NTL definition of FREE

[ian@huth]

Originally Posted by orangebird

Just a quick comment about how 18866 keep their charges so low - they don't have to pay for the installation, maintenance and headcount required to keep a telephone network running. That's how they're so cheap.

It doesn't really matter to the customer how they keep the prices so low, the fact is that they are so low.

BT, NTL and TW all charge a line rental which pays for the overheads you mention and an initial installation charge (unless there is a special offer on). Call charges themselves are just a licence to print money, particularly connection charges such as NTLs 5p and the non-geographic call costs.

[bob_builder]

Originally Posted by ianathuth

IBT, NTL and TW all charge a line rental which pays for the overheads you mention and an initial installation charge (unless there is a special offer on). Call charges themselves are just a licence to print money, particularly connection charges such as NTLs 5p and the non-geographic call costs.

Only if the call is wholey within NTL's network. As soon as it goes outside (e.g. onto BT's network or abroad) then NTL have to either rent space on somebody else's lines and/or pass the call onto another company.

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by orangebird

Just a quick comment about how 18866 keep their charges so low - they don't have to pay for the installation, maintenance and headcount required to keep a telephone network running. That's how they're so cheap.

And..................... are we suppose to feel sorry for BT and NTL?

Thats what you pay line rental for?

Originally Posted by dellwear

And..................... are we suppose to feel sorry for BT and NTL?

Thats what you pay line rental for?

I do feel a little sorry for ntl, although not nearly so much for BT. BT were handed a telephone infrastructure at a knock-down price that was effectively built for them by the State. It would be unreasonable for them to just do whatever the hell they liked with it, hence we have a communications regulator and rules guaranteeing competitor access to the system.

NTL, on the other hand, has bankrupted itself trying to build a new network from scratch using private money. I think it's a little unfair that other companies should be allowed to reap the rewards of that, and a little unfair of NTL customers to be expecting that they should be able to. BT has a universal service obligation, there is no reason why you can't have a BT line if you want to place your calls through a 3rd party.

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by Chris T

NTL, on the other hand, has bankrupted itself trying to build a new network from scratch using private money.

Thats the thing though, THEY have bankrupted them self, no one forced them to go about buying other companies at extortionate prices.

We live in a free market economy, if a company can provide me with a service cheaper they'll get my business.

there is no reason why you can't have a BT line if you want to place your calls through a 3rd party.

For most NTL customers there is a reason they won't take out a BT line to have their calls cheaper, its because NTL force you to pay for their phone line whether you use it or not if you have DTV with them. Why should people have to pay twice?

As an aside my understanding was that you play line rental for the line who you use to make your calls is your business, surely the price of line rental should cover the cost of it to the company? Thats just good business practise, why should they use the revenue from phone calls to support their creaking network?

The only way Ntl would ever get my phone business back is if they under cut my current phone supplier.

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by bob_builder

Only if the call is wholey within NTL's network. As soon as it goes outside (e.g. onto BT's network or abroad) then NTL have to either rent space on somebody else's lines and/or pass the call onto another company.

But the price you pay covers this, I can't see the issue?

If call18866 can provide calls to the states for 1p per min at all times or 0.5p per min to UK land lines then why cant NTL?, They're a bigger company surely they'd have more clout?

Unfortunately the main company's are just interested in making a big buck fast, where as the smaller companies have to be really competitive to even be noticed.

Originally Posted by dellwear

For most NTL customers there is a reason they won't take out a BT line to have their calls cheaper, its because NTL force you to pay for their phone line whether you use it or not if you have DTV with them. Why should people have to pay twice?

I can't defend NTL's phoneline policy, it makes no sense. When it's convenient to them, they suggest it's a freebie; when it makes them look uncompetitive with $ky they say otherwise.

As an aside my understanding was that you play line rental for the line who you use to make your calls is your business, surely the price of line rental should cover the cost of it to the company? Thats just good business practise, why should they use the revenue from phone calls to support their creaking network?

The only way Ntl would ever get my phone business back is if they under cut my current phone supplier.

No, a phone company has the absolute right to decide who you can call on its lines, except for BT. BT is forced to allow you to call anyone or anything you like due to its effective monopoly status. This is the only way the Government could allow competition initially, by allowing people to dial free numbers accessing other networks. NTL, Telewest, Orange, T Mobile, Vodafone and O2 are under no such obligation. I'm puzzled at how 18866 is being allowed by NTL to run a service via its lines.

As for what the various elements of your bill covers, no business ring-fences certain types of income in the way you're suggesting. It's not so simple as the line rental pays for the line and the call charges are a licence to print money. Every penny they earn, whatever the source, is used to pay staff, post your bill out, maintain the network and pay off their crippling debts.

