Started as Proportional bills for a variable service?

[Toto]

Originally Posted by Fatec

How? on letters you get from VM, there is no mention of STM, if you sign up through a letter, no mention of STM, unless you know where to look for it on their site, you wont know about it, its not in their T&Cs nor is it in their apparent FUP.

No mention when you sign up at all.

I think you'll find that most users who get slow speeds just think there is too many people signed up and get a tech called out or just 'put up' with it because its easier than change providers, alas, most people also stick around with the slow speeds because they keep getting really good retention deals to keep them on.

Alas, you need to look at their results properly, they had 30,000 net disconnects/losses, barely -any- sign ups, thats right, all those new customers? where?

Alas "I" need to look at their results properly? Have YOU looked properly?

Q4 2007 (PDF)
111,200 total broadband net additions

Q1 2008 (PDF)
88,400 on-net broadband net additions

Q2 2008 (PDF)
On-net broadband net additions of 54,600 (Q2-07: 45,800)
• Customers taking top-tier broadband up 82% year-on-year

So customers taking upper end tiers increasing too. Sorry Fatec, I am in possession of the facts, and whilst STM is certainly unpopular with heavy and persistent download/uploaders it isn't impacting on all users all of the time, fact.

There is no mass migration to other ISP's due to STM, neither will there be when it does not affect the majority of normal users.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Toto

Sorry Fatec, I am in possession of the facts, and whilst STM is certainly unpopular with heavy and persistent download/uploaders it isn't impacting on all users all of the time, fact.

There is no mass migration to other ISP's due to STM, neither will there be when it does not affect the majority of normal users.

Oh dear it's the one with all the facts
Can you show us proof of all the facts that you have. or won't Virgin let you show us?
Should we just take your word for it?

[Toto]

Originally Posted by Gary L

Supposing there is one sole person using his connection and downloading an abnormal amount, such as 1GB. only him connected to the internet, everybody else is dead. he would still be STMd.
how is that helping others who are not even using their connection? it isn't. he is being penalised regardless of the circumstances and regardless of what they say STM is there for.

If there were 10 people all downloading on the same UBR. they would all be STMd. but STM is there to give them a better experience, but has actually gave all 10 of them a bad experience now. they are all talking to each other on MSN saying was I making it worse for you? no you wasn't mate. I was happily downloading and you wasn't affecting my speed when you were downloading too.

They all have to wait now for a few hours because STM is helping them.
STM is not helping them, it's helping Virgin save bandwidth by taking it from those who want to use it.

And yet, since the introduction of STM my average download speed at peak time is much nearer the 20Mb mark than it used to be? A friend of mine living in student territory land has seen massive improvements during colledge / university terms since STM.

You can quote "what if's" and "ah but's" till the cows come home, but the reality is that for most users there appears to be an improvement

Tell me how that isn't a good thing, aside from a few people being affected by STM , when they could have probably done their downloading at another time.?

---------- Post added at 12:41 ---------- Previous post was at 12:40 ----------

Originally Posted by Gary L

Oh dear it's the one with all the facts
Can you show us proof of all the facts that you have. or won't Virgin let you show us?
Should we just take your word for it?

Well, Fatec quoted something like a 33K net loss, and I posted actual results, including links, that any good for you?

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Toto

And yet, since the introduction of STM my

What percentage are you of the total amount of customers?
what percentage of you and others that are getting full speed are of the total amount of customers?
what has you getting full speed got to do with what has been said about STM affecting peoples speeds when they are not affecting others speeds?

---------- Post added at 12:47 ---------- Previous post was at 12:45 ----------

Originally Posted by Toto

Well, Fatec quoted something like a 33K net loss, and I posted actual results, including links, that any good for you?

You posted something that is available to all who want to read them. where's the facts that you are in possession of, that we might be able to see but have to take your word for?

[Toto]

Originally Posted by Gary L

What percentage are you of the total amount of customers?
what percentage of you and others that are getting full speed are of the total amount of customers?
what has you getting full speed got to do with what has been said about STM affecting peoples speeds when they are not affecting others speeds?

---------- Post added at 12:47 ---------- Previous post was at 12:45 ----------



You posted something that is available to all who want to read them. where's the facts that you are in possession of, that we might be able to see but have to take your word for?

Well, that was my whole point, I am in possession of the facts because I have taken the time to read what is publicly available, and offered to help those who may not know where to look so that they can be in possession of the facts also.

Please Gary, calm down, this is nothing personal.

For the record then, VM have about 3.8M Broadband customers, just over 3M are cable, or thereabouts?. STM has been in force for over a year now?

Where are the masses of customer losses that appear to be a direct cause of the STM policy? Those figures I have quoted must surely show net decline quarter on quarter if the STM policy was causing migration?

All I can see is a few moaning about it here and on the official VM newsgroups, and yet they seem to scared of the alternative because they have not moved on to an alternative supplier.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Toto

Well, that was my whole point, I am in possession of the facts because I have taken the time to read what is publicly available, and offered to help those who may not know where to look so that they can be in possession of the facts also.

Please Gary, calm down, this is nothing personal.

I am calm. I promise you that I do not think that you are being personal
It would help if you were to try and not to post like it reads that here's some publically available links, and believe me I also have the facts.

For the record then, VM have about 3.8M Broadband customers, just over 3M are cable, or thereabouts?. STM has been in force for over a year now?

Where are the masses of customer losses that appear to be a direct cause of the STM policy? Those figures I have quoted must surely show net decline quarter on quarter if the STM policy was causing migration?

