*ALL* ntl Cap Discussion Here Please. - Page 6

GrahamD · 06-01-2005, 11:24

Personally, I would be much happier with the idea of a cap, if it was not a hard cut-off. If exceeding the cap meant that you were restricted to 300K for the rest of the month, you could still carry on with "essential" surfing (buying birthday presents, paying bills, webmail, etc).

Sorry if this has already been mentioned, but there are so many threads on caps that I don't have time to read them all.

Stuart · 06-01-2005, 11:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by ianauth

This could be got round by NTL having a mirror site for such items that is only available to NTL customers. It could be set so that customers could request a particular download which would be sent to their machine during night time hours when it should not affect other customers internet experience. Microsoft would be happy as it reduced the strain on its servers and NTL would keep all this traffic within its own infrastructure.

Whether such a scheme would be workable depends on how NTL measure bandwidth used and if exclusions can be made for certain sites.

True, but bearing in mind the problems NTL have with the News servers and email servers, could they be trusted to run a mirroring server?

enjoymarcus · 06-01-2005, 11:34

Why dont NTL stop being tight arse capitalists, and give their customers what they deserve.

etccarmageddon · 06-01-2005, 11:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by scastle

True, but bearing in mind the problems NTL have with the News servers and email servers, could they be trusted to run a mirroring server?

no and it's probably less work just to make the 'cap' or whatever only be enforced during peak hours. during off peak (perhaps 12am to 8am) users should be allowed unrestricted or less restricted downloading.

06-01-2005, 12:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by enjoymarcus

Why dont NTL stop being tight arse capitalists, and give their customers what they deserve.

Because that will cost them too much.

sherer · 06-01-2005, 12:07

the thing with all these threads about the cap is that it's all well and good us discussing this and suggesting things NTL and do but unless these ideas are actually being sent onto NTL they won't take any notice

06-01-2005, 12:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by sherer

the thing with all these threads about the cap is that it's all well and good us discussing this and suggesting things NTL and do but unless these ideas are actually being sent onto NTL they won't take any notice

And they can cause arguements. As seen before

ian@huth · 06-01-2005, 12:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by sherer

the thing with all these threads about the cap is that it's all well and good us discussing this and suggesting things NTL and do but unless these ideas are actually being sent onto NTL they won't take any notice

We all know that some NTL employees actively post on here and these may pass ideas back to the company. NTL will have employees that monitor this and other sites and report back on the feelings of customers and anything of importance that can assist the company in its development. Many a time someone comes up with an idea that is so simple that everyone wonders why it has never come to light before. Such an idea may be posted on here and get picked up by NTL and implemented if it is for the benefit of the company. So post away with any ideas, however wild they may be as one of them could be implemented and help both the company and you yourself. Despite what has been said about NTL and its failings, they honestly want to provide what customers want to buy and give them an above average service level. NTL are not a company that wants to fleece its customers and give them shoddy products and shoddy service. Top executives know that there rewards will be much greater the more its customers are satisfied. Some, as in all companies, may have personal agendas for their own survival and advancement which can result in an adverse affect on customers but hopefully the others will see through them and take whatever action is needed.

Stuart · 06-01-2005, 12:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by enjoymarcus

Why dont NTL stop being tight arse capitalists, and give their customers what they deserve.

Because they are a business? Wether you agree with it or not, NTL do have a responsibility to pay their debts as well as having shareholders. Obviously they need to balance these up with keeping the customer happy. Also bear in mind that with heavy downloaders they do actually make quite a large loss on the account (so if you are a 1.5 Meg user and download 24/7, you are costing NTL far more than you are paying them).

Edit: Actually, although you are costing NTL more directly, they will pass that charge on to everyone else, so indirectly, you are costing everyone else more.

I know there is no official announcement, but if the rumours on this site are true, then these "caps" are not actually cut off points, but simply the point at which NTL will start charging extra for bandwidth usage. I may get flamed for this, but I think this is fair.

06-01-2005, 13:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrahamD

Personally, I would be much happier with the idea of a cap, if it was not a hard cut-off. If exceeding the cap meant that you were restricted to 300K for the rest of the month, you could still carry on with "essential" surfing (buying birthday presents, paying bills, webmail, etc).

Sorry if this has already been mentioned, but there are so many threads on caps that I don't have time to read them all.

And how do you know that is not the case. I have not seen anything from NTL on how this is going to be done. Before long with the way threads go someone somewhere will quote you and it will have come from NTL that is what happens with rumors. I don't know how they are going to do this, I have not been told and i have not seen anything released by NTL of how they are going to cap users other that the cap limits. Until i see them release more info i will wait and see. I am sure we will know more when the time comes to implement it.

Chrysalis · 06-01-2005, 13:40

I thought the best question asked to ignition was why Telewest could offer higher download/upload and have no cap and no reduced performance its a shame he couldn't answer it, I have to assume its company greed. Fact is Telewest have made NTL look like idiots and shown it is quite easily possible to offer more. COX us cable isp has recently upgraded their customs to 4mbit/768kbit free its not announced on their website yet tho. Interesting tho look into these points.

1 - A good ISP actually caring about their users will upgrade them before they announce it or at least very soon after, NTL have gone the other way and announced it and we recieve the upgrades up to half a year or so later.
2 - NTL cant give without taking, the first upgrade seen the top tier have a price increase (some will claim its unrelated) and this upgrade see's a admin charge and a hard cap been added.
3 - We keep hearing again and again from the die hard supporters of a cap that if there is no cap we all suffer from horrible speeds, funny how telewesy have no such issue, pipex have no such issues, plusnet have no such issues, aol has no such issues, nildram has no such issues and they all offer unmetered.
4 - The top tier offers 40 gig a month, following NTL's tradition to shaft the highest paying customer's using the excuse we dont want people to download 24/7, well 24/7 on a 3mbit connection is 900 gig a month, so why not say a 150 gig limit which will do the same and no allow anything near 24/7 but give users a decent limit.
5 - A few people here seem to think price is everything, well it isn't quite a few people here have said they will pay more for a better product so why not offer it.
6 - The big question still unanswered, why cant NTL provide the same quality of service as telewest and yet they have more money to spend. They have a bigger network which is an "advantage" since contention is less visible on bigger pipes.
7 - Why do customers have to frequently goto their local managing director to get a decent resolution to their problems, whats up with customer services attitude lately.
8 - Its 6th january and no news of upgrades starting although I am not going to switch now, when do we expect to see it starting.

Some good questions I think.

scrotnig · 06-01-2005, 13:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by enjoymarcus

Why dont NTL stop being tight arse capitalists, and give their customers what they deserve.

I'm afraid you need to realise that companies are not set up because the owners want to practice socialist idealism, they are set up becausde they want to make a profit.

That's how a free market economy. NTL, BT, Sky, and all other companies are not here to 'give people what they deserve' they are their to make money.

That's the harsh reality of the situation. I can handle the fact that people don't like that, but I won't stand by and allow it to be suggested that somehow ntl are the only ones with this attitude. ALL companies have that attitude. That's how the system works.

Chrysalis · 06-01-2005, 14:07

Mark B, then how are other companies making money and offering more then NTL, the question is do they want to make a profit or do they want to make a obscene profit.

Rone · 06-01-2005, 14:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by scastle

@Rone & Ianauth
The quote above is a joke based on a "conversation" Ignition and I had about the 8 Meg ADSL service being touted by UKOnline..

i c.

Well i am one of the lucky ones it seems.
Looks like i'm going to have to pick an adsl provider [an 8 meg one if needs be] and just leave the ntl box on the wall, just in case they realise they are going to alienate quite a few people, and might want to lure a few back.
I'm sure Sky wont turn another subscriber away either.

I have a bt and ntl phone, but the ntl phone can go, loyalty needs to work both ways.

This might sound like ner ner ner ner ner, but i havent time to monitor 3 children, and i dont want to ripped off for lots of cash if i go over, or be cut off.

ian@huth · 06-01-2005, 14:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

snip>
6 - The big question still unanswered, why cant NTL provide the same quality of service as telewest and yet they have more money to spend. They have a bigger network which is an "advantage" since contention is less visible on bigger pipes.
<snip

Some thoughts on "the big question"

Quality of Service is quite different to what speeds are available and whether there is capping or not. NTL may have an higher QOS than Telewest, I don't know and guess that you don't either.

NTL will look at market conditions and infrastructure capabilities when deciding what speeds to offer and at what price. They will take an informed decision on the effects of capping or not capping on their business. They do not compete with Telewest and what Telewest do is less important to their decisions than other factors.

Who knows how much money NTL or Telewest have to spend or what they are actually spending at the moment. The banks and bondholders will have a very big say in that. I think that most broadband users will agree that their service has improved considerably over the pasy year or so and that is due to money being invested in the infrastructure by NTL

Contention on cable is felt most at UBR card level and no matter how big the network is or how fat the pipes are after that. It is what users on a specific UBR card do that affects service most and several 24/7 leechers on the same card can be a big problem. The solution would be to add extra UBRs which are very expensive or to cap the heavy users. Why should an ISP spend thousands of pounds on upgrading just so that a very small minority of customers can continue to download the entire internet 24/7.