[merged] Price increase

[Neil]

Originally Posted by Nikko

I find it remarkable that that people can afford 35 quid a month, but 38 quid totally annihilates their family budget?

Come on, how daft is that? I really am interested in any rational explanation - is the £3 monthly price adjustment really the straw that broke the camel's back?

Having watched people's reactions/comments-I would suspect it is the straw that broke the camel's back.

ntl's 'service' does not seem to be improving, yet they are putting their prices up while they really should be going down due to competition.

Also taking into account Aizad Hussain (MD of ntl) said to myself & Ben that he didn't want to offer 1 2MB service as it would only attract heavy downloaders (leechers I think was the expression he actually used). Now because Telewest have increased their speeds by 50%, ntl have done the same & although they are not offering 2MB speeds, they are very nearly there with 1.5, so are these the customers Aizad does not want?

£38.00 per month is too much money IMO for a 1 meg BB connection (cable or DSL) Everyone else seems to be hovering at the magic pricing point of sub £35.00, but ntl are goingin the opposite direction, & I believe that people are not prepared to continue paying increased pricing for no increase in 'service' in this day & age.

Just my take on things.....

[andrew_wallasey]

You are getting 1.5mbps for £38 per month. Once the upgrades take place in the next couple of months. Which IMO is a !!GOOD!! deal.

[andrew_wallasey]

There is no IP Stream ADSL ISPs offering that sort of deal!!!

and before you mention Bulldog!!!!!! Bulldog is not using IP Stream services its using datastream and datastream has a lot of problems with speed.

[Chrysalis]

andrew yes 1.5mbit for 38 a month but please take these 2 points into consideration and I think most will agree with me.

there was no price increase on the 2 lower tiers, making the gap between the packages wider which is now at £13 per month instead of £10 per month.

the traffic cap was not raised with the speed meaning as neil has said in other post's it only serves for people to hit the cap quicker.

Me personally I was already stretching my budget at £35 a month, and I would love to have a 1.5mbit connection but have decided I cant afford the 38 a month and for 13 less a month I will be on 600kbit (soon to be 750kbit), which considering the cap etc. is overwhelmingly better value for money.

[andrew_wallasey]

There was no need to increase the price on the lower tier as they are much more competative with the lower prices.

An extra 750kbps for £13 a month is not a bad deal. Everyone keeps talking about this CAP when there is NO CAP! Not one person has been disconnected by NTL for excessive downloading and some people download in the region of 10gb per day. The 1gb per day is just a guideline.

With the way cable modem services work (AND ADSL) you can not have customers maxing out their connection everyday minute of the day as it affect other customers. No matter how good you network is!

[andygrif]

Originally Posted by random_username

I remember suggesting that about four years ago on another forum and I was widely derided 'never happen, private companies, not like electricity .. '

I've always said this should happen. I don't see the point in monopolising customers to only have one supplier of content or telephone.

There is no reason why ntl could not rent out their connections to people's houses to offer, say, a phone line through BT or Talk Talk or a TV package via Sky.

Maybe this is the solution that ntl need - someone comes in, buys all the wires, gets ntl out of debt - then makes their money back from the various package providers.

[andrew_wallasey]

Originally Posted by andygrif

I've always said this should happen. I don't see the point in monopolising customers to only have one supplier of content or telephone.

There is no reason why ntl could not rent out their connections to people's houses to offer, say, a phone line through BT or Talk Talk or a TV package via Sky.

Maybe this is the solution that ntl need - someone comes in, buys all the wires, gets ntl out of debt - then makes their money back from the various package providers.

What you fail to realise is NTL own the network thats why! How would you feel if you bought a piece of land, built a house on that piece of land and then the local council said "Youve got to share this house with 4 other people because they are homeless but dont worry they will pay you £1 a week rent.

[Neil]

Originally Posted by andrew_wallasey

With the way cable modem services work (AND ADSL) you can not have customers maxing out their connection everyday minute of the day as it affect other customers. No matter how good you network is!

It shouldn't have been sold as an unlimited service then.

[andrew_wallasey]

Nothing can be unlimited and I guess if you left your Pipex connection maxed out 24/7 they would be in contact.

There is always terms with ISPs that can allow them to cut people off who take the ****. Anyone remember the days of 24-7 Freecall?

[Neil]

Originally Posted by andrew_wallasey

Nothing can be unlimited

Don't sell it as unlimited then-simple.

