I really don't want to jump ship but please look at your Caps

[Rik]

All honestly do you think it is right that I should have to wait till after midnight to use the bulk of my internet usage?.....do you have to wait till midnight to go onto the internet?.....I think not

AFAIK, IDNet's peak/off-peak hours are based on the usage patterns of their business customers. To change them would involve increased capacity which was largely redundant, therefore, an increase in costs.

[andrue]

You'll have to forgive me, but this is one thing I don't understand.  With respect, does your wife have to use iPlayer to watch the programme?

For what it's worth I agree with you. I've wondered why catch-up is so popular. All it takes is ten minutes a day browsing the EPG and marking stuff. Even more bizarre (it seems) is the number of people enthusiastic about Sky's Anytime+. That isn't even(*) a proper catch-up service. Just random material available for download. I suppose that where Sky is concerned the two tuner limitation is harder to work around. We sometimes struggle to juggle two Freesat and two Sky HD tuners and that's only two adults with unusually similar tastes in TV. If it was a 'true' VoD system where all content currently licensed for broadcast was available(**) then I'd go for it but a simple catch-up just doesn't do anything for me either.

(**)Ie;as soon as a series is bought by a broadcaster every episode is available to watch.
(*)Apparently it's going to become a proper catch-up very soon with almost everything available for download. Based on the SD quality I've seen so far that would make it a viable solution to the 'two tuner problem' if they included HD material.

Simon in answer to your question why not use alternative catch-up methods to see a program like "The Apprentice"............the answer is simple, we didn't record it....sorry that should be, I  didn't remember to record it because we have one of the latest Panasonic DVD recorders (250Gbs)

That's the advantage of never watching anything live in the first place. The only time I might miss something is if a new series starts or it's one of those occasional programmes like Traffic Cops or Midsomer Murders seems to have become. Everything gets tagged for series link so the box takes care of it.

But..people pay for their broadband so they should be able to use it. If catch-up suits Simon then that's fine. IDNet's 9am to midnight (aka 'whenever you're awake') timing is a bit annoying. I'm lucky. Since I don't stream video I'm averaging 7GB a month on-peak so I'm happy on their lowest FTTC package. It would be nice though not to have the nagging feeling of guilt when I do download something big. I didn't have that problem with Be.

[Ardua]

AFAIK, IDNet's peak/off-peak hours are based on the usage patterns of their business customers. To change them would involve increased capacity which was largely redundant, therefore, an increase in costs.

Fair enough, but that does rather suggest that non-business users are customers that can be ignored which is not my experience of IDNet. Other business ISPs (Goscomb for example) seem to manage to offer 80GB for a similar price to IDNet's 50/150GB package without peak/off-peak restrictions for all its FTTC customers. I know that some contributors are fiercely protective of IDNet - others like me will take stock, from time to time, to assess whether or not the packages on offer meet their specific downloading requirements. At the moment, IDNet works for me. I am sure - despite what others opine - that IDNet will be following this thread closely: that said, only they will know whether their business/financial model works. 

[Rik]

No customers are ignored, I get 15/45GB now for the same price I paid for 2GB six years ago. Every business, though, is a balancing act and there have to be compromises or restrictions somewhere along the way - unless you're big enough to cross subsidise.

[Steve]

If it was a similar contract length to adsl we probably wouldn't be having this discussion. At least with adsl if the bandwidth limitations don't fit your requirements you can switch. Perhaps a hope for the future.

[Glenn]

Once past 12 months, I believe it is a rolling 1 month contract.

[Rik]

It is. BT impose the 12 month contract.

[Bill]

AFAIK, IDNet's peak/off-peak hours are based on the usage patterns of their business customers.

I wouldn't go so far as to say I don't believe that, but if so then their business customers work some very peculiar hours...

[Rik]

Off-site backups, e-commerce etc, Bill.

[Bill]

Off-site backups, e-commerce etc, Bill.

Yes, I thought of those, but I doubt if e-commerce has a high-bandwidth requirement (reliability being more important) and (ime) off-site backups are usually done in the small hours, ie during our "off-peak" hours.

