120M : Sales/Oversubscription/Customer Service

[sollp]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

I find that last paragraph pretty astonishing. VM couldn't care less if customers on 152Mb are hitting 20Mb as long as they don't hit it for too long during a 7 day period, let alone dropping 20Mb. A quick look at the VM forum shows people hitting sub-10Mb at peak times being told that their area 'hasn't breached thresholds'. I can show you customers on VM that have been paying for 152Mb and been achieving less than 10Mb at peak periods for over a year. Hardly 'running around trying to fix the issue'.

When you, or I, order a service from an xDSL ISP they will quote a speed range. That is what we are paying for and what they commit to provide. Indeed Ofcom regulate this and if the speeds fall below estimate too much we can leave free of charge.

At least we have a low end and a high end, and if we don't like it there are usually 40Mb products available. For a VM customer 'up to' can mean less than 10Mb/s during peak periods for several months on a 152Mb service.

xDSL has distance limitations that are outside of the ISP's control, it's a symptom of the technology. Cable has issues that are most definitely within the cable operator's control. VM do not make any attempt to ensure that services are congestion free, and will openly admit to this.

Incidentally the speed ranges are intentionally wide. They don't mean that your line is definitely capable of the higher end speed at all. If that were the case you'd have a single figure given. The estimates are based on the line length between the cabinet and the distribution point that serves your, and other, properties. If you are further away than most from that distribution point your speeds will be at the lower end. If uptake of FTTC in your area is high that'll also have an impact on the speeds due to crosstalk.

You were given an estimated speed range, your line performs within that speed range. The laws of physics are pretty unforgiving and they are what govern these speeds. This is in contrast to speeds on VM, which are entirely down to the laws of profitability.

I think most customers will not know this so as far as they are concerned are paying for a service of either 40Mb or 76Mb. My point is BT will say upto and gives some reason of distance from exchange ect for the reason your speed not being where it should be but its not until you look for yourself and then question why the speed is so low and could it be improved your again hit with the reasons why its slow is because of distance from cab...so your not getting anywhere near what you thought you would. I accept that there will be a loss, but How much? Which is what the OP was complaining about the,"miss selling at best if not fraud"
So what's the difference?

I'm fully aware of the reasons why but should this be an excuse for having such a dramatic loss of speed?? Your saying it's down to the technology limitations and distance but i'm paying for a 76Mb service, your saying well you don't get that because of the reasons given as somehow thats ok for BT and not for VM? astonishing thought.

And yes they do run around trying to get speeds and service resolved i can vouch for that.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by sollp

And yes they do run around trying to get speeds and service resolved i can vouch for that.

This doesn't.

Or this.

September 2015, VM-recorded download speeds via SamKnows panel, 8-10pm weekdays:

152Mb: 109.8Mb.
100Mb: 83.28Mb.
50Mb: 46.68Mb.

September 2014, VM-recorded download speeds via SamKnows panel, 8-10pm weekdays:

152Mb: 115.91Mb
100Mb: 88.39Mb
50Mb: 49.40Mb

Or how about this guy.

Issue reported 12th May. 2014. Due for review 16th December.

Originally Posted by sollp

I think most customers will not know this so as far as they are concerned are paying for a service of either 40Mb or 76Mb. My point is BT will say upto and gives some reason of distance from exchange ect for the reason your speed not being where it should be but its not until you look for yourself and then question why the speed is so low and could it be improved your again hit with the reasons why its slow is because of distance from cab...so your not getting anywhere near what you thought you would. I accept that there will be a loss, but How much? Which is what the OP was complaining about the,"miss selling at best if not fraud"
So what's the difference?

Easy. You sign up with BT you get a personalised estimate of your speed. That's what you're paying for, and most customers will know it as it forms part of the purchasing process. It has to, Ofcom require it.

BT give you this before you can even click 'order':

BT always offers you the best speed possible on your line. Typically 80% of customers receive speeds within or above this range. The speed prediction we have given here is an estimate, however download speeds can vary and the actual download speed will fall within a range. The BT broadband range is an indication of the speed that other similar lines across the UK have achieved for their broadband service.

If you can point me to where Virgin Media give a speed range or a guaranteed minimum speed that'd be appreciated.

If you're interested in how to advertise it properly - excuse the Google Translate::

Our clearer labeling

Com Hem, you always get the broadband speed you pay for.
For you as Com Hem customer really know what speed you'd expect, we have introduced a clearer labeling.

