120M : Honesty from VM

[hedgie]

Hi all,
Warning Rant ON
I know from my own experience and looking at the plethora of threads on the "official VM Forum" that there seems to be a significant issue with capacity and peak time broadband speeds. Folks getting upgraded from one package to another suddenly see their service deteriorate, its not right.

Different folks all over the country are seeing similar BQM and speed test profiles. The one thing no one is seeing is any transparency from VM.

Is it really too much to expect VM to "man up" and actually explain the magnitude of their problems, what they are doing and how they are planning to fix the situation? I would actually feel better if somehow VM were more open and actually declared what they were doing technically with a published programme of works and regular project updates.

I appreciate that the staffers who post on here can't say openly what they know but please can you push back up inside the organisation to get someone to provide some proper information, realistic timeframes and evidence of accountability for getting things right. I used to be a real cable advocate but the last six months I have seen the other side of the service, and its not good.

Sorry rant off.

[Taf]

I'm one of those affected... and so far ignored by VM staff on the official forum.

100down/6up changed to >85down/10up after the free "upgrade".

I don't know if I'm angry or sad, but I'm definitely frustrated.

[Martin_D]

Virgin is undertaking a big job as they are in the process of upgrading a lot of the old CMTS to the new Arris CMTS this lets them roll out 16 Downstream this takes time, And with the Hub 3.0 Rolling out to new customers it will start to improve but it will take time And they are doing the most overloaded areas first,

[hedgie]

Originally Posted by Martin_D

Virgin is undertaking a big job as they are in the process of upgrading a lot of the old CMTS to the new Arris CMTS this lets them roll out 16 Downstream this takes time, And with the Hub 3.0 Rolling out to new customers it will start to improve but it will take time And they are doing the most overloaded areas first,

Thats great, but, why won't VM publish a schedule of areas due to be upgraded and which are priority? Visibility of the programme would be great.

How do I know if I am in priority area or not, I appreciate its not your fault and you have provided some info but I really do think the firm should provide open honest communication to customers have been mis sold products, or at best had products mis represented.

[scoobydoo[uk]]

It does look like its a country wide problem and the network just cant cope at peak times.
I was on 152mb and my connection was good even at peak times.

Got the free upgrade to 200mb, new superhub 2 and now peak time speeds are all over the place
Sometimes 90mb, upto 130mb but its not consistent and is all over the place.
Why move people onto the new speeds when the network cant cope. I would have been happy staying on 152mb and having constant decent speeds.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Martin_D

Virgin is undertaking a big job as they are in the process of upgrading a lot of the old CMTS to the new Arris CMTS this lets them roll out 16 Downstream this takes time, And with the Hub 3.0 Rolling out to new customers it will start to improve but it will take time And they are doing the most overloaded areas first,

I am not sure all the overloading is just a CMTS scaling issue? A lot are waiting on physical network changes e.g. node splits etc. If it was just a headend resource solution then surely it is fixable in short timescales rather than timescales of months or years we see.

Also, VM will *never* say how many customers are impacted by over utilisation as it is a very commercially sensitive point. Imagine how much fun BT would have with this data

[JoelTheSuperior]

Originally Posted by ianch99

Also, VM will *never* say how many customers are impacted by over utilisation as it is a very commercially sensitive point. Imagine how much fun BT would have with this data

Oh definitely. BT could have the most brilliantly targeted marketing ever.

It is a pain though - people can have no idea what the state of the network in an area will be like when they sign up for Virgin Media's service, and watching the forums it feels like fix dates are endlessly pushed back.

[hedgie]

Originally Posted by ianch99

IAlso, VM will *never* say how many customers are impacted by over utilisation as it is a very commercially sensitive point. Imagine how much fun BT would have with this data

If the regulator had a pair and could demand they publish data just imagine how focussed VM management would be to get the issues fixed....

Right now, based on their official feedback from the support forum, it feels like they don't give a f***** f*** for the customers just so long shiney new ones keep signing up.

Personally I would like the regulators to publish information on the various ISP's & Telco's. I'm sure folks on here could think of five or six key metrics all ISP's & telcos could be scored on that would provide insight in to the overall service delivery of each supplier.

Network Capacity & Contention by area
Network uptime
Lead time for new install in provisioned area
%age of installs that require a second visit
Comparison of published speed vs actual speed off peak/peak. Sam Knows type data.
Billing accuracy
etc.


Based on my experience I am sure VM would score well on some metrics, for example I have had really good experience with network uptime, scheduling of engineers for the occasional defect fix etc. its not all bad and I'm sure other suppliers would score worse in some categories you could think of. Not publishing utilisation data makes it impossible for the customer to make an informed decision, in fact the way VM promote their service when they know they have these national issues is tantamount to mis representation.

[MUD_Wizard]

Originally Posted by scoobydoo[uk]

It does look like its a country wide problem and the network just cant cope at peak times.
I was on 152mb and my connection was good even at peak times.