[mervl]

If the client list (as shown in IDNets home pages) still includes the BBC, for instance, then I can imagine they impose some very strict requirements on QoS; and with  others like HP are an international organisation that works to US hours; which I suspect makes the late "peak" hours quite explicable.

[Bill]

If the client list (as shown in IDNets home pages) still includes the BBC, for instance, then I can imagine they impose some very strict requirements on QoS; and others like HP are an international organisation that works to US hours; which I suspect makes the late "peak" hours quite explicable.

Maybe... we're guessing because that's not (quite reasonably) the sort of information that IDNet are going to provide.

But... if the requirements of their business customers are such that their domestic products become increasingly uncompetitive (which, tbh, is happening) perhaps they should reconsider whether it's a market they should be in, and make a managed withdrawal before it dies on its feet?

Because, even though it's generally good and used to justify (to some extent) the high prices, IDNet's vaunted customer service isn't as good as some others. For example, it's been mentioned that the unhappiness with caps or hours should be taken up directly with IDNet- most of the other small ISPs that have independent user groups or forums like this one actively monitor and participate in them.

[Ardua]

Credit for this lengthy post goes to the MD of AAISP at revk.www.me.uk

Sustainable Pricing for Broadband


IPTV means there is now a gradual increase in the usage of broadband lines. More and more people are starting to do some streaming and downloading of video that did not before. This is an issue in the industry, obviously.

One of the main problems is that back-haul from a customer premises to a handover point in the UK costs 10 times what connectivity from an ISP to the rest of the world costs. Yes, it seems crazy that a company that only has to link a few hundred exchanges in a small geographic area charges so much more than companies linking thousands interconnects all over the globe.

However, the upshot of this is simple, IPTV is increasing costs for ISPs. It does vary from ISP to ISP and depends how they connect to customers. Some ISPs with exchange equipment are in a better position to cope, those using BT back-haul are not so much. But either way, it means people spending more upgrading links from exchanges. That does cost money.

So that leads me to ponder what is a sustainable pricing model for an ISP. One where prices relate to costs in some way (like us), and increased usage (because of IPTV or otherwise) means both increased costs and increased revenues... Or, a business model where price competition drives prices down, and ISPs offer "all you can eat" services where IPTV increases costs.

What do I think? Well, I am not an economist, but I think that this all puts pressure on the back-haul links and their costs. I think competing on price is less sustainable, to be honest. Transit costs have plummeted over the years as usage has increased, but back-haul has reduced more slowly. What I hope is that pressure on the back-haul pricing means that it gets a lot cheaper. That means we can lower our prices to customers. Even so, I don't see us competing on price - it means compromising far too much on other aspects of the service, and means potentially running an unsustainable model. We intend to stay in business.

Eventually, back-haul links will be high enough capacity for fixed pricing models to be viable. When that happens we will offer them. Having said that, we are trialling some interesting options for businesses even now, with much more affordable, fixed price, all-you-can-eat Internet links using FTTC and Etherflows. They are not cheap enough for residential use yet, or rolled out to much of the UK yet, but we are getting there.

[mervl]

Yes, I've always understood that most pricing models assume that many (most?) users use significantly less than their allowance, and think I can recall a post from Idnet on here that indicated as much. Just hope I'm in that category and that  Idnet don't give up on residential users as I don't believe I'm the only happy FTTC customer.

I think the disregard by the regulatory authorities (who are charged with ensuring a competitive market) of backhaul costs is a scandal, not just for FTTC/P but also for competition on ADSL and alternative technologies, and more of a problem for the extension of faster broadband than the local loop. UK Broadband delivery is half-cocked as a result.

EDIT: just a thought, I wondered where BT get the millions to match fund BDUK monies, now I think I know. The modern equivalent of "robbing Peter to pay Paul",  no doubt!

[Glenn]

I have no capacity issues, so am happy to stay at present.

[Simon]

I don't believe I'm the only happy FTTC customer.

I'm sure you're not - we just don't often hear from the rest.