The label shows the minimum and maximum speed for each broadband when you have a wired connection between the modem and computer. For example, the download speed of the subscription Broadband 250 vary, and this we express with a so-called speed range: 250-100 Mbit / s. Such speed range available for all our subscriptions.

Our rate guarantee

Test us on the independent site Bredbandskollen.se. To get a fair idea of your actual speed is good if you are making three measurements at hourly intervals. Also note that the speed of the guarantee only applies to wired connection and not wireless (WiFi).

If you think the speed is lower than what you pay for, you just have to get in touch with our customer service at 90 222. We see if there might be something wrong with the modem or otherwise malfunctions on the way to your computer. There are some things you can do to increase the possibility of a faster broadband (see below), but if you want, you obviously downgrade you to the speed you come up in and not pay for more than that.

TL;DR you fall outside the speed range they lower your bill to the tier whose speeds you are achieving.

Might be tough for VM that one, there seem to be a fair few areas capable of the non-advertised 'S' tier and not much else at peak times.

[Ignitionnet]

http://community.virginmedia.com/t5/...d/td-p/2543859

Reported in November. Took until June to add new channels, by which time even without any new customers demand would have gone up 20-30%. Unsurprisingly these didn't resolve the issue, so end of this month is a new review date.

My idea of running around is splitting nodes, this doubling capacity instantly, not taking 7 months to drip-feed apparently insufficient capacity to keep up with growth in demand, let alone relieve the oversubscription issue.

This knowing, too, that an uplift was planned for October.

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

BT give you this before you can even click 'order':

That's changed recently... Since when did they have a minimum guaranteed speed?

[pip08456]

http://bt.custhelp.com/app/answers/d...peed-explained

[qasdfdsaq]

I know what it means, it just hasn't ever been shown. At least it wasn't shown two months ago.

[pip08456]

Yes, it is only recently that it has happened but offshore have been fully briefed and are using it.

[sollp]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

http://community.virginmedia.com/t5/...d/td-p/2543859

Reported in November. Took until June to add new channels, by which time even without any new customers demand would have gone up 20-30%. Unsurprisingly these didn't resolve the issue, so end of this month is a new review date.

My idea of running around is splitting nodes, this doubling capacity instantly, not taking 7 months to drip-feed apparently insufficient capacity to keep up with growth in demand, let alone relieve the oversubscription issue.

This knowing, too, that an uplift was planned for October.

A few cases there can't argue with that but like i say the money is being spent, upgrades are constant, speeds issues dealt with. Sometimes not quickly enough yes

---------- Post added at 19:26 ---------- Previous post was at 19:23 ----------

It looks like you’ve already got BT Infinity, but you can still upgrade your speed or usage limit
FIBRE BROADBAND
You could get
51Mb-70Mb
Estimated download speed range*
You currently get
51Mb-70Mb
Estimated download speed range*
40Mb
Minimum guaranteed speed This speed
is an estimate, but it should be accurate to within 1 or 2Mb *

So now they are saying they will only guarantee 40Mb!! Get any lower and i might as well go for 40Mb.

So i won't get a discount unless it's below 40Mb, you seem to think thats ok, at least with VM you can complain to get the speed where it should be, maybe take a while for it to happen but at least they will do something about it unlike BT

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by sollp

A few cases there can't argue with that but like i say the money is being spent, upgrades are constant, speeds issues dealt with. Sometimes not quickly enough yes

---------- Post added at 19:26 ---------- Previous post was at 19:23 ----------

It looks like you’ve already got BT Infinity, but you can still upgrade your speed or usage limit
FIBRE BROADBAND
You could get
51Mb-70Mb
Estimated download speed range*
You currently get
51Mb-70Mb
Estimated download speed range*
40Mb
Minimum guaranteed speed This speed
is an estimate, but it should be accurate to within 1 or 2Mb *

So now they are saying they will only guarantee 40Mb!! Get any lower and i might as well go for 40Mb.

So i won't get a discount unless it's below 40Mb, you seem to think thats ok, at least with VM you can complain to get the speed where it should be, maybe take a while for it to happen but at least they will do something about it unlike BT

BT will do something about it.

I offered to help you here but you obviously don't want any.

When you're ready head over to HERE where either I or one of the others will advise.

