Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results

[brundles]

Originally Posted by TraxData2

Ok, what about the fact most house holds now have more than 1 PC? 1 kid playing games, 1 kid streaming youtube, iplayer, itunes, legal p2p services, HD streams, dvd rental/downloads.

Then one person downloading (note that 50Mbit has its own legal HD streaming service)

That limit can be hit within 20Minutes and then the product cannot do what it is advertised to do, multitask and do it fast, 8GB is nothing, xbox360 demos weigh in at 1-4gb, patches for wow weigh in at 3GB, it only takes 1-2 people multitasking for you to hit STM and then the connection becomes useless, its not so much a thing of people downloading illegal content 24/7, it's just a simple fact that file sizes are no longer small and 8GB limit is stupid in this day and age, why assume anyone who is grabbing big files is an illegal downloader?

And sorry, but no, if you're paying for 50Mbit, then you want big files and you want them fast, only rather (stupid?) people would pay for 50Mbit to download an mp3 in a few seconds and not make use of the connection.

Surely you've seen enough of my posts now to realise I certainly don't assume anything above 100meg is illegal? Dig back and you'll find half of my complaints about STM are the limits on the current packages and the other half are that VM provide no useful way for a networked household to work out what it's usage is during that period.

I agree that only the stupid (who deserve what they get) will pay for 50meg just to grab a few MP3s (although you can be sure that's how VM will quote the generosity of the limit).

The HD streaming sounds interesting - and is exactly the thing I referred to as something that would make the limits poor. It is possible that those on their own would break the thresholds. The other things are problems but not ones that will be hit daily - as they can be now, even with the 20meg package.

At least the 10meg left is still a reasonably fast connection -more than can be said for the others. Not the 50meg people are paying for though.

The thing is that TBH, I suspect that VM are more concerned about the quantity of data you receive rather than the speed to get it. As I keep saying, I can't help but feel that VM are trying to push people on to higher speeds when they don't actually need the speed but need the STM allowance that speed gives them.

[Fatec]

Originally Posted by brundles

Surely you've seen enough of my posts now to realise I certainly don't assume anything above 100meg is illegal? Dig back and you'll find half of my complaints about STM are the limits on the current packages and the other half are that VM provide no useful way for a networked household to work out what it's usage is during that period.

Just to point out, i actually meant that to be pointed towards VM and not you, sorry about the confusion.

I agree that only the stupid (who deserve what they get) will pay for 50meg just to grab a few MP3s (although you can be sure that's how VM will quote the generosity of the limit).

Which is the customers VM want, people who will pay for a top tier product and never use it, they dont want users to actually do anything with their connections.

The HD streaming sounds interesting - and is exactly the thing I referred to as something that would make the limits poor. It is possible that those on their own would break the thresholds. The other things are problems but not ones that will be hit daily - as they can be now, even with the 20meg package.

I'm unsure as to how the HD stream will work, it may be like TiscaliTV where the usage doesnt directly affect the conneciton and wont be counted towards STM but i'm pretty sure its just general streaming using the Net so as you say, it seems rather idiotic to put STM on a package like that, the HD service requires a minimum of 20Mbit to stream efficiently (as per the trials) so users wont be able to use it at all once STM'd.

At least the 10meg left is still a reasonably fast connection -more than can be said for the others. Not the 50meg people are paying for though.

If it was done properly yes it's fast enough, though not when you're paying a premium price!!!

Though as noted before, how VM handle the AKPackets and upstream packets means you wont see 10Mbit down and just as with current STM, multitasking will be impossible without crippling the connection.

The thing is that TBH, I suspect that VM are more concerned about the quantity of data you receive rather than the speed to get it. As I keep saying, I can't help but feel that VM are trying to push people on to higher speeds when they don't actually need the speed but need the STM allowance that speed gives them.

I personally believe VM are only introducing 50Mbit just to stick their middle finger up at BT/ADSL/ADLS+2 and say "ner ner look at us" aka "small *aherm* syndrome"

And yes, its become blatantly obvious that the STM on the lower tiers has been put in to basically force customers upto a higher tier package just to get the speeds they are paying for.

Originally Posted by TraxData2

....snippety snip snip.
And yes, its become blatantly obvious that the STM on the lower tiers has been put in to basically force customers upto a higher tier package just to get the speeds they are paying for.

In your opinion

I know lots of people who are on the 4Mb (now 10Mb) package, who aren't affected by STM, and who wouldn't dream of "moving up" - they are happy on that.

[Fatec]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

In your opinion

I know lots of people who are on the 4Mb (now 10Mb) package, who aren't affected by STM, and who wouldn't dream of "moving up" - they are happy on that.