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by Chris T

As for what the various elements of your bill covers, no business ring-fences certain types of income in the way you're suggesting. It's not so simple as the line rental pays for the line and the call charges are a licence to print money. Every penny they earn, whatever the source, is used to pay staff, post your bill out, maintain the network and pay off their crippling debts.

Thats right and pay my Knapp his huge salary as well as the rest of the "rotten apples" at the top.

Personally I pay my line rental to BT, thats it, I pay them for the line, if they want me to make calls with them they need to be competitive, just like NTL need to be.

Were always being told that NTL is a company and not a charity then they should act like one and become more competitive. None of their products currently is competitive, well maybe their new BB speeds I've not looked at the competition recently but its a sorry state when they cant compete with the other companies in the same markets!

Going back to the topic in hand I honestly think that the was NTL promote their products is criminal, but who am I to complain, I'm only the customer.

Although we wanted to have DTV again and not being able to have Sky here the only choice is NTL, but I wouldn't take it while they insisted I pay for their phone line. They have recently done a deal where they don't charge you for the phone and we took it up, simple. If only this was a permanent thing then they may get some more customers.

[Voodoodan]

What makes me sick is why NTL have to 'deceive' us with the £19.50 thing. Why not add the exclusive £9.50 phone line to the price? I am sick at myself for missing the 'PS. You have to pay for the phone line' bit at the bottom of the screen.

I have covered the floor in sick now that I have received a hire agreement form from NTL stating that I also have to pay for the rent of a set top box.

So the nice £19.50 a month I thought I was going to pay just suddenly turned into £34.49 a month.

That took a smile off my face!

Thanks 4 letting me vent....

Dan.

[eoin.miskell]

Originally Posted by Voodoodan

What makes me sick is why NTL have to 'deceive' us with the £19.50 thing. Why not add the exclusive £9.50 phone line to the price? I am sick at myself for missing the 'PS. You have to pay for the phone line' bit at the bottom of the screen.

I have covered the floor in sick now that I have received a hire agreement form from NTL stating that I also have to pay for the rent of a set top box.

So the nice £19.50 a month I thought I was going to pay just suddenly turned into £34.49 a month.

That took a smile off my face!

Thanks 4 letting me vent....

Dan.

The phone line should be included with the £19.50 because all Digital TV packs include the phone line rental.

You should be paying only £19.50 per mounth unless you have any other services like broadband or an extra phone line.

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by Voodoodan

What makes me sick is why NTL have to 'deceive' us with the £19.50 thing. Why not add the exclusive £9.50 phone line to the price? I am sick at myself for missing the 'PS. You have to pay for the phone line' bit at the bottom of the screen.

I have covered the floor in sick now that I have received a hire agreement form from NTL stating that I also have to pay for the rent of a set top box.

So the nice £19.50 a month I thought I was going to pay just suddenly turned into £34.49 a month.

That took a smile off my face!

Thanks 4 letting me vent....

Dan.

They can't win either way. They say £19.50 and Sky can compare at £21, but they say £29 and sky start shouting about how they are £8 cheaper (even though you have to pay BT £9.50 a month making the total more).

I thought that any new contract at the mo got telco line rental free for the first 12 months, have a polite conversation with customer service, don't vent your spleen it won't help.

Why £34.49 though, have you added other services?

[Voodoodan]

Hi,

I have had NTL broadband for some time now and decided to opt for the £19.50 family pack, nothing more.

This is what the Hire Agreement form shows:

Family - £29.50
SACM Digital with TV - Free
Add Digi Set Top Box rent - £15.00
(A)FREELineRnt+DTVFam 1yr - minus £9.51
Total Monthly Charges - £34.49

I feel a little bit conned but I'm sure there's small print somewhere about the digital box line rental.....?

Thanks,
Dan.

[Tezcatlipoca]

The £15 charge is for the rental of an additional STB....I assume you do have an additional STB?

The "minus £9.51" is the 1year's free phone line rental.

[Marge]

Originally Posted by Voodoodan

Hi,

I have had NTL broadband for some time now and decided to opt for the £19.50 family pack, nothing more.

This is what the Hire Agreement form shows:

Family - £29.50
SACM Digital with TV - Free
Add Digi Set Top Box rent - £15.00
(A)FREELineRnt+DTVFam 1yr - minus £9.51
Total Monthly Charges - £34.49

I feel a little bit conned but I'm sure there's small print somewhere about the digital box line rental.....?

Thanks,
Dan.

the add set box rental shouldn't be there, the £15 needs to come off

when an extra box is installed the system picks this up as a "chargeable" box, if this is an additional box for tv then the charge is correct but if you have a cable modem then the charge needs to be removed

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by Voodoodan

<snip>
Add Digi Set Top Box rent - £15.00
<snip>

You have two STBs in your house?

If not call. Sky make a charge for servicing two boxes also, I think it is slightly lower, but that is because you have bought the box and are responsible for its setup and maintainance.