[Sephiroth]

... where you can also read some my own wise musings!

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

... where you can also read some my own wise musings!

I'd never noticed them Seph.

[Sephiroth]

You can always click on my name and see the occasional musings - particularly in respect of the wretched HH5, the stupid HH5 advertising campaign, the aluminium cable situation and, whenever I can get away with it, the holier-than-though "Sages" who pontificate there worse than I do here!

[pip08456]

I'm not a "Sage" and I do know where your musings are hence the grins at the end of my post.

I do agree that some of the "Sages" do have a "holier than thou" attitude but I just tend to ignore them most of the time. They can be "used" though as they are so gullible.

Both I and a few others who are helpful have direct means of contact with the Mods so we don't need the "Sages".

[Sephiroth]

You know me, Pip. I love a bit of fun. The BT forums are the same as the VM forums in terms of people with the same class of problems; rubbish Homehubs; poor speed, poor SNR margin; rubbish offshore call centre. But those "sages" - they inspire the pixie in me.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by sollp

A few cases there can't argue with that but like i say the money is being spent, upgrades are constant, speeds issues dealt with. Sometimes not quickly enough yes

So i won't get a discount unless it's below 40Mb, you seem to think thats ok, at least with VM you can complain to get the speed where it should be, maybe take a while for it to happen but at least they will do something about it unlike BT

The speed is where it should be, per the estimate. You aren't entitled to 76Mb and it's made very clear throughout the order process that speeds are subject to distance from cabinet.

You aren't entitled to a discount if your speeds drop below 40Mb, you are entitled, if they can't bring it back into range, to break contract and go elsewhere. This is as regulated by Ofcom, as is the need to provide speed estimates.

If you could show me the equivalent speed guarantee from VM that'd be appreciated. As far as I'm aware there isn't one; VM can sell incredibly congested services with no fear unless customers pursue legal remedies for failing to provide services that are fit for purpose.

VM are indeed upgrading constantly, however if the money is being spent and the work being done so completely why are there any speed issues, let alone ones that take several months and even upwards of a year to resolve? There are areas that have had issues for over two years bar a 3 month period.

It is, frankly, crap that customers get sub-5Mb/s at peak periods, VM take months to do the cheapest capacity upgrade they can, then a few months more to do the same again, and only spend any real money addressing the issues a year down the line.

I am aware there have been issues with deploying new Arris CMTS and downstream ports on Cisco kit, and it's run behind schedule in some cases. So why weren't nodes being split in advance, so that when the ports became available nodes could just be decombined ensuring that the capacity was there to relieve the issue in one hit?

I've read another couple of instances on the VM forum today where VM did nothing with issues for months waiting for ports to become available. They could have been planning and implementing node splits. There should've been no areas waiting an age for extra channels, then having to wait again for a Cat C because there should've been no Cat C required as the node had already been split and recombined.

You can't on the one hand point out that VM can deliver maximum speed to all customers regardless of distance from the cabinet, unlike BT, that they are constantly upgrading their network, then excuse their failure to keep pace with customer demands to the point where areas spend upwards of a year delivering less than 10% of customer's paid-for speeds at peak times.

Sadly you seem to want to ignore that there are valid reasons why your service isn't 76Mb, that the speeds you would get were made very clear to you at sign-up time, and that you are within that range, hence you are getting exactly what you were told you would get.

Virgin Media have one simple reason why they don't deliver full speed to all customers - they choose not to. They do not target full speed for all customers. The upgrades they undertake are not intended to achieve this aim, it's a pleasant bonus when it happens.

I've shown you what I consider to be a better approach, how Comhem advertise services and how they operate. To me this is a more transparent, fair and reasonable way of operating. It makes clear that Comhem do not attempt to provide full speeds all the time, and gives a very clear delineation as to what they consider to be acceptable and the remedies the customer is entitled to.

Per my earlier post, it's interesting that a company spending all this money and running around delivering capacity upgrades has lower peak speeds in September 2015 than in September 2014. Even more interesting that they see fit to do tier uplifts in this environment.

VM need to plough serious cash into capacity, and they need to stop trying to avoid splitting the nodes and simply do it as the very first step in capacity relief, with additional channels only either where needed for a tier uplift or to relieve the congestion somewhat while the split is being planned and executed.

You know, pretty much as the then-recently bankrupt ntl managed to in the early 2000s.