The future

[jtwn]

Yes but if bt targets consumers with 8mb with mass media and what not, ntl will have to respond, just to be able to offer a service that can compete. Purely for the sake of 'we are better than you'.

Ian do you mean they aren't able to roll it out nationwide due to the line requirements or because they don't have the capacity or have to equipment?

[soneill]

Originally Posted by orangebird

As for your mobile analogy, no, I wouldn't take 900 minutes and a 1000 text at £2 more, because I know I wouldn't use it. What's the point in paying for something I'll never use? AFAIC, that's just having eyes bigger than your belly. Or more money than sense.

I agree that it doesn't make sense and I wouldn't do it BUT I do know people who would. My Dad is a good example - He currently has a nice shiny new XP SP2 PC with DVD burners etc and if he could he would be running Wordperfect for Dos on it He has the money so he likes to know that he is buying nice "good quality" 'toys' even if he won't use a fraction of the features.

[Kevin]

sorry mate it does look strange, got taken out of context their....:-)

[seaneeboy]

Originally Posted by Kevin

But having the option of 8Mb is a hell of a marketing tool tho!,

Speaking as a marketer, it isn't really... having competitive entry and mid level packages are a MUCH stonger marketing tool... Compare BTYahoo! to the proposed new entry level NTL package, NTL comes out very well indeed...

[mentalis]

It seems to be the case that as speeds increase, so do the download caps, so instead of thinking of £2 a month as extra bandwidth, how about as extra download (e.g. 50Gb instead of 30Gb ) - in that case I would consider paying extra (even more if there was no limit)

[ian@huth]

As speeds increase there is the small minority of customers still trying to max that out who put even more of a strain on their ISPs infrastructure and purse.

[Kevin]

But thats the point if I pay for a 2mb connection i want to use it as much as possible, why because im paying for it...

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by orangebird

But there's not point on spending time and money an an option that only a tiny percentage would take. ntl's for the masses.

As for your mobile analogy, no, I wouldn't take 900 minutes and a 1000 text at £2 more, becuaser I know I wouldn't use it. What's the point in paying for something I'll never use? AFAIC, that's just having eyes bigger than your belly. Or more money than sense.

But many would, penis dangling performance. The ISP happily takes your extra £2 a month and most users carry on using the same traffic as before, so more money for no further investment.

[orangebird]

Originally Posted by Kevin

But thats the point if I pay for a 2mb connection i want to use it as much as possible, why because im paying for it...

And therein lies the difference between customers like you and me. I use the resource I need. Others use it just because it's there.

[Kevin]

im just glad im out of contract now with ntl, when and if they enforce the caps i can switch to whichever adsl supplier i please, some of those on this board do not have that option.
__________________

orangebird:
And therein lies the difference between customers like you and me. I use the resource I need. Others use it just because it's there.

What the hell does that mean, i pay just as much as you do, so why the hell shouldnt i use what i have paid for ?, the fact you don't just lines ntls coffers.

[ian@huth]

Originally Posted by Kevin

But thats the point if I pay for a 2mb connection i want to use it as much as possible, why because im paying for it...

What you are (or will be) paying for is contended share of a service with a maximum 2Mb burst speed. This service has an AUP and terms and conditions which stipulate what you can use your connection for and how it can be used. Contention is there to enable the service to be offered at the price it is. Usage has to be controlled to enable the service and price to be maintained at an acceptable level. There are two ways that usage can be controlled, by the user voluntarily or by the ISP. As a proportion of users are not willing to control their usage voluntarily then the ISP has to take over control one way or other. ISP control will upset some users but will ensure a better service for the majority of users.

[Kevin]

That i understand, what i dont understand is why ukonline can give me 8mb with a 500gb a month cap for £39.99 surely then the same applies to ukonline, or it is just a limitation of ntl's network.

[AdamD]

Originally Posted by Kevin

But thats the point if I pay for a 2mb connection i want to use it as much as possible, why because im paying for it...

I have to agree with that
When I originally signed up, it was advertised as unlimited, i.e, no restrictions, then they went ahead and slipped in the hidden clause about using to much
If they're service can't cope with what they originally offered, they shouldn't have offered it in the first place.

[ian@huth]

Originally Posted by Kevin

That i understand, what i dont understand is why ukonline can give me 8mb with a 500gb a month cap for £39.99 surely then the same applies to ukonline, or it is just a limitation of ntl's network.

UKonline will also for a limited time give you a £69.99 wireless router if you sign up. To me that says that they are trying to gain market share and they are paying to do so. How long will that price, speed and usage allowance be sustainable? Some questions to ask yourself include, what speed can I actually receive at my address both at quiet off-peak times and during busy peak times. How long will it be before they start ensuring that the service is profitable and alter usage allowances or take other action to achieve that end.

If you look at most companies they give special offers to new customers to tempt them onto their products. Are these offers profitable and sustainable? I think you know the answer to that.
__________________

Originally Posted by AdamD

I have to agree with that
When I originally signed up, it was advertised as unlimited, i.e, no restrictions, then they went ahead and slipped in the hidden clause about using to much
If they're service can't cope with what they originally offered, they shouldn't have offered it in the first place.

It may have been feasable at the time you ordered, particularly if you were amongst the first to subscribe. Time changes things though and no one can predict what the future holds. If you look at cable infrastructure in places like Leicester and parts of London it was put in place at a time when no one envisaged that there would ever be more than 50 TV channels and cable broadband internet was not even a consideration. Time has proved that assumption wrong and those early cable adoption areas are suffering badly and need loads of cash spending on them.

[Kevin]

Yes but i dont have to buy their router, i have an adsl router and a quick look through any online computer store will tell you that you can have one from £25, so how does your statement add up answer it doesnt.

btw how much are ntl's "wireless" routers ?

Secondly, its not on a yearly contract, i could go either ukonline or plusnet, plusnet being a 1 month contract..so either way its a hell of a lot better than ntl.

And easynet tempting users hahahahaha yeah they have more money than ntl do so where that statement comes from god knows.

Easynet havent been through chapter 11, dont owe god knows how many billions....