Because now whatever way you look at it there are people who signed up for an umlimited service that now have a limited service.

Originally Posted by andrew_wallasey

and I guess if you left your Pipex connection maxed out 24/7 they would be in contact.

But that would not be based on how much I downloaded-Pipex openly state there is no download limit on my service, it may be because I am having a detrimental affect on the network-but not due to how much I download, don't confuse those 2 issues.

Originally Posted by andrew_wallasey

There is always terms with ISPs that can allow them to cut people off who take the ****. Anyone remember the days of 24-7 Freecall?

Yes, but you have missed the point (again) ntl offered an umlimited service, now those people who signed up for it have a limited service (not really that difficult to comprehend I don't think)

[andrew_wallasey]

Don't sell it as unlimited then-simple.

Because now whatever way you look at it there are people who signed up for an umlimited service that now have a limited service.

I don't see anywhere on NTL's site it is selling broadband as an unlimited product.

But that would not be based on how much I downloaded-Pipex openly state there is no download limit on my service, it may be because I am having a detrimental affect on the network-but not due to how much I download, don't confuse those 2 issues.

Yes but it all relative the more you download the more stress you put on the network.

The way you are going on about this limit its as if they have put it at like 10mb a day. 1gb a day is a reasonable suggestive limit to impose.

Not one person has been disconnected by NTL for exceeding this limit and there is no plans to disconnect anyone! So therefore I do not see how it will affect the average user.

Most people want extra speed because they like to wait less time, I download no more now than when I first got broadband (512kbps) compared with when I had the 2mbit ADSL line. If people are so bothered about this limit then why are people still getting their broadband from NTL?

[Neil]

Originally Posted by andrew_wallasey

I don't see anywhere on NTL's site it is selling broadband as an unlimited product.

Are you listening?

The product was sold as unlimited, & continued to be for some time after the cap/"guideline" was introduced.

So all the people who signed up for an unlimnited service as per the adverts have been given a limited service due to a download cap/"guideline" being introduced.

Originally Posted by andrew_wallasey

Yes but it all relative the more you download the more stress you put on the network.

But they still could not do anything based on data download totals.

Originally Posted by andrew_wallasey

The way you are going on about this limit its as if they have put it at like 10mb a day. 1gb a day is a reasonable suggestive limit to impose.

Not when you move the goalposts & change what people signed up for it isn't.

Originally Posted by andrew_wallasey

Not one person has been disconnected by NTL for exceeding this limit and there is no plans to disconnect anyone! So therefore I do not see how it will affect the average user.

Not the point-the point is that it is still in place & they are not going to increase it even with the new speed tiers coming.

Originally Posted by andrew_wallasey

Most people want extra speed because they like to wait less time, I download no more now than when I first got broadband (512kbps) compared with when I had the 2mbit ADSL line. If people are so bothered about this limit then why are people still getting their broadband from NTL?

Because they are not like you & don't care about download caps/"guidelines", or they simply don't know better-those are the only 2 options.

[andygrif]

Originally Posted by andrew_wallasey

What you fail to realise is NTL own the network thats why! How would you feel if you bought a piece of land, built a house on that piece of land and then the local council said "Youve got to share this house with 4 other people because they are homeless but dont worry they will pay you £1 a week rent.

I don't fail to realise this, but it is only the same as BT owning its network - rather than your analogy of someone owning a house - which doesn't really make much sense in this context.

I'm not saying that ntl should have their lines taken away from them, what I have said for a long time is that for true competition and customer choice it would be the best solution if one company owned the lines and you could then chose who you got your content from.

This would open up the market to some interesting competition, and it would be the customer who benefitted long-term - which I'm all for.

[zovat]

Originally Posted by andygrif

I don't fail to realise this, but it is only the same as BT owning its network - rather than your analogy of someone owning a house - which doesn't really make much sense in this context.

I'm not saying that ntl should have their lines taken away from them, what I have said for a long time is that for true competition and customer choice it would be the best solution if one company owned the lines and you could then chose who you got your content from.

This would open up the market to some interesting competition, and it would be the customer who benefitted long-term - which I'm all for.

Wasn't there talk of AOL using NTLs cables for their own broadband offering...

Did that ever happen - or was it just another idea that NTL decided wasn't profitable enough for them ?

[andrew_wallasey]

Yes you can get AOL Broadband through NTL.