Just as i know lots of people who are on the 10Mbit package who are affected by STM despite not even being downloaders and would like to get the speed they pay for but cannot afford 20Mbit.

And with the STM limits, anyone not hitting them really shouldnt be on 10Mbit.

Why would you need 10Mbit just to browse and read emails

I don't.

I use it for iTunes, COD4, YouTube, and we have 1 PC and 3 laptops, often all being used at the same time (Me on COD4, teenagers doing whatever teenagers do (facebook, uploading/downloading photos, youtube, iPlayer, etc, etc, and SWMBO surfing the intraweeb).

I don't feel the need to download everything that's available, just because I could.

10Mb works for me, and for most people I know - I understand that it doesn't work for everyone, and I don't assume that everyone shares my (so far) reasonable experience; but I also don't assume that almost everyone has a bad experience.

[Fatec]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

-snip-
I don't feel the need to download everything that's available, just because I could.
-snip-

It's not about downloading alot of things though, i think everyone is just angry at the fact if you dare use you're conneciton at full speed for 20 minutes (patches, updates, whatever) then you get classed as an abuser, while the real heavy users just leave their connections running 24/7 (and trust me, since all day STM has come into play, they dont care anymore ...) downloading as much content as possible.

I understand their frustration, but not everyone downloads patches, linux distros, and 4GB demos all day, every day......

btw, I noticed you ignored the part of my post about 4 people in my house using 10Mb for everyday usage without any negative impact.......

[Fatec]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

I understand their frustration, but not everyone downloads patches, linux distros, and 4GB demos all day, every day......

Never said they did, but that's my point, people who rarely download or go over the limit tend to hit it every once in a while and get classed as an abuser, while the real abusers just carry on stealing all the bandwith, this is a point VM have fail to seen and have opted to go for the screw everybody approach rather than sort the real problematic users out, unfair

btw, I noticed you ignored the part of my post about 4 people in my house using 10Mb for everyday usage without any negative impact.......

For that specific reason above

Let's agree to disagree, and hopefully the thread will get back on topic........

[Ignitionnet]

Results are nothing too special. Only things of note are that while Virgin are selling more products they are both selling them to less customers and making less money per customer despite each taking more products than before. A sign of the competitive times I guess.

Apart from that pretty dull, perhaps a touch disappointing as reflected in the drop in share price.

It is worth mentioning that this share price and results cannot be compared directly or even indirectly with BT or BSkyB, both of whom are either in the middle of huge CapEx spends and/or write downs. BT are throwing VM's entire yearly CapEx spend at 21CN alone not including all the other stuff, while Sky experience ongoing pain due to the ITV acquisition and big CapEx spend on Sky Broadband.

I dont see Virgin will do as bad as people think, they have started to do alittle more but however I can see the next few years will test VM to the limit and then when BT release there uncapped unlimited FTTH service VM could fail

[tvtimes]

Originally Posted by darthlinux

I dont see Virgin will do as bad as people think, they have started to do alittle more but however I can see the next few years will test VM to the limit and then when BT release there uncapped unlimited FTTH service VM could fail

They won't fail, they will just have to be more competitive. It will give them the kick up the arse they need because at the moment they are sitting on the best technological advanced infrastructure and they are cruising in 2nd gear instead of fourth. Once BT comes along and offers some real competition virgin will need to get their act together by lowering prices and getting rid of STM. Plus they may need to start offering faster speeds because they are capable of offering some serious speeds once they free up the bandwith. Not only that but once BT rolls our fibre and is forced to Wholesale it to other companies VM is going to have more access to more areas which should in turn improve it's growth.

The main problem is the debt and it wont get much lower in 4yrs, and Virgin need to get as much miney as they can and invest which they wont do, Virgin need to worry

[tvtimes]

Originally Posted by darthlinux

The main problem is the debt and it wont get much lower in 4yrs, and Virgin need to get as much miney as they can and invest which they wont do, Virgin need to worry

Virgin won't invest? Where's 50meg, Setanta sports, extra VOD,new v+, free music ondemand all coming from then? They are investing, making their products stronger so people will join up. Coverage isn't the issue because soon they will be able to reach more and more customers which much less investment and just piggy back off BT.

The debt will get smaller, they pay millions of pounds back every quarter!

50Mb - Has harsh stm and isnt using full DOCSIS 3.0 so not much investment there
Setanta Sports - That was a quick fix for losing sky sport news and making customers happy.
VOD - Very messy atm some season have half the shows on there - needs more investment.

Virgin Media could be massive right now but whilst they have STM, limited HD and paying celebs millions for adverts they will be just a company in the middle of sky and bt