughout the UK. Why would they need to drop prices and lose millions in doing so?

BT can offer upto 40mb
Smallworld cable upto 50mb
talktalk fibre upto 40mb

Originally Posted by New to cable

BT can offer upto 40mb
Smallworld cable upto 50mb
talktalk fibre upto 40mb

BT can offer Freeview with on demand tacked on.
Smallworld can't offer even half the UK services.
TalkTalk no longer offer TV services.

So my point is proven.

[New to cable]

Originally Posted by Jameseh

BT can offer Freeview with on demand tacked on.
Smallworld can't offer even half the UK services.
TalkTalk no longer offer TV services.

So my point is proven.

Yes your point is proven.

[Chrysalis]

I dread to think what the service would be like if 50mbit was sold for £19 on VM.

So how are smallworld doing it? no idea but its possibly a loss leader as they selling sky sports for less than the wholesale cost. Bizarre as well that there is no online ordering.

When I was on adsl I deliberatly stayed away from cheap isps as something has to give way when the numbers dont add up, with VM of course tho there is no other cable isp in the area so I chose VM as it pounds adsl down hard. My feelings are on smallworld they loss leading to get a customer base and if their service is currently good it may well nose dive soon.

[Nopanic]

To provide the fastest service VM have to invest... To invest they need profit.

[kwikbreaks]

To maintain those profits VM need to retain customers to avoid - well I'll say annoying them to avoid the wrath of the mods here. Yet you still get this sort of thing...



from a 50Mbps connection even though it isn't particularly cheap.

[Nopanic]

Every ISP has faults.

[Welshchris]

Originally Posted by Nopanic

To provide the fastest service VM have to invest... To invest they need profit.

if its profit u need why have VM just reported losses of £74 million pre tax? lol



http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10...ia_q3_results/

[Ignitionnet]

Simple - depreciation and amortisation, neither of which are a reflection of the company's actual cash income but are used within the net profit/loss statement - a handy way of calming the tax bill down and required as part of writing down the value of purchased assets.

In terms of actual cash that went into the business you need to look at Free Cash Flow: FCF up 13% to £136m for the quarter

'lol'

[kwikbreaks]

Vodafone had a cheaper approach to reducing their tax bills - just wine and dine the head of HMRC a few times and voilÃ* - a magic write off of a huge tax bill.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by kwikbreaks

Vodafone had a cheaper approach to reducing their tax bills - just wine and dine the head of HMRC a few times and voilÃ* - a magic write off of a huge tax bill.

Or point out that the UK's tax system is on rather shaky ground and threaten some unpleasant legal action which may cost HMRC far more money as other companies we charge for their overseas profits win the right to only pay tax in the jurisdiction the revenue was generated.

That was German income, tax was paid in Germany on German profits, the same income was then taxed again in the UK, this is potentially in contravention of international agreements regarding double taxation and its legality within the EU, though this has not been legally tested yet and HMRC really didn't want to wait for their money while it was.

Rather than reading Private Eye or listening to UKUncut have a look at the specifics of this.

A Controlled Foreign Company ("CFC") is a company controlled by a UK resident that is not itself UK resident and is subject to a lower rate of tax in the territory in which it is resident.[60] Under certain circumstances, UK resident companies that control a CFC pay corporation tax on what the UK tax profits of that CFC would have been. However, because of a wide range of exemptions,[61] very few companies suffer a CFC charge.

There are also a number of other cases making their way, slowly, up to the European Court. In particular:
A Group Litigation Order arguing that dividends received from overseas companies should be exempt from tax in the same way as dividends received from UK companies are exempted from tax;
Claims that the UK CFC legislation is contrary to EU law (notably Vodafone).

Blame Calamity Broon, the dodgy CFC legislation removing double taxation relief is another of his tax grabs.

[kwikbreaks]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Rather than reading Private Eye...

Guilty as charged m'lud.

Now back to VM... why do they sell the same capacity several times over and take months to upgrade? I'll wait on their response to when the fault they raised for mine will be actioned and if I don't like the answer I'll downgrade to 10Mbps as that's all I get in peak times anyway. If it does come to that I'll desert to Infinity as soon as it's available to me.