Got the free upgrade to 200mb, new superhub 2 and now peak time speeds are all over the place
Sometimes 90mb, upto 130mb but its not consistent and is all over the place.
Why move people onto the new speeds when the network cant cope. I would have been happy staying on 152mb and having constant decent speeds.

This is not a new thing. It happens every year they do the round of upgrades to new speeds. Always adding new people before capacity is ready in the area.
Blame the marketing lead side of the company.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by MUD_Wizard

This is not a new thing. It happens every year they do the round of upgrades to new speeds. Always adding new people before capacity is ready in the area.
Blame the marketing lead side of the company.

Some areas are never ready for any upgrade never mind the upcoming one. VM have a problem: they own a patchwork quilt of inherited/acquired physical networks each with own challenges of topology/demographic mismatches, ageing fibre etc. infrastructure, etc.

BT had the luxury, so it seems, to design and deploy a newer, technology wise, network into a far more devolved, fine grained solution. As a result, their ability to react to localised network loading problems seems far more reactive and sophisticated.

VM has to convince its shareholders (1st) and customers (2nd) that it is "competing" with BT whether it can or not.

VM is between the devil and the deep blue sea: it can't be honest with its customers when they face an area loading problem because this would admit the disadvantage they face in these areas. Consequently, they play a game of smoke and mirrors where customers who face a network issue are told:

1. there isn't an issue and send customer off on wild goose chase
2. when it is so obvious that there is an issue, they will then admit it
3. they will assign pseudo-random fix dates fundamentally decoupled, process-wise, from the real work on the ground (assuming it has been a) triaged, b) planned c) resourced d) budgeted and e) tasked)
4. they (mostly) mandate that the customer waste their time to ring and claim a rebate for a patently evident loss of service

I think that OFCOM should work with SamKnows to collate a representive, statistically meaningfull set of VM customer line stats and publish them on map, alongside a similar set of BT data points. This map should flag in a some kind of colour coded way the level of peak-time degradation.

This would be interesting

[hedgie]

Originally Posted by ianch99

I think that OFCOM should work with SamKnows to collate a representive, statistically meaningfull set of VM customer line stats and publish them on map, alongside a similar set of BT data points. This map should flag in a some kind of colour coded way the level of peak-time degradation.

This would be interesting

Perfect....if it shows the deviation between contracted and delivered speeds

This would allow the customer to make an informed choice, and would focus the minds a bit more of the VM Senior team.

Your commentary on the fix dates sounds very scarily believable....

[japitts]

Originally Posted by ianch99

Some areas are never ready for any upgrade never mind the upcoming one. VM have a problem: they own a patchwork quilt of inherited/acquired physical networks each with own challenges of topology/demographic mismatches, ageing fibre etc. infrastructure, etc.

BT had the luxury, so it seems, to design and deploy a newer, technology wise, network into a far more devolved, fine grained solution. As a result, their ability to react to localised network loading problems seems far more reactive and sophisticated.

[snip]

What a superb summary, thanks so much for this.

One potentially awkward point though, is that especially when "longstanding" congestion areas are solved - I presume through new CMTS mainly - how future-proof such fixes are.

In other words, if resolving congestion (either on broadband or Tivo-legacy) takes substantial work, then how much future planning is built into that work, to avoid congestion occurring within a reasonable timeframe.

I'm potentially speaking from experience here, having presumed (hopefully not in error) that fixes would last a decent amount of time.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by ianch99

Some areas are never ready for any upgrade never mind the upcoming one. VM have a problem: they own a patchwork quilt of inherited/acquired physical networks each with own challenges of topology/demographic mismatches, ageing fibre etc. infrastructure, etc.

BT had the luxury, so it seems, to design and deploy a newer, technology wise, network into a far more devolved, fine grained solution. As a result, their ability to react to localised network loading problems seems far more reactive and sophisticated.

More down to the basic nature of the networks each is using than any devolved, fine grained solution.

That and VM's planning criteria. BT upgrade cabinet backhaul well in advance of congestion, VM simply don't.

http://labs.thinkbroadband.com/local...area=E14000652

You can see the cycle of congestion, speed uplifts, and resolution of congestion really well there.

[japitts]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

More down to the basic nature of the networks each is using than any devolved, fine grained solution.

That and VM's planning criteria. BT upgrade cabinet backhaul well in advance of congestion, VM simply don't.

http://labs.thinkbroadband.com/local...area=E14000652

You can see the cycle of congestion, speed uplifts, and resolution of congestion really well there.

Very interesting. Looks like roughly 6-12months each time serious congestion hits. That fits with my experience on both Tivo & broadband until now.

[Kushan]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

More down to the basic nature of the networks each is using than any devolved, fine grained solution.

That and VM's planning criteria. BT upgrade cabinet backhaul well in advance of congestion, VM simply don't.

http://labs.thinkbroadband.com/local...area=E14000652

You can see the cycle of congestion, speed uplifts, and resolution of congestion really well there.

That data is brilliant. Shows how bad Warrington has got though: