BE's new pricing

[Ann]

BE have brought out a new Value deal.  £7.50 for an up to 8meg speed with a 40gig download limit, although the limit doesn't start until July.  It's a bit cheap and does make me wonder whether it's all going to fall apart this year!

[Rik]

We've seen it happen before, Ann, then comes the FUP and throttling.

[somanyholes]

then comes the FUP and throttling.

I would of thought a large proportion of be's users will leave it that happens, me included.

[Rik]

Let's hope I'm wrong, So.

[Ann]

They will certainly have to be careful but O2 customers have been paying lower prices for some time using the same LLU.  They are also telling on the forum that it is not available for current customers who are expected to continue paying £13.50, but I know different   

[Rik]

Orange used to play those sort of games...

[Supanova]

Orange used to play those sort of games...

True, but unlike Orange BE actually provide something that could be considered actual internet, while Orange rarely provide anything of the sort.

Anyway, its 'BE/O2' vs 'Virgin' and I hate virgin so BE for me.

[Gary]

True, but unlike Orange BE actually provide something that could be considered actual internet, while Orange rarely provide anything of the sort.

Anyway, its 'BE/O2' vs 'Virgin' and I hate virgin so BE for me.

I wish BE/O2 was at our exchange  with my line I would get very good speeds, and a much better allowance

[Sebby]

We've seen it happen before, Ann, then comes the FUP and throttling.

The difference is, though, that those ISPs are at the mercy of BT (both in terms of cost and service), which BE aren't.

[Rik]

True.

[Sebby]

Don't get me wrong, I don't think for one second that BE are indestructible, but I think they've got a much better chance than some others we've seen in the past because they are LLU.

[Rik]

Providing the sales people listen to the engineers, eh?

[Gary]

Providing the sales people listen to the engineers, eh?

They seem to have done so far, Rik  but companies do get greedy 

[Ann]

Sometimes I get the distinct impression that BE and O2 compete with each other which is very odd but may in the end bring about their downfall.  Just remember that I said it here first!

[Rik]

I've just bookmarked it, Ann.

[dujas]

It could work, we know the cost of bandwidth usage on O2/BE LLU is significantly lower than BT's 21CN, so if they're happy to subsidise the line costs...

[Technical Ben]

I heard of this strange story a while ago.
Some big rich people offered "free money" to the public. It was a great idea. The supply of money was "unlimited". And the plan could not fail.
The customer would pay back more than they borrowed. How could the rich people loose?
But then the money ran out, and the customer could not pay back what the borrowed.

I have a bad feeling that some ISP companies see Bandwidth the same way as the banks saw money. When they run out of bandwidth, and the entire thing collapses. Who is to blame? The customer for using what he is given, or the company for make false promises/bad decisions? Will they ask for a bail out?

[edit] Unless BE/O2 do support the infrastructure unlike BT.

[dujas]

Not really. Internet access has always been about the balance of the profitable light users against the money losing heavy users. Something that becomes increasingly difficult with overall usage on the rise, hence traffic management, download caps and FUPs. The only exception seems to be where the broadband package is cross subsidised by an additional revenue stream e.g. Landline/TV/Mobile phone contacts etc.

You can get unlimited usage packages from BT Wholesale reliant ISPs, but you're looking at £90+ per month.

[Technical Ben]

Which is exactly what I said. You can get unlimited services. It costs £90 a month. So why complain about the price? If a company like O2 is willing to sell "unlimited broadband" (home access) for £7.50 subsidised by mobile contracts and other customers, what do you expect? I would not expect everything to be cosy if O2 had to squeeze 12 customers onto the same bandwidth as the customer paying £90.

So we pay £15-£30 with IDNet, and get the equivalent bandwidth, service, email and webspace. If you think you can go elsewhere for less than do. I would if I find somewhere as dependable. But being locked into a 12 month contract, I don't want to take the chance.

[Ann]

You are way out with that.  O2's Home Access is much more.  According to the website it's £22.50 a month.

http://broadband.o2.co.uk/home/findmore.jsp

[D-Dan]

Well, here's a reason for me not to switch. Over at Be they estimate:

"You can get BE broadband on ***********
It's probably going to be this fast:

3 megs*

This estimate is based on from data supplied by BT./Find out more.

Buy a BE broadband package NOW"

And O2

"We've estimated that your maximum download speed is 3 meg .This is based on information BT gave us about your BT line. "

But with IDNet:

"Bandwidth (Up/Down) [kbps/kbps]:   965 / 7,645"

Think I'll stay right where I am

Steve

[Ann]

That thing said I'd get 3.5 megs.  I actually can get 11 megs.  As I'm on the Value deal mine is capped at 8 megs but the little gizmo thing is bonkers.

[Technical Ben]

You are way out with that.  O2's Home Access is much more.  According to the website it's £22.50 a month.

http://broadband.o2.co.uk/home/findmore.jsp

Sorry, it was quite a while since I last checked. It's £17.50 for mobile phone users. I guess I was thinking of their LLU options. There service still fails on all levels.

[Gary]

Sorry, it was quite a while since I last checked. It's £17.50 for mobile phone users. I guess I was thinking of their LLU options. There service still fails on all levels.