All I can see is a few moaning about it here and on the official VM newsgroups, and yet they seem to scared of the alternative because they have not moved on to an alternative supplier.

would you agree that Virgin class those that upgrade their packages and have been given retention deals as new customers, and publish them as such?

[Toto]

Originally Posted by Gary L

would you agree that Virgin class those that upgrade their packages and have been given retention deals as new customers, and publish them as such?

If they have not had a particular service, such as BB, then take up the service, then that is an additional BB unit yes. New customer? No. Retention deals means that a customer is kept, so no customer loss, yes. New customer? No.

[r00t]

Nice copy paste from news groups Gary

Originally Posted by Gary L

Oh dear it's the one with all the facts
Can you show us proof of all the facts that you have. or won't Virgin let you show us?
Should we just take your word for it?

Gary, are you stating that the figures that Virgin Media publish to the City and their shareholders are false?

[r00t]

I doubt he'd know,
his first post is just a copy/paste from the groups. The content is not his, the argument is not his. All that he has contributed to the thread is ** suprise, suprise ** hate mongering, for want of a better 5 letter word.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by r00t

Nice copy paste from news groups Gary

Yes, and I already said that it was from virginmedia.feedback when you asked me earlier.
why you mentioning it again for?

---------- Post added at 21:22 ---------- Previous post was at 21:21 ----------

Originally Posted by foreverwar

Gary, are you stating that the figures that Virgin Media publish to the City and their shareholders are false?

No, are you going to?
r00ts answer was interesting though, where he says I doubt he'd know


---------- Post added at 21:26 ---------- Previous post was at 21:22 ----------

Originally Posted by r00t

I doubt he'd know,
his first post is just a copy/paste from the groups. The content is not his, the argument is not his. All that he has contributed to the thread is ** suprise, suprise ** hate mongering, for want of a better 5 letter word.

If someone posts a joke about an irishman in the funny section. would you say that the joke is not his, the content following posting the joke is not his and surprise surprise everyone, he don't like Irishmen!

Please r00t, calm down, you are taking this too personal.

---------- Post added at 21:37 ---------- Previous post was at 21:26 ----------

Originally Posted by Toto

If they have not had a particular service, such as BB, then take up the service, then that is an additional BB unit yes. New customer? No. Retention deals means that a customer is kept, so no customer loss, yes. New customer? No.

I can't really understand that much because of the way it's laid out, but I think you're saying that in one instance they're not classed as a new customer but are classed as an additional unit?

as I say, I can't quite understand from how it's laid out.

[Toto]

Gary L, it was me who asked you about your original post, not r00t, and I would have thought you could have edited that post by now to show that.

To answer your other question, net additions to a particular service can be attributed to new customers, or existing customers taking new products.

In a nutshell the claim made by Fatec that there has been a loss in BB users of plus 30K is simply not supported by the facts, hence therefore STM, whilst unpopular with some, is certainly not causing mass panic within cable land, and is likely doing what it intended to do.

If the figures I had quoted showed net losses, they would be clear, but just to add some basic clarity......

20,000 BB customers cancel in Q1, and go to an alternative supplier, but 30,000 new BB units are added in the same quarter, then the net gain is 10,000 BB units.

Reverse those figures and its a net loss of 10,000 BB units.

Anyway, its academic as VM aren't going to offer reductions to customers who have been STM'd

[Sirius]

Personally all i have EVER seen in Gary L's posts are attacks on Virgin Media. now i don't know if he is or is not a customer of VM but if he is not a customer of VM then WTF is his problem with VM, If he is a customer of VM and has such a bad time with them WTF is he doing staying with them, because if i had been on the receiving end of the bad service he always goes on about then i for one would have changed my provider.

As for his posts they do seem to be plagiarism of other posts and seem to be reports of other peoples post on the news groups, which i can just as easily read on the news groups.

End of the day his posts seem to me to be completely and always anti VM and as such bore me in the extreme.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Sirius

Personally all i have EVER seen in Gary L's posts are attacks on Virgin Media.

Is that because you ignore the other ones?

now i don't know if he is or is not a customer of VM but if he is not a customer of VM then WTF is his problem with VM,

I am a customer of VM.

If he is a customer of VM and has such a bad time with them WTF is he doing staying with them,

I don't have such a bad time with them.

because if i had been on the receiving end of the bad service he always goes on about then i for one would have changed my provider.

Be's supposed to be excellent.

As for his posts they do seem to be plagiarism of other posts and seem to be reports of other peoples post on the news groups, which i can just as easily read on the news groups.

You can, you do, or you can but you don't?

End of the day his posts seem to me to be completely and always anti VM and as such bore me in the extreme.

Have you finished?



---------- Post added at 21:42 ---------- Previous post was at 21:40 ----------

Originally Posted by Toto

Gary L, it was me who asked you about your original post, not r00t, and I would have thought you could have edited that post by now to show that.

I would have edited it but I've been on holiday

Originally Posted by Gary L

Oh dear it's the one with all the facts
Can you show us proof of all the facts that you have. or won't Virgin let you show us?
Should we just take your word for it?

Originally Posted by foreverwar

Gary, are you stating that the figures that Virgin Media publish to the City and their shareholders are false?

Originally Posted by Gary L

...snip....

No, are you going to?
r00ts answer was interesting though, where he says I doubt he'd know ...snip

Gary, try answering the question I asked, not the one you wanted me to think I asked.

The figures that VM provide to the City in it's results were the figures quoted - you appear to be stating that these figures are not in fact accurate.

I think they are - what do you think?