The Bloke in the PUB says .........

[Toto]

Thought I'd dip my toe in the water here as well.

I took some time to review the Sky user forum, just for poops n giggles, and I am amazed how many people are wondering if the move to them from other ISPs was the right one.

Poor customer service, lack lustre to almost 56K speeds, regular losses of connections and incredibly poor ping times to quality game servers seem to be the norm. Whilst many argue that its the best you can get for the cash, I think a few months more and folks are going to start returning. They realize that if you want consistency, it isn't going to come for free.

If the man-in-the-pub wasn't too sloshed, and the plans are correct, I can honestly see the gamble VM took in not bending over to Sky and pay for their premium prices a good move. It is possible that they are going to welcome back some BB subscribers, possibly with TV subscriptions to boot.

I'm not certain though that Sky have secured premium TV shows, I series record about 8 TV shows at the moment, I don't think Sky has anything that fresh any more.

An improvement in the EPG software would be rather nice, as Sky is much faster in that respect.

[ceedee]

Originally Posted by slowcoach

As we have seen from previous information from “The Bloke in the Pub�, he has been known to be wrong. All he can do is pass on current thinking, circumstances may require VM to change to Plan B tomorrow or next week.

You mean like his earlier tip that 50Mb would be introduced in early 2007?


What wisdom was the bitp able to impart on the Phorm phiasco and, in particular, the damaging delay in reaching the inevitable decision to drop it?



---------- Post added at 13:40 ---------- Previous post was at 13:36 ----------

Originally Posted by Toto

I took some time to review the Sky user forum, just for poops n giggles, and I am amazed how many people are wondering if the move to them from other ISPs was the right one.

Poor customer service, lack lustre to almost 56K speeds, regular losses of connections and incredibly poor ping times to quality game servers seem to be the norm.

You're reading vm.support.broadband.cable *not* the Sky User forums!

[Toto]

Originally Posted by ceedee

You're reading vm.support.broadband.cable *not* the Sky User forums!

Nope, Sky user forum.

[ceedee]

Originally Posted by Toto

I took some time to review the Sky user forum
[...]
Poor customer service, lack lustre to almost 56K speeds, regular losses of connections and incredibly poor ping times to quality game servers seem to be the norm.

Go have a look -- unfortunately the VM users' complaints seem remarkably similar!

[Toto]

Originally Posted by ceedee

Go have a look -- unfortunately the VM users' complaints seem remarkably similar!

I know full well about VM complaints, goodness knows there are plenty here, and I do read the VM groups also.

I was referring to Sky customers, so don't dare tell me what I was talking about please. I'll PM you the forum if you want it.

[CrowmanUK]

I'm amazed that a communications company is so bad at communicating with its customers, I vote the man in the pub does PR for VM. I'd much sooner have the truth than a wall of silence.

[Taf]

..or a tissue of lies

Originally Posted by CrowmanUK

I'm amazed that a communications company is so bad at communicating with its customers, I vote the man in the pub does PR for VM. I'd much sooner have the truth than a wall of silence.

What comms have they not told you that you need to know

[CrowmanUK]

The fact that an adsl traffic managed account gets 50kbps when they say there will be a minimum of 512kbps due to a bug in the traffic management software would have been nice before I signed up with them.

[slowcoach]

Originally Posted by techyguy4

What about the 2Mb connection? Is it going to be free?

2Mb/s will be history, as will 4Mb/s.

[handyman]

Originally Posted by CrowmanUK

The fact that an adsl traffic managed account gets 50kbps when they say there will be a minimum of 512kbps due to a bug in the traffic management software would have been nice before I signed up with them.

I ditched sky after 2 months as it was completely useless. The router they supplied with custom firmware kept crashing. Now I could handle the Internet side crashing but when this router crashed it took down the network as well so any streaming of movies across the network stopped. I listened to some prize bs from them on technical support and even tried another router but nothing got better so I binned them for Orange nearly a year ago. The orange router has not been rebooted in months and works flawlessly.

Sky said that they would send 2 boxes for the routers and have never turned up.

2 days ago I got a letter from sky saying my computers had viruses on then and had been compromised and that my service had been disconnected. (what a crock I left a year ago).

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by slowcoach

First, VM, negotiated their current loans before the credit crunch became evident, renegotiating when the loan period ends is going to be a real problem, VM will have to show tangible improvements to their, so far, lacklustre performance in order for even the most enthusiastic lender to give them a second look.

Sky has the best TV/Movies contracts sewn up leaving VM the option of being a reseller with all the pitfalls that entails, being held to ransom on price etc..

All too late for me I'm afraid... phones, bb, mobile the lot. All with new providers.

Virgin Media seem to be in real trouble at the moment.

Lots of complaints about Phorm, no answers.

STM is hurting people who are paying for premium broadband badly.

They're trying to raise $1Bn in 'senior notes' ... which (to a non finance man like me) sounds like a very big mortgage.

And I gather from an article in the Telegraph Virgin Media might even suffer the indignity of flogging their own channels to someone else;

"Liberty Global, the international cable business chaired by US media tycoon John Malone, is considering bidding for Virgin Media's television channels.

Virgin Media chief executive Neil Berkett has asked Goldman Sachs to review its channels business, which has been valued at £800m. The most likely outcome is thought to be a sale."

So its not looking at all good.

[Robertus]

Originally Posted by ceedee

Go have a look -- unfortunately the VM users' complaints seem remarkably similar!

well one could argue that it's a support group :p

(same with Sky)

And to be honest...some people come on ranting and raving:

"Oh my lord this service sucks etc etc" for two weeks then find it's there OWN router (which they bought elsewhere).

[ceedee]

Agreed.
I was attempting (poorly, perhaps) to point out that frequent complaints about slow and faulty connections, poor ping times to games servers and deficient customer support are common to both VM *and* Sky.
(And, by extension, that such complaints against Sky's service should not be taken as necessarily indicative of all Sky customers' experiences.)

To be brutally honest, given the pace of growth, I'm impressed that Sky BB hasn't collapsed already. VM's problems, however, are almost completely of their own making.

[grungernut]

I do think that VM have the best broadband product, it just belongs to a company that does not have the resources to run/improve it. The network needs massive investment and they simply do not have the cash, hence the up-coming all day stm and the implementation (sh, its only secret trial at the moment) of stm on business customers. There is work going on upgrading ubrs but every one that is done is soon at capacity again. Nothing will change until some serious cash is spent.