[Ardua]

Unhappy customers tend to migrate quietly away to another supplier. Currently, I also have no FTTC capacity issues: that said, I have recently signed up for some online Lightroom 4 training and I am watching the meter closely.  I do not believe that any of the previous posters are unhappy - many would like to stay with IDNet. They are just trying to ascertain whether there are any packet changes in the IDNet pipeline? I think that it is a fair question but not one which will necessarily get a response. At least AAISP (above) is saying that they recognise the IPTV bandwidth issue but that there are no immediate solutions for their domestic customers. If I was with AAISP then that is at least something to throw into the stay/migrate pot.

[psp83]

I'm a happy FTTC customer, I just have issue with having the same allowances as the slower ADSL2+ package on a MUCH faster connection..

My argument is, Allowances should match packages and currently they don't.

Also another problem is, websites that put live TV feeds on the homepages. Take sky news for example. They do it often, normally I open a few tabs and sometimes walk away from the PC, now if sky news has live TV on the homepage, bye bye bandwidth & its not your fault.

[Bill]

Unhappy customers tend to migrate quietly away to another supplier.

I seldom do anything quietly when I'm unhappy

Seriously, idiotic though it might be these days, I've got quite a brand loyalty to IDNet- they've provided me with very good service for quite a few years now with little cause for complaint, and it would need a fair bit of pressure to get me to move.

But the pressure is building... it's yet to reach the trip point, but the possibility is a lot higher than it used to be

I don't want "all you can eat, 24/7" for the same price- as I said earlier, I'd be perfectly happy if my 120+30GB allowance was a flat 100GB, rather like Zen.

[Simon_idnet]

We do keep reviewing our bandwidth allowances. And we do so bearing in mind our performance targets. We have, in the past, not quite hit those by being a little too optimistic in the size of the monthly bandwidth allowance that we can include in the packages. We are determind not to make that mistake again. We can only compete with the big ISPs on quality, because we cannot compete on price. This means that we have to ensure that those customers who buy from us because of low latency and low jitter receive the performance that they need. We expect to review our packages again after the Olympics rather than before as many events will be held during the business day.

One of our customers wrote in his blog recently about his experience of using our ADSL compared to a cable connection: http://blog.mythic-beasts.com/?p=231&preview=true

[Rik]

Thanks for that perspective, Simon. 

[Simon_idnet]

If your primary requirement were for streaming TV services, then latency and jitter would not be important to you, and so I would have to concede that our performance goals may well be overkill for your needs.

Of course, we do hope that customers make the most of the servcie that we strive to deliver. But, to borrow someone's analogy, if you really want to use a McLaren to tow a caravan then, well, feel free :-)

[Bill]

We expect to review our packages again after the Olympics rather than before as many events will be held during the business day.

That's fair enough, I can well imagine that that's going to be a problem time. And don't forget Euro 2012 as well, yet another event I shall be studiously avoiding

Thanks Simon.

[kerrso05]

We can only compete with the big ISPs on quality, because we cannot compete on price. This means that we have to ensure that those customers who buy from us because of low latency and low jitter receive the performance that they need. We expect to review our packages again after the Olympics rather than before as many events will be held during the business day.

Thanks Simon for joining in on this discussion about the very restrictive caps on the FTTC. I am very glad to hear that you are looking at this. "We can only compete with the big ISPs on quality, because we cannot compete on price".....I knew that but I'm sure you would agree with me that you can compete with the smaller ISPs like Zen and ADSL24 both of whom have a less restrictive caps. Can you promise to have a look this part of the business?....is it possible to change the peak times from say 10.00pm to 10.00am....at least I wouldn't have to wait to the late hours to download.

[Simon_idnet]

Hi Harry

We'll certianly look at it again after the Olympics and maybe Euro2012.

I doubt that we'll change the hours though as they are specifically designed to ensure that gamers and evening SSH workers etc are not swamped by streaming and it also allows us to offer competition-beating, practically unlimited overnight allowances for those who are able to schedule their downloads.

BT have hinted that wholesale price changes mught be afoot for later in the summer - that would certainly let us  increase the allowances.