Thier LLU is fine, when I had it no issues and great stability using my own router and for £7.50 as i'm an O2 mobile customer, O2/Be LLU is perfectly acceptable and would be my choice is it was in my Village, not the access package which is adslmax though as thats a failure

[davej99]

It is not clear to me that any of the large ISPs can provide a good quality congestion free ADSL service. You would think that economies of scale would make this possible. This made we wonder how IDNET manage to deliver the quality of service they do?

[Tacitus]

It is not clear to me that any of the large ISPs can provide a good quality congestion free ADSL service. You would think that economies of scale would make this possible. This made we wonder how IDNET manage to deliver the quality of service they do?

I think it's down to two, possibly three things.  One is they make sure, BT notwithstanding, that the investment in their network stays ahead of demand.  The second is their pricing model deters the 'all-you-can-eat' brigade - note they're not alone in this since Zen/Newnet/AAISP do much the same.

The third and, possibly most important, is they cater to the sort of customers who are prepared and able, to pay a little more for quality.  This group don't regard value as synonymous with price.  Again, the other smaller BT based ISPs follow the same type of model, so it isn't that competition is non-existent.  However, how long this model is sustainable in what we are told is the coming age of austerity, remains to be seen.  It works for me, so unless they do something completely out of character I can't see me changing any time soon.  YMMV of course...

Be interesting to see how they re-jig the price/allowances.

[Rik]

They have more capacity than their contracted customers require, Dave. That's why there's a premium on the service.

[dujas]

It is not clear to me that any of the large ISPs can provide a good quality congestion free ADSL service

I think that's a silly comment to make. LLU has been an overwhelming success for the customer. Providing much higher usage limits and reduced monthly charges, as well as protecting the home user from the quirks of BT Wholesale i.e. IP Profiles and 'under dimensioned' exchanges.

As demonstrated by Thinkbroadband's survey, the main failure of the large ISPs is in customer service.

[davej99]

I think that's a silly comment to make. LLU has been an overwhelming success for the customer. Providing much higher usage limits and reduced monthly charges, as well as protecting the home user from the quirks of BT Wholesale i.e. IP Profiles and 'under dimensioned' exchanges.

As demonstrated by Thinkbroadband's survey, the main failure of the large ISPs is in customer service.

I am not sure it is helpfull or courteous to describe my observations as silly. Nor am I sure how the provision of an LLU service relates to the performance of an ADSL service in areas that do not have it; the context of the thread when I made my comment. I said that, "It is not clear to me that any of the large ISPs can provide a good quality congestion free ADSL service."

The survey you mention does not distinguish between LLU and ADSL (BTW resale) service performance and therefore it is not relevent to a discussion about ADSL performance by the large ISPs. The weight of opinion seems to support the view that large ISPs do not provide an uncongested ADSL service and that they are outperformed by ISPs like IDNET/Zen/Newnet/AAISP, which is the point I was making.

[Ann]

LLU is ADSL.  The terms are not mutually exclusive.  That, I suggest, is where the confusion has arisen.

[dujas]

My reply wasn't meant to cause offence, it was regarding the "It is not clear to me that any of the large ISPs can provide a good quality congestion free" part of your statement, which I feel some of the LLU providers have offered for several years now. I don't see how not having 100% availability to the UK population (when there's no state support) changes that fact.

The second part was acknowledgement that the larger ISPs continue to underperform compared to the niche ISPs in customer service. I don't understand what you mean by ADSL service, as that's a common standard for data transmission. Largely dependant on the quality and length of the wiring between the home and exchange, you're completely at the mercy of physics and BT Openreach, regardless of your ISP. My focus was on the backhaul from the exchange onwards in terms of capacity.

[davej99]

IDNETTERS discussions sometimes use the terms LLU, ADSL (over BT) and ADSL+ (over BT) to distinguish three types of service. Other terms are used but it is usually clear from the context of the thread what is being talked about. I thought the general point when I posted was that large ISPs are very poor at reselling BTW services whereas ISPs like IDNET/Zen/Newnet/AAISP are very good. When I said, "It is not clear to me that any of the large ISPs can provide a good quality congestion free ADSL service," this is what I has in mind. Please forgive me if my post was ambiguous, but I think the context is clear.

[troesma]

Anyway, just to add to the debate... in 1 place I have ADSL2+ with IDnet and on the other VM. I do get circa 5 Mb DL speeds on the IDnet line, thanks to distance to exchange, poor BT infrastructure (and I'm in London) and whatever. Compensated by fantastic customer service/support.

Site 2 has fiber optic available and I'm with VM. After some initial misery resulting from surly customer service, engineering troopers who were clueless, complete lack of touch and giving you (a customer) 2 fingers, it's now working fine (touch wood). On the balance, well...



and it works. I have not tested this up to see how their throttling operates. Fortunately I'm in front of the bloody VM cabinet and not many people around hooked to the service. Price-wise..? Same as IDnet. The Q here is how much you value customer service and support, because it's clear on price per Mb who wins... If you ask me, I'd rather pay a premium for customer service. Better 5 Mb with back-up than 50 Mb breaking down. OK, VM has not broken down in about 3 weeks... will see if it stand the passage of time, once they get more people into their 50 Mb package.

Just my 2c.

[dujas]

AFAIK there currently isn't any traffic management/throttling on the 50Mbps service. However that will probably change later this year, albeit with higher allowances than the 20Mbps service before they kick in.